Search

Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation, incomplete adherence to anticoagulants increases risk of stroke. Non-warfarin oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are expensive; we evaluated whether higher copayments are associated with lower NOAC adherence., Methods: Using a national claims database of commercially-insured patients, we performed a cohort study of patients with atrial fibrillation who newly initiated a NOAC from 2012 to 2018. Patients were stratified into low (<$35), medium ($35-$59), or high (≥$60) copayments and propensity-score weighted based on demographics, insurance characteristics, comorbidities, prior health care utilization, calendar year, and the NOAC received. Follow-up was 1 year, with censoring for switching to a different anticoagulant, undergoing an ablation procedure, disenrolling from the insurance plan, or death. The primary outcome was adherence, measured by proportion of days covered (PDC). Secondary outcomes included NOAC discontinuation (no refill for 30 days after the end of NOAC supply) and switching anticoagulants. We compared PDC using a Kruskal-Wallis test and rates of discontinuation and switching using Cox proportional hazards models., Results: After weighting patients across the 3 copayment groups, the effective sample size was 17,558 patients, with balance across 50 clinical and demographic covariates (standardized differences <0.1). Mean age was 62 years, 29% of patients were female, and apixaban (43%), and rivaroxaban (38%) were the most common NOACs. Higher copayments were associated with lower adherence (P < .001), with a PDC of 0.82 (Interquartile range [IQR] 0.36-0.98) among those with high copayments, 0.85 (IQR 0.41-0.98) among those with medium copayments, and 0.88 (IQR 0.41-0.99) among those with low copayments. Compared to patients with low copayments, patients with high copayments had higher rates of discontinuation (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.19; P < .001)., Conclusions: Among atrial fibrillation patients newly initiating NOACs, higher copayments in commercial insurance were associated with lower adherence and higher rates of discontinuation in the first year. Policies to lower or limit cost-sharing of important medications may lead to improved adherence and better outcomes among patients receiving NOACs., Competing Interests: Disclosures BNR has received consulting fees from Blue Cross Blue shield of Massachusetts and the non-profit Alosa Health for unrelated work. JJG has received salary support from grants from Eli Lilly and Company and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation to the Brigham and Women's Hospital and was a consultant to Optum, Inc., all for unrelated work. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The Brazilian public health system does not cover pharmacotherapy for urge urinary incontinence (UUI). The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of providing tolterodine, solifenacin, oxybutynin (OXY), darifenacin, and mirabegron for the treatment of UUI in Brazilian public health system., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis with budget impact was performed. Six scenarios were assessed: in one scenario, all 5 therapeutic alternatives approved for coverage, and in the remaining 5 scenarios, only 1 alternative is approved for adoption for all patients. Clinical data were derived from a rapid systematic review conducted in several databases. One-way sensitivity analysis was also performed. The time horizon was 12 months., Results: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that patients treated with OXY had the lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per outcomes assessed (change in urinary incontinence episodes (UIE): R$1180.08; change in urge incontinence episodes: R$757.85 and change in micturition frequency: R$907.75), corresponding to a budget impact of R$17.9 billion over 5 years. The change in effectiveness measures was the parameter that most influenced the results of the ICER per patient-year., Conclusion: The results of the study have shown that OXY and solifenacin had the lowest ICER per patient-year and the lowest budget impact when compared with other drugs., (Copyright © 2020 ISPOR--The professional society for health economics and outcomes research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Antithrombotic drugs decrease stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation, but they increase bleeding risk, particularly in older adults at high risk for falls. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective antithrombotic therapy in older adults with atrial fibrillation who are at high risk for falls., Methods: We conducted a mathematical modelling study from July 2019 to March 2020 based on the Ontario, Canada, health care system. We derived the base-case age, sex and fall risk distribution from a published cohort of older adults at risk for falls, and the bleeding and stroke risk parameters from an atrial fibrillation trial population. Using a probabilistic microsimulation Markov decision model, we calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Cost data were adjusted for inflation to 2018 values. The analysis used the Ontario public payer perspective with a lifetime horizon., Results: In our model, the most cost-effective antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation in older patients at risk for falls was apixaban, with an ICER of $8517 per QALY gained (5.86 QALYs at $92 056) over ASA. It was a dominant strategy over warfarin and the other antithrombotic agents. There was moderate uncertainty in cost-effectiveness ranking, with apixaban as the preferred choice in 66% of model iterations (given willingness to pay of $50 000 per QALY gained); edoxaban, 30 mg, was preferred in 31% of iterations. Sensitivity analysis across ranges of age, bleeding risk and fall risk still favoured apixaban over the other medications., Interpretation: From a public payer perspective, apixaban is the most cost-effective antithrombotic agent in older adults at high risk for falls. Health care funders should implement strategies to encourage use of the most cost-effective medication in this population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Copyright 2020, Joule Inc. or its licensors.)

