Search

To evaluate the healthcare resource use (HRU) and cost of lost productivity due to migraine among Italians with ≥4 monthly migraine days (MMDs), with a focus on those with ≥2 prior preventive treat...

Valentina Perrone,1 Chiara Veronesi,1 Elisa Giacomini,1 Rita Citraro,2 Stefania Dell’Orco,3 Fabio Lena,4 Arrigo Paciello,5 Anna Maria Resta,6 Mihaela Nica,7 Daniela Ritrovato,7 Luca Degli Esposti1 1Clicon S.r.l. Società Benefit, Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Bologna, Italy; 2Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Università Magna Grecia di Catanzaro, Unita’ Operativa di Farmaco-logia Clinica e Farmacovigilanza, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria “Mater Domini”, Catanzaro, Italy; 3ASL Roma 6, Rome, Italy; 4USL Toscana Sud Est, Grosseto, Italy; 5ATS Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy; 6Struttura Complessa di Farmacia Territoriale Area Vasta 1, Fano, Italy; 7Novartis Farma S.p.A, Origgio, Varese, ItalyCorrespondence: Valentina Perrone, CliCon S.r.l. Società Benefit, Health, Economics & Outcomes Research, Via Murri, 9, Bologna, 40137, Italy, Tel +39 3450316494, Email valentina.perrone@clicon.itPurpose: A retrospective analysis of real-world data was performed to assess the epidemiology and economic burden of multiple sclerosis (MS), relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), and secondary-progressive MS (SPMS) in Italy.Patients and Methods: An observational study on administrative databases from a sample of Italian entities was carried-out. Between 01/2010– 12/2017, patients with ≥ 1 MS diagnosis code (ICD-9-CM:340 and/or exemption code:046) and/or ≥ 1 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) prescription, were included. Among MS-cohort, SPMS patients were identified by ≥ 2 hospitalizations or by ≥ 2 drug prescriptions related to MS progression. MS patients not fulfilling SPMS criteria were included as RRMS. Mean annual healthcare costs were reported during follow-up and stratified by DMT treatment/untreatment.Results: Overall, 9543 MS patients were included; 8397 with RRMS and 1146 with SPMS. Estimated prevalence of MS was 141.6/100,000 inhabitants (RRMS 124.4/100,000 and SPMS 17.2/100,000). Mean annual cost for untreated and treated patient was respectively: € 3638 and € 11796 (MS-cohort), € 3183 and € 11486 (RRMS-cohort), € 6317 and € 15511 (SPMS-cohort). The first-line DMT treatment duration averaged 27.4 ± 22.8 months; the mean cost was 19004€ for the whole period. The second-line DMT treatment lasted on average 31.1 ± 24.5 months; the mean cost was 47293€ for the whole period.Conclusion: This study provided insights into the MS epidemiology in Italy and its economic burden. Healthcare costs associated with MS management were mainly driven by DMTs expenditure. A trend of higher healthcare-resource consumption was observed among SPMS-cohort.Keywords: real-world evidence, clinical practice, multiple sclerosis, epidemiology, healthcare resource consumption

Background Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative disease negatively impacting patients’ physical, psychological and social well-being with a significant economic burden. Objectives The study estimates MS burden and cost of illness in Italy from a societal perspective in 2019. Methods Information on the impact of the disease on daily activities, symptoms, employment, resource utilization and the role of caregivers was collected through questionnaires completed by 944 patients and caregivers. Results were stratified according to both disease severity and payer. Mean costs and overall costs were extrapolated from the sample to the Italian MS population considering published distribution of severity. Results The study showed a great impact of the disease on daily and work activities increasing with the disability. The overwhelming burden of fatigue emerged. Mean annual costs were estimated at €39,307/patient (€29,676, €43,464 and €53,454 in mild, moderate and severe cases, respectively). Direct healthcare costs were the major component (€21,069), followed by indirect costs (€15,004). The overall cost of the disease in Italy was €4.8 billion. The National Healthcare System (NHS) sustained most of the costs (80%), most notably direct healthcare costs, while patients paid almost all non-healthcare expenses. Conclusions This study confirmed that MS carries a substantial burden to patients and society, highlighting the need for awareness of this disease.

