Search

Objective:To compare all-cause hospitalization and associated costs among patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder (BD) treated with long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs). Methods:The Truven MarketScan Medicaid claims database was used to identify patients with schizophrenia; MarketScan Medicaid and commercial claims databases were used to identify BD. Adult patients with ≥1 LAI claim from January 1, 2013–June 30, 2014 (ID period) were identified. The first day of LAI initiation was the index date; patients were followed for ≥1 year. Logistic and general linear regression models were used to estimate the risk of hospitalization and associated costs. Results:Adjusted analyses showed that, in the schizophrenia cohort, risks of hospitalization were statistically significantly higher in the haloperidol [OR (95% CI) = 1.51 (1.05–2.16); HR (95% CI) = 1.35 (1.05–1.73)] and risperidone [OR (95% CI) = 1.58 (1.07–2.33); HR (95% CI) = 1.33 (1.01–1.74)] cohorts than in the aripiprazole once monthly extended release (AOM 400) cohort. Similarly, in patients with BD, risks of hospitalization were significantly higher in haloperidol [OR (95% CI) = 1.49 (1.01–2.19); HR (95% CI) = 1.33 (1.03–1.73)] and risperidone [OR (95% CI) = 1.78 (1.19–2.66); HR (95% CI) = 1.33 (1.01–1.75)] than in AOM400. No statistically significant differences in hospitalization costs were observed in either disease group. Conclusions:Although the study results may be subject to confounding variables that are not contained in claims databases, such as disease severity, it appears that AOM400 may be more effective than haloperidol and risperidone LAIs among patients with schizophrenia or BD. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Treatment of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder (MDD) with atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) show improved efficacy and reduced side effect burden compared with older antipsychotic medications. However, a risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) remains. TEAEs are hard to quantify and perspectives on the importance of TEAEs differ across patients and between patients and physicians. The current study is a qualitative assessment that investigates TEAEs of AAPs from both patient and physician perspectives to provide better understanding of the occurrence and burden of TEAEs associated with these medications. Methods: Focus groups comprised of patients with MDD and interviews with patients with schizophrenia were conducted at two qualitative research facilities, along with a physician focus group at one of the facilities. Information collected from patients included an exhaustive list of TEAEs experienced, and the frequency and level of bother of each TEAE; from psychiatrists, information included an exhaustive list of TEAEs based on personal observations and patient report, frequency of TEAEs, clinically important TEAEs, and levels of patient-perceived bother. Standard qualitative analysis methods were used to identify, quantify, characterize, and summarize patterns found in the data collected. Results: A total of 42 patients (25 with MDD and 17 with schizophrenia) and 4 psychiatrists participated in the study. TEAEs reported as bothersome across both patients groups included cognitive issues, weight gain and/or increased appetite, low energy, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), and need to sleep/excessive sleep/excessive sleepiness. TEAEs considered more bothersome by patients with schizophrenia were weight gain, low energy, EPS, mental anxiety, and increased positive symptoms; those considered more bothersome by patients with MDD were cognitive issues, somnolence/sedation, and flat/restricted affect. TEAEs considered most clinically important by psychiatrists included metabolic syndrome, weight gain, neutropenia, hyperglycemia, and QT prolongation; those TEAEs considered most bothersome to patients from physicians' perspectives included weight gain, reduced sexual desire or performance, EPS, akathisia, and hormonal issues. Conclusions: The wide range of TEAEs that are both frequent and bothersome and the variation in perceived burden according to diagnosis highlight the need for a tailored TEAE-awareness approach when choosing an AAP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Our goal was to examine the daily average consumption (DACON) of oxycodone controlled-release tablets (OxyContin CR)and oxymorphone extended-release tablets (Opana ER) in patients with low back pain.Study Design: An observational, retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with multiple prescriptions for oxycodone CR or oxymorphone ER tablets. These patients also had International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for low back pain. Pharmacy prescription medication claims data were obtained from a large commercially insured health plan in the U.S. Mean daily consumption was calculated for a 90-day period.Methods: We used descriptive statistics to evaluate patient demographics and health plan characteristics. Univariate analyses were used to examine the data as observed. A generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and log-link function provided a sensitivity measure, adjusting for heterogeneity among patients and the skewed nature of the DACON variable.Results: A total of 4,023 patients received oxycodone CR, and 374 patients received oxymorphone ER. The mean age of patients (standard deviation, SD) was 49.0 (11.6) years for oxycodone CR and 47.3 (10.6) years for oxymorphone ER. DACON of oxycodone CR was 3.2 tablets per day, and DACON