Introduction: Treatment patterns and costs were characterized among patients with overactive bladder (OAB) receiving later-line target therapies (combination mirabegron/antimuscarinic, sacral nerve stimulation [SNS], percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation [PTNS], or onabotulinumtoxinA)., Methods: In a retrospective cohort study using 2013 to 2017 MarketScan databases, two partially overlapping cohorts of adults with OAB ("IPT cohort": patients with incident OAB pharmacotherapy use; "ITT cohort," incident target therapy) with continuous enrollment were identified; first use was index. Demographic characteristics, treatment patterns and costs over the 24-month follow-up period were summarized. Crude mean (standard deviation [SD]) OAB-specific (assessed by OAB diagnostic code or pharmaceutical dispensation record) costs were estimated according to target therapy., Results: The IPT cohort comprised 54 066 individuals (mean [SD] age 58.5 [15.0] years; 76% female), the ITT cohort, 1662 individuals (mean [SD] age 62.8 [14.9] years; 83% female). Seventeen percent of the IPT cohort were treated with subsequent line(s) of therapy after index therapy; among those, 73% received antimuscarinics, 23% mirabegron, and 1.4% a target therapy. For the ITT cohort, 32% were initially treated with SNS, 27% with onabotulinumtoxinA, 26% with combination mirabegron/antimuscarinic, and 15% with PTNS. Subsequently, one-third of this cohort received additional therapies. Mean (SD) costs were lowest among patients receiving index therapy PTNS ($6959 [$7533]) and highest for SNS ($29 702 [$26 802])., Conclusions: Costs for SNS over 24 months are substantially higher than other treatments. A treatment patterns analysis indicates that oral therapies predominate; first-line combination therapy is common in the ITT cohort and uptake of oral therapy after procedural options is substantial., (© 2020 The Authors. Neurourology and Urodynamics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose of the Review: This paper discusses the recent evidence supporting beta 3 adrenergic agonists as the preferred pharmacological management of overactive bladder syndrome., Recent Findings: Mirabegron has a similar efficacy profile to first-line antimuscarinics with favorable adverse effects profile. Treatment of OAB with beta-3 adrenergic agonist should be favored in patients at higher risk of anticholinergic adverse events. The efficacy and tolerability of beta-3 adrenergic agonists are consistently reported in older OAB patients, whether used alone or with other antimuscarinics. Mirabegron is cost-effective in treating OAB unless the symptoms were severe or refractory. Combination therapy of mirabegron and other pharmacotherapy has proven to be efficient in controlling OAB symptoms without inducing serious add-on adverse effects. While beta-3 adrenergic agonists bear favorable advantages in OAB treatment, physicians should perform a thorough and careful pre-treatment planning to optimize treatment benefits and adherence.

Purpose: Brexpiprazole is an oral atypical antipsychotic (OAA) for the treatment of schizophrenia (SCZ). This study compared all-cause and psychiatric inpatient hospitalization and medical costs in adult patients with SCZ newly treated with brexpiprazole versus other US Food and Drug Administration-approved OAAs in a real-world setting., Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from: (1) the IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases, and the MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid database; and (2) the de-identified Optum Clinformatics Datamart. Adult patients were identified if they had SCZ and initiated either brexpiprazole or another OAA during the study identification period (July 1, 2015, to September 30, 2016, for MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental and for Optum; July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016, for MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid) and had ≥12 months of continuous enrollment before (baseline) and after (follow-up) the first treatment date. Linear regression analyses were performed to test associations between treatment groups (brexpiprazole vs another OAA) and costs (total and medical); negative binomial regression models were used to estimate number of hospitalizations per year, adjusting for baseline characteristics and medication adherence to index treatment during the 12-month follow-up., Findings: The final study sample consisted of 6254 patients with SCZ: 176 initiated brexpiprazole; 391, ziprasidone; 453, paliperidone; 523, lurasidone; 786, aripiprazole; 1234, quetiapine; 1264, olanzapine; and 1427, risperidone. Controlling for baseline characteristics and medication adherence, the adjusted number of hospitalizations (both all-cause and psychiatric), all-cause total costs, and all-cause medical costs did not differ across groups. Brexpiprazole users had the lowest mean psychiatric costs among all OAA users ($12,013; 95% bootstrap CI, 7488-16,538). Compared with brexpiprazole users, paliperidone (incidence rate ratio [95% CI], 1.52 [1.05-2.19]; P = 0.027) and quetiapine (incidence rate ratio [95% CI], 1.47 [1.04-2.07]; P = 0.029) users had more psychiatric hospitalizations per year. Paliperidone had higher psychiatric costs than brexpiprazole (total, $32,066 [95% bootstrap CI, 28,779-35,353] vs $23,851 [18,907-28,795]; medical, $19,343 [16,294-22,392] vs $12,013 [7488-16,538]). Psychiatric medical costs were also $6744 higher in olanzapine users (95% bootstrap CI, 1694-11,795; P = 0.009) than in brexpiprazole users., Implications: Patients with SCZ treated with brexpiprazole had fewer psychiatric hospitalizations and lower psychiatric costs than those treated with paliperidone. Differences in the number of all-cause hospitalizations and medical costs among treatments were not statistically significant. Although treatment decisions are driven by a number of factors (eg, clinical circumstances and drug costs), choice of OAA may affect health care costs., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Optimal use of scarce resources is a focus in the healthcare sector, as resources devoted to health care are limited. Costs and health economic analyses can help guide decision-making concerning treatments. One important factor is the choice of cost perspective that can range from a focus on narrow drug budget costs to broader economic perspectives. In the case of treatment with oral anticoagulants