Objectives: Aim of the study was to describe the use and pharmacoutilization profiles of recommended drugs for HF patients, hospital re-admission rates, mortality rates and determine healthcare res...

This Italian retrospective study aimed to analyze the pharmaco-utilization of anti-VEGF drugs and health care costs among patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD) or other ocular diseases. A retrospective analysis was performed on administrative databases of Italian entities covering approximately six million individuals. Across January 2010–December 2017, patients aged ≥50 years with a prescription of intravitreal anti-VEGFs were included as “wAMD” patients [by wAMD hospitalization or intravitreal injections] or as “other ocular diseases” patients [by hospitalization for other ocular disorders or intravitreal injections, with concomitant diabetes diagnosis or dexamethasone treatment]. The date of first matching of inclusion criteria was index-date. wAMD-cohort. Overall, 3879 patients were included; at index-date, 82.2% were treated with Ranibizumab, 15.8% with Aflibercept, and 2% with Pegaptanib. During the follow-up, the mean/annual anti-VEGF prescription [3.6 (first-year)–0.8 (third-year)] and the total expenditure [5799.84 € (first-year)–3212.84 € (third-year)] decreased. Other ocular diseases-cohort. Overall, 2646 patients were enclosed; 85.9% were treated with Ranibizumab, 13.5% with Aflibercept, and 0.6% with Pegaptanib. During the follow-up, the mean/annual anti-VEGF prescription [3.3 (first-year)–0.5 (third-year)] and the total cost [7196.83 € (first-year)–5162.68 € (third-year)] decreased. This observational study highlighted a decline in anti-VEGF prescriptions over time in both cohorts, suggesting a trend of under-treatment that could worsen the patients’ clinical outcomes and increase health care resource consumption.

Background Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a common and chronic eye condition characterized by the presence of progressive degenerative abnormalities in the central retina (macula). Notably, neovascular, or wet, AMD (nAMD) occurs when new, abnormal blood vessels grow under the macula causing scarring of the macula itself and resulting in a loss of central vision, visual distortion, and an impaired capacity of perceiving colour contrast and intensity. Brolucizumab, a new generation anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) monoclonal antibody, was approved by the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of nAMD. The aim of this analysis is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness profile of brolucizumab, compared to the main therapeutic alternative available (aflibercept), for the treatment of nAMD. Methods The simulation of costs and outcomes was carried out using a Markov model over a time horizon of 15 years. In base-case, treatment effectiveness inputs for brolucizumab and aflibercept were extracted from the HAWK and HARRIER studies and from a network meta-analysis. The Italian National Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective was considered, therefore only healthcare direct costs (treatment acquisition, administration, adverse events, disease monitoring) were analysed. In the alternative scenarios, the societal perspective and a prolonged time horizon were considered. Model robustness was tested through sensitivity analyses. Results In the base-case analysis, brolucizumab was dominant over aflibercept (+ 0.11 years QALY gained and -€15,679 costs). Both one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness and reliability of base-case results. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that when the willingness to pay is equal to €50,000 per QALY gained, brolucizumab would be dominant in 84% of simulations and in the remaining simulations brolucizumab would be cost-effective compared to aflibercept. Results of the alternative scenarios and sensitivity analyses confirmed the results of base-case. Conclusion The cost-utility analysis shows that brolucizumab is dominant over aflibercept. Treatment with brolucizumab reduces the economic impact of nAMD and determined a slight increase of quality-adjusted survival. This analysis gives a high level of confidence that the treatment with brolucizumab would reduce the burden of intravitreal injections, compared to aflibercept, a relevant therapeutic alternative in Italy.