of oxymorphone ER was 2.7 tablets per day (P < 0.01). Utilization of maximum-strength tablets of oxycodone CR 80 mg was 3.9 tablets per day, which was significantly higher, by one tablet per day, than the utilization of equipotent oxymorphone ER maximum-strength tablets of 40 mg at 2.9 tablets per day (P < 0.01).Conclusion: The use of oxycodone CR, measured as mean daily consumption over a 90-day period, was significantly higher than that for oxymorphone ER in these patients, a finding that could have financial implications for health care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION:Existing findings on effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) versus oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalizations are inconclusive. This study was conducted to compare hospitalization costs between Medicaid patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who initiated a LAI and those who changed from one oral antipsychotic to another.METHODS:This retrospective cohort analysis used the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Medicaid claims database to study patients ≥18 years with schizophrenia. The two cohorts were: “LAI”, defined as initiating LAI (no prior LAI therapy) between 1 January 2013 and 30 June 2014; and “oral”, defined as changing from one oral antipsychotic to another during the same period. The first day of LAI or the new oral antipsychotic was the index date. A linear regression model was conducted to estimate hospitalization costs.RESULTS:The final sample included 2,861 (36.7 percent) LAI and 4,926 (63.3 percent) oral users. Compared to oral users, LAI patients were younger (mean (Standard Deviation, SD): 39.9 (13.2) versus 42.7 (13.1); p<.001) and had a lower mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score (mean (SD): 1.1 (1.9) versus 1.7 (2.3); p<.001). Of the 877 LAI initiators and 1,688 oral users who were hospitalized during the 1-year post-index follow-up period, the unadjusted mean hospitalization costs for LAI and oral users were USD32,626 and USD36,048, respectively. After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, baseline medication use, and baseline ED or hospitalizations, the adjusted average hospitalization costs were USD1,170 lower in LAI initiators than oral users. None of the unadjusted or adjusted differences were statistically significant.CONCLUSIONS:This real-world study suggests that among hospitalized patients, hospitalization costs are lower in LAI initiators than in oral antipsychotic users, although the difference is not statistically significant. Our study is limited as our results are reflective of a multi-state Medicaid population. Future studies are warranted to confirm the results in non-Medicaid patient populations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

INTRODUCTION:Existing studies have not investigated the effectiveness of one long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) versus another in preventing hospitalizations among patients with bipolar disorder (BD). This study was conducted to compare all-cause inpatient healthcare utilization and associated costs among BD patients who initiated LAIs.METHODS:This retrospective cohort analysis used the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Commercial and Medicaid claims database. Bipolar patients >18 years with at least one claim for one of the following LAIs were identified between 1 January 2013 and 30 June 2014 (identification period): aripiprazole, haloperidol, paliperidone, and risperidone. The first day of initiating an LAI was considered the index date. Logistic regression and generalized linear regression models were conducted to estimate risk of inpatient hospitalization and associated costs during the 1-year follow up.RESULTS:A total of 1,540 BD patients initiated an LAI: 14.5 percent aripiprazole, 16.3 percent risperidone, 21.0 percent haloperidol, and 48.1 percent paliperidone. With the aripiprazole cohort as the reference group, the odds of having any inpatient hospitalizations were significantly higher in haloperidol [Odds Ratio, OR (95 percent Confidence Interval, CI): 1.49 (1.01 - 2.19)] and risperidone [1.78 (1.19 - 2.66)] cohorts. The paliperidone cohort also had a higher risk of having a hospitalization than aripiprazole, but the difference was not statistically significant (p>.05). Among LAI initiators having any inpatient hospitalizations, the adjusted mean all-cause inpatient costs were lowest in the aripiprazole cohort (USD26,002), followed by risperidone (USD27,937), haloperidol (USD30,411), and paliperidone (USD33,240). However, the cost difference was not statistically significant.CONCLUSIONS:Our study findings highlight the value of aripiprazole in reducing all-cause inpatient hospitalizations and associated costs among patients with BD during the 1-year follow-up. It is worthwhile to note that bipolar diagnoses were identified from healthcare claims coded for reimbursement purposes, thus misclassification was possible. Future studies are warranted to understand the impact of LAI use in a longer period of time. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