in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, the aim of this cost analysis was to illustrate the differences in costs when applying different cost perspectives. Methods: In a cost analysis, pairwise comparisons of average costs of 6 months standard treatment with either a low molecular weight heparin parenteral anticoagulant (LMWH) and a Vitamin K Antagonist (VKA) versus one of the non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants [NOACs; dabigatran etexilate, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) used in daily clinical practice in Denmark for VTE patients were carried out. Each analysis included the results from five different cost analyses with increasingly broader cost perspectives going from the narrowest "drug cost only" perspective to the broadest "societal" perspective. Results: Focusing on "drug costs only", LMWH/VKA was associated with the lowest costs compared to all NOACs. However, including the economic impact of preventing recurrent VTE and limit bleedings, apixaban and rivaroxaban resulted in slightly lower health care costs than LMWH/VKA. When applying the "societal perspective", the total costs saved with apixaban and rivaroxaban compared to LMWH/VKA further increased, with apixaban having the lowest total costs. Conclusions: The present study's case of oral anticoagulants in VTE treatment illustrated the importance of the cost perspective in the choice of therapy. If decision-making were based on drug costs only, instead of applying a health care sector or societal cost perspective, suboptimal decisions may be likely.

Malignancy is a well-established risk factor for venous thromboembolism and while low-molecular-weight heparin therapy has been standard of care for cancer-associated thrombosis for many years, many patients find injection therapy burdensome. The direct oral anticoagulant edoxaban has been shown to be noninferior to dalteparin for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. In a Markov simulation model, edoxaban with 6-month time horizon and a United States societal perspective with 2017 US dollars, edoxaban was the preferred strategy in the general cancer population (6-month cost $6061 with 0.34 quality adjusted life years) and in a subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal malignancy (6-month cost $7227 with 0.34 quality adjusted life years). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio of dalteparin compared to edoxaban was $1,873,535 in the general oncology population and $694,058 in the gastrointestinal malignancy population.

Introduction: While trials have demonstrated non-inferiority of direct oral anticoagulant drugs (DOAC) to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) for the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT), it is unclear if the newer intervention is cost-effective., Methods: We performed a cost-utility analysis using a Markov state-transition model over a time horizon of 60 months in a hypothetical cohort of 65-year-old patients with active malignancy and first acute symptomatic CAT who were eligible to receive either rivaroxaban/edoxaban or dalteparin. We obtained transition probability, relative risk, cost, and utility inputs from the literature. We estimated the differential impact on costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient and performed one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of results., Results: Using the base-case analysis over 60 months, DOAC versus dalteparin was associated with an incremental cost reduction of $24,129 with an incremental QALY reduction of 0.04. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, the cost of dalteparin contributed the most to the incremental cost difference; relative risk of death related to underlying cancer contributed the most of the incremental QALY difference. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case analysis, with a large reduction in cost but small reduction in QALYs., Conclusion: Rivaroxaban or edoxaban as compared to dalteparin is cost saving from a payer's perspective for the treatment of CAT. Professional organizations and healthcare systems may want to consider this analysis in future practice recommendations., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction and Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of edoxaban vs acenocoumarol in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in Spain., Methods: Markov model, adapted to the Spanish setting from the perspective of the National Health System, stimulating the progression of a hypothetical cohort of patients with NVAF throughout their lifetime, with different health states: stroke, haemorrhage, and other cardiovascular complications. Efficacy and safety data were obtained from the available clinical evidence (mainly from the phase III ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 study). The costs of managing NVAF and its complications were obtained from Spanish sources., Results: Edoxaban use led to 0.34 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALY) compared with acenocoumarol. The incremental cost with edoxaban was 3916€, mainly because of higher pharmacological costs, which were partially offset by lower costs of treatment monitoring and managing NVAF events and complications. The cost per QALY was 11 518€, within the thresholds commonly considered cost-effective in Spain (25 000-30 000 €/QALY). The robustness of the results was confirmed by various sensitivity analyses., Conclusions: Edoxaban is a cost-effective alternative to acenocoumarol in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with NVAF in Spain., (Copyright © 2018 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA), implantable sacral nerve stimulation devices, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, anticholinergic medications and mirabegron compared with best supportive care (BSC) for management of refractory overactive bladder (OAB)., Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of treatment options with BSC over a 10-year time horizon. Resource utilization, discontinuation rates and costs were derived from unpublished and published sources. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were reported., Results: Treatment with onabotA 100U produced the largest gain in QALYs (7.179) and lowest estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($32,680/QALY) of all assessed treatments compared with BSC., Conclusion: Compared with BSC, onabotA 100U was the most cost-effective treatment option for patients with refractory OAB.