Background Siponimod is an effective treatment for patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS), with active disease evidenced by relapses or imaging features characteristic of multiple sclerosis inflammatory activity, however there is a need to evaluate its economic value and sustainability compared to other disease modifying-therapies (DMTs). Objective To estimate the siponimod cost-effectiveness profile and its relative budget impact compared with other DMTs, by using the Italian National Healthcare System perspective. Methods We performed: 1) a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) vs interferon beta-1b using an analytical Markov model and a life time-horizon, and 2) a budget impact analysis by using 3-years time-horizon. The results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net-monetary benefit (NMB) for CEA, using a willingness to pay threshold of €40,000 per QALY gained, and as difference in the overall budget (Euro) between the scenario with and without siponimod for budget impact. Results In the base case scenario siponimod resulted cost-effective compared with interferon beta-1b 28,891€ per QALY. Overall, the market access of siponimod was associated to an increased budget of about 3€ millions (+0.9%) in the next 3 years simulated. Conclusion Compared to interferon beta-1b, siponimod seems to be cost-effective in SPMS patients and sustainable, with less than 1% overall budget increased in the next 3 years. Future studies need to confirm our results in the real word setting and in other countries.

Background and Objective In asthma, symptom control is a primary goal that is not consistently met with available treatment options. The first commercially available fixed-dose combination in a single inhaler of a long-acting beta-agonist (indacaterol, IND), an inhaled corticosteroid (mometasone furoate, MF) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (glycopyrronium, GLY) has shown promising clinical results in phase III trials. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the cost-utility of IND/GLY/MF fixed-dose combination relative to a combination of salmeterol/fluticasone and tiotropium or salmeterol/fluticasone or IND/MF in adult patients with asthma, from the Italian Health Service (NHS) perspective. Methods A two-state and 4-week cycle Markov model was used to estimate lifetime clinical outcomes and costs. Patients entered the model in stable disease and could experience a non-fatal exacerbation event. The exacerbation rate is dependent upon the therapy a patient is receiving, as per the IND/GLY/MF clinical trials. The impact of each type of exacerbation is accounted by applying a utility decrement, obtained from the literature, and a treatment cost. Utility values were obtained from the EQ-5D questionnaires in the IND/GLY/MF clinical trials. Lifetime costs considered in the analysis were drugs and exacerbation management. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out, with the aim of evaluating the impact of uncertainty on input parameters. Results IND/GLY/MF is associated with a higher quality of life [+ 0.25 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)] than salmeterol/fluticasone plus tiotropium, with an incremental cost of −€3213.90. The incremental cost-utility ratio indicates dominance. At a threshold of €5000 per QALY, IND/GLY/MF has nearly a 100% probability of being cost effective. IND/GLY/MF is associated with a higher quality of life (+ 0.21 QALY) than salmeterol/fluticasone, with an incremental cost of €2547.76. Incremental cost-utility ratio results in €11,897 per QALY. At a threshold of €20,000 per QALY, IND/GLY/MF has nearly a 100% probability of being cost effective. IND/GLY/MF is associated with a higher quality of life (+ 0.34 QALY) than IND/MF, with an incremental cost of €4745.91. Incremental cost-utility ratio results in €14,088 per QALY. At a threshold of €20,000 per QALY, IND/GLY/MF has nearly a 100% probability of being cost effective. Conclusion The results indicate that IND/GLY/MF is cost effective against the considered comparators in a cohort representative of adult patients with asthma in Italy.

To evaluate the healthcare resource use (HRU) and cost of lost productivity due to migraine among Italians with ≥4 monthly migraine days (MMDs), with a focus on those with ≥2 prior preventive treatment failures (TFs).Data from Italian participants from theData of 420 participants, enrolled between September 2017 and February 2018, were analyzed (mean age: 38.5 years, 81.2% women, 37.8% with ≥2 TF). During a 6-month period, 57.6% of participants visited general practitioners (mean visits: 4.5), 31.9% neurologists (mean visits: 2.6), and 26.4% headache specialists (mean visits: 2.8). Overall, 32.0% of participants had ≥1 emergency room visit (mean visits: 2.8) and 15.0% had ≥1 hospitalization (mean visits: 2.9) because of migraine in the past 12 months. Participants who were employed (Migraine-related HRU and indirect costs are high among individuals with ≥4 MMDs (particularly those with ≥2 TF). There is a need for more effective treatments and better management of migraines to reduce the functional and economic burden among this difficult-to-treat population.