INTRODUCTION:Existing evidence on clinical and economic effectiveness of one long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) versus another in successful management of schizophrenia is scarce. The study was conducted to compare all-cause inpatient healthcare utilization and associated costs among Medicaid patients with schizophrenia who initiated LAIs.METHODS:This retrospective cohort analysis used the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Medicaid claims database. Schizophrenia patients >18 years with at least one claim for one of the following LAI were identified between 1 January 2013 and 30 June 2014 (identification period): aripiprazole, fluphenazine, haloperidol, paliperidone palmitate, and risperidone. The first day of initiating an LAI was considered the index date. Patients were followed for 1 year from index date. Logistic and general linear regression models were used to estimate risk of inpatient hospitalization and associated costs during follow up.RESULTS:Of the identified Medicaid patients with schizophrenia, 1,672 (36.7 percent) initiated an LAI: 44.0 percent received paliperidone, 26.4 percent haloperidol, 13.8 percent risperidone, 9.2 percent aripiprazole, and 6.6 percent fluphenazine. With the aripiprazole cohort as the reference group, the odds of having any inpatient hospitalizations were significantly higher in haloperidol [Odds Ratio, OR (95 percent Confidence Interval, CI): 1.51 (1.05 - 2.16)] and risperidone [OR (95 percent CI): 1.58 (1.07 - 2.33)] cohorts. Fluphenazine and paliperidone palmitate cohorts also had higher risk of having any inpatient hospitalizations compared with aripiprazole, but the differences were not statistically significant (p>.05). Among LAI initiators with any inpatient hospitalizations, the adjusted mean inpatient costs were lowest in the aripiprazole cohort (USD25,616), followed by haloperidol (USD30,811), paliperidone (USD30,833), risperidone (USD31,584), and fluphenazine (USD37,338), although differences were not statistically significant.CONCLUSIONS:Our study findings highlight the value of aripiprazole in reducing inpatient hospitalizations and associated costs among patients with schizophrenia. However, our study is limited as our results are reflective of a multi-state Medicaid population. Future studies are warranted to confirm the results in non-Medicaid patient populations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Introduction: Understanding the prevalence of treatment-eligible Alzheimer's disease (AD) is crucial for policy planning., Methods: We used a comprehensive literature review and population cascade approach to estimate the number of amyloid-positive, clinically diagnosed patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to AD in the United States., Results: An estimated 666,646 individuals were identified as having MCI due to AD (range: 351,926-1,227,776) and 620,850 individuals as having mild dementia due to AD (range: 445,082-820,339). In a US population of 76 million individuals aged 60 or older in 2021, the estimates of MCI and mild dementia due to AD increased with age., Conclusions: As earlier diagnosis of AD and new disease-modifying treatments become available, accurate population estimates are required to reduce uncertainty in the number of clinically diagnosed patients eligible for amyloid-targeting therapies., Competing Interests: D.S., E.K., and A.H. are employees of Eli Lilly and Company, who funded this study. R.Z. is an employee of IQVIA and has a consulting agreement with Eli Lilly and Company. P.L. and P.S. have a consulting agreement with Eli Lilly and Company and are affiliated with The Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health (CEVR), which is funded by multiple parties, including the PhRMA Foundation; Arnold Ventures; and other government, foundation, and pharmaceutical industry sources. CEVR also maintains the Cost‐Effectiveness Analysis Registry and SPEC database, which are supported by several dozen organizations, including drug industry and academic and nonprofit foundation sources. Author disclosures are available in the supporting information., (© 2023 IQVIA. Eli Lilly and Company and The Authors. Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Alzheimer's Association.)

Objective: Our goal was to examine the daily average consumption (DACON) of oxycodone controlled-release tablets (OxyContin CR)and oxymorphone extended-release tablets (Opana ER) in patients with low back pain., Study Design: An observational, retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with multiple prescriptions for oxycodone CR or oxymorphone ER tablets. These patients also had International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for low back pain. Pharmacy prescription medication claims data were obtained from a large commercially insured health plan in the U.S. Mean daily consumption was calculated for a 90-day period., Methods: We used descriptive statistics to evaluate patient demographics and health plan characteristics. Univariate analyses were used to examine the data as observed. A generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and log-link function provided a sensitivity measure, adjusting for heterogeneity among patients and the skewed nature of the DACON variable., Results: A total of 4,023 patients received oxycodone CR, and 374 patients received oxymorphone ER. The mean age of patients (standard deviation, SD) was 49.0 (11.6) years for oxycodone CR and 47.3 (10.6) years for oxymorphone ER. DACON of oxycodone CR was 3.2 tablets per day, and DACON of oxymorphone ER was 2.7 tablets per day (P < 0.01). Utilization of maximum-strength tablets of oxycodone CR 80 mg was 3.9 tablets per day, which was significantly higher, by one tablet per day, than the utilization of equipotent oxymorphone ER maximum-strength tablets of 40 mg at 2.9 tablets per day (P < 0.01)., Conclusion: The use of oxycodone CR, measured as mean daily consumption over a 90-day period, was significantly higher than that for oxymorphone ER in these patients, a finding that could have financial implications for health care systems.