Background and Purpose- Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are safer, at least equally efficacious, and cost-effective compared to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but they remain underused, particularly in demented patients. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of DOACs compared with warfarin in patients with AF and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Methods- We constructed a microsimulation model to estimate the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation therapy (adjusted-dose warfarin and various DOACs) in 70-year-old patients with AF and AD from a US societal perspective. We stratified patient cohorts based on stage of AD and care setting. Model parameters were estimated from secondary sources. Health benefits were measured in the number of acute health events, life-years, and QALYs gained. We classified alternatives as cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained. Results- For patients with AF and AD, compared with warfarin, DOACs increase costs but also increase QALYs by reducing the risk of stroke. For mild-AD patients living in the community, edoxaban increased lifetime costs by $6603 and increased QALYs by 0.076 compared to warfarin, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $86 882/QALY gained. Even though DOACs increased QALYs compared with warfarin for all patient groups (ranging from 0.019 to 0.085 additional QALYs), no DOAC treatment alternative had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$150 000/QALY gained for patients with moderate to severe AD. For patients living in a long-term care facility with mild AD, the DOAC with the lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (rivaroxaban) costs $150 169 per QALY gained; for patients with more severe AD, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were higher. Conclusions- For patients with AF and mild AD living in the community, edoxaban is cost-effective compared with warfarin. Even though patients with moderate and severe AD living in the community and patients with any stage of AD living in a long-term care setting may obtain positive clinical benefits from anticoagulation treatment, DOACs are not cost-effective compared with warfarin for these populations. Compared to aspirin, no oral anticoagulation (warfarin or any DOAC) is cost effective in patients with AF and AD.

Aims: The EdoxabaN vs. warfarin in subjectS UndeRgoing cardiovErsion of atrial fibrillation (ENSURE-AF) (NCT02072434) study was a multicentre prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint evaluation (PROBE) trial comparing edoxaban with enoxaparin/warfarin followed by warfarin alone in 2199 non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients undergoing electrical cardioversion and showed comparable rates of bleeding and thromboembolism between treatments. This prespecified ancillary analysis investigated the impact of edoxaban therapy on treatment satisfaction and utilization of healthcare services., Methods and Results: The Perception of Anticoagulant Treatment Questionnaire (PACT-Q2) was completed by study patients on Day 28 post-cardioversion. Higher scores represent greater satisfaction. Healthcare resource utilizations were collected from randomization to Day 28 post-cardioversion. Data from patients who received at least one dose of study drugs were analysed. Patients treated with edoxaban were more satisfied than enoxaparin/warfarin in both PACT-Q treatment satisfaction and convenience scores (P < 0.001 for both). Differences in treatment satisfaction scores were greater in patients who underwent non-transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE)-guided cardioversion than in patients who underwent TOE-guided cardioversion. Edoxaban was associated with fewer clinic visits (4.75 visits vs. 7.60 visits; P < 0.001) and fewer hospital days (3.43 days vs. 5.41 days; P < 0.05). Rates of hospitalizations and emergency room visits were not significantly different. Overall, edoxaban therapy was estimated to reduce healthcare costs by €107.73, €437.92, €336.75, and $246.32 per patient in German, Spanish, Italian, and US settings, respectively., Conclusions: The convenience of edoxaban therapy over warfarin in patients undergoing cardioversion may provide greater treatment satisfaction and cost savings to the healthcare system.

Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of mirabegron 50 mg relative to tolterodine extended release 4 mg for the treatment of overactive bladder if used as the first-line treatment in Japan., Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the cost-effectiveness of the mirabegron first-line treatment (and tolterodine second-line) versus tolterodine first-line treatment (and mirabegron second-line) taken for 5 years from the randomized European-Australian study (SCORPIO trial) and single technology appraisal assessment report by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated with utility value by quality-adjusted life year with cost using the medical fee and the drug price tariff in 2016. For the study of transition of treatment status, our analytical model was established. The transition probabilities of severity states were calculated based on the probabilities for the mean numbers of incontinence episodes/day and micturition episodes/day in mirabegron-treated and tolterodine-treated patients in the single technology appraisal assessment report., Results: The 5-year expected effect per patient was 3.860 quality-adjusted life years for first-line mirabegron and 3.839 quality-adjusted life years for first-line tolterodine. The 5-year expected cost per patient was ¥526 191 for first-line mirabegron, and ¥472 390 for first-line tolterodine. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was ¥2 565 927/quality-adjusted life year. This value was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥5 million/quality-adjusted life year. In more severe states, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio exceeded ¥5 million., Conclusions: First-line mirabegron appears to be more cost-effective than first-line tolterodine. In patients with severe symptoms, first-line mirabegron is not economically preferable., (© 2018 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Background: Several studies have compared the cost effectiveness of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin using results from clinical trials evaluating NOACs. However, the time in therapeutic range (TTR) of warfarin groups ranged across clinical trials, and all were below the therapeutic goal of 70%. We compared the cost effectiveness of edoxaban 60 mg, apixaban 5 mg, dabigatran 150 mg, dabigatran 110 mg, rivaroxaban 20 mg, and well-managed warfarin with a TTR of 70% in preventing stroke among patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of bleeding., Methods: For the six treatments, we used a Markov state-transition model to quantify lifetime costs in $US and effectiveness in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We simulated relative risk ratios of clinical events with each NOAC versus warfarin with a TTR of 70% using published regression models that predict how the incidence of thrombotic or hemorrhagic events changes for each unit change in TTR. We re-ran our analysis for two other estimates of TTR: 65 and 75%., Results: Treatment with edoxaban 60 mg cost $US127,520/QALY gained compared with warfarin with a TTR of 70% and cost $US41,860/QALY gained compared with warfarin with a TTR of 65%. However, warfarin with a TTR of 75% was more effective and less expensive than all NOACs. For three levels of TTR, apixaban 5 mg, dabigatran 150 mg, dabigatran 110 mg, and rivaroxaban 20 mg were dominated strategies., Conclusions: The comparative cost effectiveness of edoxaban and warfarin is highly sensitive to TTR. At the $US100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, our results suggest that warfarin is the most cost-effective treatment for patients who can achieve a TTR of 70%.