OBJECTIVE To estimate the migraine-related healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among patients with improved vs. worsened/stable migraine. METHODS This was a follow-up to a retrospective, panel-based chart review conducted in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain among a panel of physicians (neurologists, headache specialists, and pain specialists) who agreed to participate in patient studies and had treated ≥10 migraine patients in 2017. Eligible physicians extracted data for up to five adults with ≥4 monthly migraine days (MMDs) who initiated a preventive treatment on or after 1 January 2013 and received physician care for ≥6 months after the date of the most recent preventive treatment initiation (index date). Based on the trajectory of migraine severity from the 1-month pre-index period to the 6-month post-index period, cohorts were classified as improved (converting from chronic to episodic or from chronic/episodic to

This study aimed to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of migraineurs prescribed ≥1 migraine prophylactic therapy, and to analyze their therapeutic pathways, healthcare resource consumption, and related costs.This retrospective analysis was based on administrative databases from two regions and three local health units in Italy. Adult patients with ≥1 discharge diagnosis for migraine or ≥1 prescription for migraine-specific drugs, or ≥1 emergency room visit for migraine from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2016 were included if they had received ≥1 migraine prophylactic therapy between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2015 (enrollment period). The first date of the last migraine prophylactic treatment was considered as the index date (ID). Patients were characterized 1-year prior ID and followed-up for 1 year afterwards.Of the 166,362 identified migraineurs, 32,794 (mean age: 45.9 ± 13.9 years, 19.2% male) who received migraine prophylaxis were included in the analysis. At ID, 31,629 patients had received 1 prophylactic treatment with antidepressants (51.2%), neuromodulators (28.1%), beta blockers (12.4%), other migraine preparations (7.8%), and botulinum toxin A (0.5%). Focusing on patients with one prophylactic treatment at ID, 85.4% did not have any previous therapeutic failures whereas 14.6% had ≥1 previous failure. During follow-up, 5% of patients made a therapeutic switch after a mean period of 103.4 ± 97.9 days. Total mean annual cost for patients receiving migraine prophylaxis was 1193.64€ during characterization and 1303.86€ during follow-up periods.This real-world study gave insights on the characterization of migraineurs and patterns of prophylaxis utilization in Italian clinical settings, showing an underuse of prophylactic agents.

Valentina Perrone,1 Elisa Giacomini,1 Diego Sangiorgi,1 Margherita Andretta,2 Anna Michela Menti,2 Mariantonietta Naclerio,3 Daniela Ritrovato,3 Luca Degli Esposti1 1CliCon S.r.l. Health, Economics & Outcomes Research, Ravenna, Italy; 2Health Technology Assessment Unit, Azienda Zero, Padova, Italy; 3Novartis Farma Italy, Origgio, VA, ItalyCorrespondence: Valentina PerroneClicon Srl, Health, Economics and Outcomes Research, Via Salara, 36, 48100, Ravenna, ItalyTel +39 544 38393Fax +39 544 212699Email valentina.perrone@clicon.itPurpose: To analyze the treatment patterns of psoriatic arthritis (PSA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients under biological therapies and to evaluate in this population the health-care resource consumption and related costs.Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on administrative databases of the Veneto region. Patients ≥ 18 years with at least one prescription of biological drugs and a diagnosis at any level for PSA or AS from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2016 (inclusion period) were included. Index date (ID) was defined as date of first biological drug prescription during inclusion period. Patients were characterized the year before ID and followed-up for one year after ID. The drug utilization profile in terms of adherence, persistence and therapeutic regimen changes, and the health-care resource consumption was analyzed during follow-up.Results: A total of 2602 patients were included: 1857 with PSA and 745 with AS. In the PSA cohort, 40.3% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 35.6% etanercept, 8.0% golimumab, 7.5% infliximab, 5.6% ustekinumab and 3.0% certolizumab. Percentage of PSA patients adherent to treatment was higher among ustekinumab patients (91.3%) and lower among etanercept users (54.3%). Persistence ranged from 53.2% (infliximab) to 70.3% (etanercept). Regarding AS cohort, 45.5% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 26% etanercept, 17.3% infliximab, 9.7% golimumab and 1.5% certolizumab. Adherence ranged from 46.9% (etanercept) to 90.9% (certolizumab) and persistence from 62.8% (adalimumab) to 81.8% (certolizumab). Mean annual health-care costs (including costs for drug treatment, diagnostic services, specialist visits and hospital admissions) ranged from € 9727 (certolizumab) to € 14,994 (ustekinumab) among PSA patients and from € 9875 (infliximab) to € 12,991 (golimumab) among AS patients.Conclusion: This study in Veneto region gave a picture of biological treatment patterns among PSA and AS patients in a real-world setting. Our findings showed the high degree of variability concerning utilization of each biological drug and provided insight on the economic burden of both diseases.Keywords: psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, biologic drugs, drug utilization, real-world