Aims: To compare healthcare costs and resource utilization in patients with overactive bladder (OAB) in the US who switch from mirabegron to onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) with those who persist on mirabegron., Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational claims analysis of the OptumHealth Administrative Claims database conducted between April 1, 2012 and September 30, 2015 used medical and pharmacy claims to identify patients with at least one OAB diagnosis who switched from mirabegron to onabotA (onabotA group) or persisted on mirabegron for at least 180 days (mirabegron persisters). Propensity score weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics that were associated with increased healthcare expenditures across treatment groups. Multivariate analyses assessed the impact of switching and persistence on all-cause and OAB-related healthcare costs and resource utilization in the year following each patient's index date., Results: In total, 449 patients were included in this study: 54 patients were included in the onabotA group, and 395 patients were included in the mirabegron persister group. Compared with the mirabegron persister patients, the onabotA patients observed significantly higher OAB-related total costs ($5,504 vs $1,772, p < .001), OAB-related medical costs ($5,033 vs $351, p < .001), sacral neuromodulation costs ($865 vs $60, p = .017), and outpatient costs ($17,385 vs $9,035, p = .009), and more OAB-related medical visits (6.0 vs 1.9, p < .001). OnabotA patients had lower OAB-related prescription costs ($470 vs $1,421, p < .001) and fewer OAB-related pharmacy claims (1.6 vs 5.0, p <.001). There were no significant differences in all-cause total medical or prescription costs., Limitations: This study was a retrospective analysis using claims data that only included patients with commercial health coverage or Medicare supplemental coverage. Accuracy of the diagnosis codes and the generalizability of the results to other OAB populations are limited. The study was not designed to determine the impact of OAB treatments on the economic outcomes examined., Conclusions: OAB patients who persisted on mirabegron treatment for at least 180 days had lower OAB-related healthcare costs and resource utilization compared with those who switched to onabotA.

Background: The β 3 -adrenoceptor agonist, mirabegron, and antimuscarinic agents provide similar efficacy for the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB), but mirabegron appears to be associated with better persistence, perhaps due to an absence of anticholinergic side-effects. This study estimated the expected costs associated with the management of OAB in Canada from a societal perspective by utilizing real-world evidence., Methods: An economic model with monthly cycles and a 1-year time horizon was developed to depict a treatment pathway for a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients with OAB. At model entry, patients receive mirabegron or an antimuscarinic. Patients who do not persist may switch treatment, undergo a minimally invasive procedure, or remain symptomatic (uncontrolled). The model includes direct costs (e.g. physician visits) and indirect costs (e.g. lost productivity). A one-way univariate sensitivity analysis assessed a ±20% variation in each of the key model inputs., Results: At 1 year, a greater proportion of patients persisted on treatment with mirabegron compared with antimuscarinics (33% vs 15-23%), and a smaller proportion switched treatment (17% vs 20-22%). The number of healthcare visits (292 vs 299-304), pads used (74,098 vs 77,878-81,669), and work hours lost (4,497 vs 5,372-6,249) were all lower for mirabegron vs antimuscarinics. The estimated total annual cost of treatment per patient with mirabegron was $2,127.46 Canadian dollars (CAD) ($5.82 CAD/day) compared with $2,150.20-$2,496.69 CAD ($5.89-$6.84 CAD/day) for antimuscarinics. The one-way sensitivity analysis indicated the results are robust., Conclusions: Improved persistence observed in routine clinical practice with mirabegron appears to translate into benefits of reduced healthcare resource use, and lower direct and indirect costs of treatment compared with antimuscarinics. Overall, these data suggest that mirabegron may offer clinical and economic benefits for the management of patients with OAB in Canada.