Objective: Migraine is a common, disabling condition typically characterized by severe headache, nausea, and/or light and sound sensitivity. This study assessed migraine-related health resource utilization (HRU) occurring in the emergency room/accident & emergency department (ER/A&E) setting among European patients with four or more migraine days per month. Methods: Patient-level clinical and HRU data were collected via chart extraction by ER/A&E physicians in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. Eligible patients had four or more migraine days in the month prior to a migraine-related ER/A&E visit and a history of migraine, among other criteria. The index date for each patient was defined as the date of an ER/A&E visit for migraine on or after January 1, 2013. Physician and ER/A&E characteristics, patient and disease characteristics, treatment history, migraine-medication used, and migraine-related HRU (i.e., procedures) during the ER/A&E visit were assessed. Descriptive analyses were conducted in the pooled population, and a sensitivity analysis was performed by country. Results: A total of 467 eligible patient’s charts (120 in France, 120 in Germany, 107 in Italy, and 120 in Spain) were provided by 136 physicians (36 in France, 36 in Germany, 28 in Italy, and 36 in Spain). On average, patients spent nearly eight hours in the ER/A&E. Approximately 82% of patients received a blood test, 62% received an electrocardiography, and 46% received a cranial computerized tomography scan. Despite the majority of patients already using acute or prophylactic treatment upon visiting the ER/A&E, almost all patients were administered or prescribed migraine treatment during the visit. Approximately 21% of patients were admitted to the hospital, and over half of patients were referred to a neurologist or headache specialist. Conclusions: European patients who had four or more migraine days in the month prior to a migraine-related ER/A&E visit had high HRU associated with the visit.

Aims: This retrospective chart review examined the six-month migraine-related healthcare resource use (HRU) among European patients who had ≥4 migraine days per month and previously failed at least two prophylactic migraine treatments. Methods: Neurologists, headache specialists, and pain specialists in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain who treated ≥10 patients with migraine in 2017 were recruited (April-June 2018) to extract anonymized patient-level data. Eligible physicians randomly selected charts of up to five adult patients with clinically-confirmed migraine, ≥4 migraine days in the month prior to the index date, and had previously failed at least two prophylactic migraine treatments. Treatment failure was defined as discontinuation due to lack of efficacy and/or tolerability. Demographic and disease characteristics as of the index date, and migraine-related HRU incurred during the six-month study period, were recorded. Results: A total of 104 physicians contributed 168 charts for patients (63% female). On average, patients were 38 years old and failed 2.3 prophylactic treatments as of the index date. During the study period, 83% of patients had ≥1 outpatient visit for migraine in the physician's office, and 27% went to the ER/A&E. Approximately 5% of patients were hospitalized for migraine, with an average of one hospitalization and an average length of stay of three days. Approximately 39% of patients had ≥1 blood test, 22% had ≥1 magnetic resonance imaging, 17% had ≥1 electroencephalogram, and 13% had ≥1 computerized tomography scan. Visits to other healthcare providers were common. Limitations: This study is subject to the limitations of chart review studies, such as errors in data entry. Conclusions: Across four European countries, the HRU burden of migraine among patients who previously failed at least two prophylactic treatments was high, indicating a need for more effective prophylactic treatments to appropriately manage migraine and reduce the HRU burden attributable to this common disorder.