Objective: To compare adherence with lurasidone to other oral atypical antipsychotics among Medicaid and commercially insured patients with schizophrenia., Research Design and Methods: Administrative claims of patients with schizophrenia treated with atypical antipsychotics (lurasidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone) from October 2010 to September 2011 were identified from MarketScan Commercial and Medicaid Databases, and were classified by the first (index) antipsychotic. Patients were 18-64 years, had insurance coverage 12 months pre- and 6 months post-index, and no pre-index use of the index drug., Main Outcome Measures: Medication possession ratio (MPR), discontinuation rate, and mean time to discontinuation were assessed post-index. Pairwise comparisons (lurasidone versus each drug) were conducted using chi-square tests and Student's t-tests., Results: There were 146 Medicaid (mean age 43.5 years, 47.9% female) and 63 commercial (mean age 40.0 years, 42.9% female) patients treated with lurasidone. In the Medicaid population, the MPR for patients treated with lurasidone was 0.60, versus 0.41-0.48 for patients treated with other antipsychotics (all p < .05). Patients treated with lurasidone exhibited a lower discontinuation rate compared to patients treated with all other antipsychotics (49.3% versus 62.3%-68.3%, all p < .05). The mean time to discontinuation with lurasidone was significantly longer than with ziprasidone (p < .05). In the commercial population, the MPR for patients treated with lurasidone (0.61) was higher compared to patients treated with quetiapine (0.44) and ziprasidone (0.43) (both p < .05). The discontinuation rate (44.4%) was lower for patients treated with lurasidone compared to patients treated with all other antipsychotics except risperidone (p < .05). The mean time to discontinuation was longer for lurasidone than with other antipsychotics., Conclusions: In Medicaid and commercial populations, patients treated with lurasidone demonstrated greater adherence compared to patients treated with other atypical antipsychotics. Limitations of using administrative claims data include potential errors or inconsistencies in coding, and lack of complete clinical information.

Objective: Overactive bladder syndrome is a condition with high prevalence, which has a negative impact on patients' quality of life. A drug with a novel mechanism of action has been recently approved: mirabegron. The objective of this study is to review the scientific evidence available on mirabegron, with the aim to analyze its efficacy, safety and cost, and thus estimate its role within current pharmacotherapy. Methods: The effectiveness and safety of mirabegron were analyzed through an evaluation of scientific evidence. The cost of different pharmacological alternatives was calculated based on their Defined Daily Dose (DDD) and their manufacturer's sale price. Results: The use of mirabegron in the treatment of overactive bladder syndrome is supported by three randomized clinical trials, controlled with placebo, at 12 weeks. All three share the same primary efficacy variables (number of incontinence episodes per 24 hours and number of micturitions per 24 hours). Long-term efficacy data are based on a 12-month study, where efficacy outcomes were measured as secondary variables. In all studies, mirabegron showed a significant but modest effect. Some of the most frequently detected adverse effects were: hypertension, increase of glucose in blood, headache, urinary tract infections, constipation and tachycardia. Special attention must be paid to cardiovascular events. Conclusions: The clinical efficacy of mirabegron is very modest and comparable to that achieved with the other drugs approved for this indication. Moreover, it is more expensive than other therapeutic options. Cardiac risks and urinary infections only allow to consider it as an alternative option to anticholinergic drugs, when these are contraindicated, show no clinical efficacy, or cause unacceptable adverse effects., (Copyright AULA MEDICA EDICIONES 2017. Published by AULA MEDICA. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate therapeutic persistence, healthcare resources, medical costs and adverse events of oxybutynin and mirabegron treatments in patients with overactive bladder in routine medical practice., Patients and Methods: An observational, retrospective, multicentre study was carried out using the records of patients attended to in 3 different geographic locations (Barcelona, Girona, Asturias). An analysis was made on the 2 study groups (oxybutynin and mirabegron). Follow-up time was one year. Persistence was defined as the time (months), without discontinuation of the initial treatment, or without change of treatment at least 60 days after the initial prescription. Primary endpoints: comorbidity, healthcare resources used, and adverse events. The data was analysed using the SPSSWIN Program, with a significance of P<.05., Results: Of the total of1,277 patients included in the study, 42.9% were on oxybutynin and 57.1% mirabegron. The mean age was 69.3 years and 53.2% were female. Demographic characteristics and morbidity were similar between the drugs and had a similar persistence (35.0% oxybutynin vs. 32.2% mirabegron, P=.294), although their costs were lower (1,151.2 vs. €1,809.6, P<.001). The biggest differences were observed in the price of medication (279.2 vs. €692.3, P<.001; a variation of: -€413.1); and adverse events (9.7 vs. 4.9%, P<.001)., Conclusions: Patients treated with oxybutynin vs. mirabegron for overactive bladder had similar persistence with the treatment, lower healthcare costs, but with higher oxybutynin vs. mirabegron adverse reaction rates., (Copyright © 2016 Sociedad Española de Médicos de Atención Primaria (SEMERGEN). Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The comparative cost-effectiveness of all oral anticoagulants approved up to date has not been evaluated from the US perspective. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of edoxaban 60mg, apixaban 5mg, dabigatran 150mg, dabigatran 110mg, rivaroxaban 20mg and warfarin in stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients at high-risk of bleeding (defined as HAS-BLED score≥3)., Materials and Methods: We constructed a Markov state-transition model to evaluate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with each of the six treatments from the perspective of US third-party payers. Probabilities of clinical events were obtained from the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, ARISTOTLE and ENGAGE AF-TIMI trials; costs were derived from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, and other studies. Because edoxaban is only indicated in patients with creatinine clearance ≤95ml/min, we re-ran our analyses after excluding edoxaban from the analysis., Results: Treatment with edoxaban 60mg cost $77,565/QALY gained compared to warfarin, and apixaban 5mg cost $108,631/QALY gained compared to edoxaban 60mg. When edoxaban was not included in the analysis, treatment with apixaban 5mg cost $84,128/QALY gained, compared to warfarin. Dabigatran 150mg, dabigatran 110mg and rivaroxaban 20mg were dominated strategies., Conclusions: For patients with creatinine clearance between 50 and 95ml/min, apixaban 5mg was the most cost-effective treatment for willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP) above $115,000/QALY gained, and edoxaban 60mg was cost-effective when the WTP was between $75,000 and $115,000/QALY gained. For patients with creatinine clearance >95ml/min, apixaban 5mg was the most cost-effective treatment for WTP thresholds above $80,000/QALY gained., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The impact of formulary management strategies on utilization and expenditures in overactive bladder (OAB) treatment has not been extensively investigated. In 2013, step therapy (ST) policies for 2 branded OAB treatments, mirabegron and fesoterodine, were removed from Humana Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) plans and Medicare prescription drug plans (PDP), allowing for an examination of the effect of ST policies on OAB medication use patterns and costs., Objective: To assess the impact of removal of formulary restriction policies for mirabegron and fesoterodine on medication utilization patterns and costs associated with OAB treatment in Medicare patients., Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study design was utilized. Subjects included individuals enrolled in Humana MAPD plans or PDPs, aged ≥ 65 years, with ≥ 1 prescription for an OAB medication in 2013. Patient demographic characteristics, OAB medication utilization, and pharmacy cost trends in 2013 were described. OAB medication use was calculated as the number of 30-day-supply equivalent medication claims and reported as a percentage of the total number of 30-day-supply equivalent claims across all OAB products. OAB medication expenditures were calculated as a percentage of the sum of pharmacy costs for OAB medications and reported separately for each month and drug during 2013. Temporal trends of OAB medication utilization and expenditures in 2013 were calculated using ordinary least squares regression., Results: Of 194,511 patients, trends in utilization of OAB medications indicated that on average, there was a statistically significant monthly increase in utilization of mirabegron (regression coefficient [B] = 274; P < 0.001; 95% CI: 218, 330), fesoterodine (B = 167; P < 0.001; 95% CI = 129, 205), oxybutynin extended release (ER; B = 357; P = 0.011; 95% CI = 99, 614), and trospium ER (B = 33; P = 0.001; 95% CI = 17, 50) and statistically significant decreases in utilization of solifenacin (B = -202; P = 0.048; 95% CI = -402, -2), tolterodine ER (B = -287; P = 0.002; 95% CI = -437, -137), darifenacin (B = -94; P < 0.001; 95% CI = -128, -61), and trospium immediate release (IR; B = -22; P = 0.001; 95% CI = -32, -12). Total OAB medication expenditures significantly increased an average of 0.12% for each month during the course of 2013 (B = 0.12; P = 0.026; 95% CI = 0.017, -0.223). While monthly oxybutynin IR utilization did not change significantly throughout 2013 (B = 228; P = 0.169; 95% CI = -114, -570), it demonstrated the largest average monthly expenditure increase (B = 0.082; P < 0.001; 95% CI = 0.056, 0.108). When removing oxybutynin IR costs from the total OAB medication costs, the trend in total OAB medication average monthly expenditures was not significant (B = 0.038; P = 0.365; 95% CI = -0.051, -0.126). An over 4-fold per-unit-cost increase for oxybutynin IR was noted., Conclusions: Utilization of 2 branded OAB products increased in the months after ST removal with minimal cost impact. One of the possible reasons total OAB expenditures increased may have been due to the increased cost of the largest-volume generic product, oxybutynin IR., Disclosures: This research was funded by Astellas Pharma Global Development and was conducted as part of the Astellas-Humana Research Collaboration. Ng, Kristy, Schermer, and Bradt are employees of Astellas. Astellas manufactures mirabegron (Myrbetriq) and solifenacin (VESIcare). Abbass, Caplan, Collins, and Suehs are employees of Comprehensive Health Insights, a subsidiary of Humana, which received funding from Astellas for this study. Suehs owns stock in Humana. Chan is an employee of Humana Pharmacy Solutions. Portions of this study were presented as a poster at Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Nexus 2015; October 26-29, 2015; Orlando, Florida. Study concept and design were contributed by Ng, Chan, Suehs, and Abbass, along with Collins. Abbass took the lead in data collection, along with Collins and with assistance from Caplan, Chan, and Suehs. Data interpretation was provided by Kristy and Bradt, along with Abbass, Caplan, Ng, Suehs, Collins, and Chan. The manuscript was written primarily by Caplan, along with Schermer, Suehs, and Abbass, and revised by Caplan, Schermer, and Ng, along with the other authors.

Background and Objective: The first class of oral pharmacologic treatments for overactive bladder (OAB) are antimuscarinics that are associated with poor persistence, anticholinergic adverse events, and increased anticholinergic burden (ACB) with risk of cognitive impairment. Mirabegron, a β3-adrenoceptor agonist, is an oral treatment that does not contribute to ACB and has early evidence of improved persistence. The objective of the analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of mirabegron for OAB vs six antimuscarinics in the US., Methods: A Markov state-transition model assessed US commercial health-plan and Medicare Advantage perspectives over a 3-year time horizon in an OAB patient population. Transition probabilities between five micturition and five incontinence severity states were derived from a network meta-analysis of 44 trials of oral OAB treatments. Therapy beginning with an oral OAB agent could discontinue or switch to another oral agent and could be followed by tibial nerve stimulation, sacral neuromodulation, or onabotulinumtoxinA. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Utilities were mapped from incontinence and micturition frequencies as well as demographics. Based on analysis of data from a large healthcare system, elevated ACB was associated with increased healthcare utilization and probability of cognitive impairment., Results: From both commercial and Medicare Advantage perspectives, mirabegron was the most clinically effective treatment, while oxybutynin was the least expensive. Tolterodine immediate release (IR) was also on the cost-effectiveness frontier. The analysis estimated costs per QALY of $59,690 and $66,347 for mirabegron from commercial health plan and Medicare Advantage perspectives, respectively, compared to tolterodine IR. Other antimuscarinics were dominated., Conclusions: This analysis estimated that mirabegron is a cost-effective treatment for OAB from US commercial health plan and Medicare Advantage perspectives, due to fewer projected adverse events and comorbidities, and data suggesting better persistence.

Aims: In the coming decades, the number of Europeans with atrial fibrillation (AF) is set to rise as the population ages, and so with it will the number of strokes. The risk of thromboembolism (principally stroke and systemic embolism) and death can be reduced by the use of the vitamin K antagonists (VKA, e.g. warfarin) and more so by non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) such as edoxaban., Methods and Results: We modelled the effect of the increasing use of edoxaban in preference to warfarin in a European AF population from both clinical and economic perspectives. We estimate that the introduction of NOACs in 2010 eliminated over 88 000 thromboembolisms and deaths annually, of which over 17 000 were ischaemic strokes. At a 1-year cost of €30k per ischaemic stroke, this strategy saved €510 million annually. Should the use of edoxaban increase from 11% in 2013 to 75% by 2030, we expect that rate of thromboembolism and death will fall from 5.67 to 5.42 total events per million patients per year, which will further eliminate over 12 000 of these events annually. At an inflation-adjusted 1-year cost of approximately €35k per ischaemic stroke, this will save €44.5 million each year. At a conservative rate of increase in the AF population of 2.2-fold from 2005, in 2050 there will be around 180 000 AF-related ischaemic strokes that, at an inflation-adjusted cost of around €62k per stroke, sums to €11 116 million. Should the rate of AF rise 2.6-fold from 2005, then in 2050 there will be 214 500 ischaemic strokes that will cost around €13 300 million., Conclusion: Our data point to a substantial increase in the human and economic cost burden of AF and so emphasize the need to reduce this burden. This may be achieved by the increased use of oral anticoagulants, particularly with the NOACs such as edoxaban., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatment of Overactive Bladder (OAB) with fesoterodine relative to mirabegron, from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective., Methods: A decision tree model was developed to represent a typical clinical process of 52-week of treatment for an OAB patient with urge urinary incontinence (UUI) initiating first-line therapy with fesoterodine 4mg, including optional titration to 8mg, vs.mirabegron 50mg. Efficacy data were obtained from a Bayesian indirect treatment meta-analysis. Patients with UUI of less than one episode/day were defined as treatment responder and persistence was assessed at weeks 4, 12 and 24. At week 12, non-responders discontinued treatment permanently. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated based on time spent in responder and non-responder states. OAB-related drug and medical care costs including physician visits, laboratory tests, incontinence pads, and comorbidities (fracture, skin infection, urinary tract infections and depression) were modeled and expressed in €2015., Results: At week 52, the percentage of responders was 20.8% for patients starting on fesoterodine 4mg who optionally titrated to 8mg and 19.4% for patients treated with mirabegron. QALYs were slightly higher with fesoterodine than mirabegron (0.7703vs. 0.7668, difference=0.0035). Fesoterodine treatment also had slightly higher total costs than mirabegron (3,296€vs. 3,217, difference=79€), resulting in a cost of 22,523/QALY€ gained for fesoterodine versus mirabegron. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the slight advantage of fesoterodine with a 61.1% probability of being cost-effective at the 30,000€ willingness-to-pay for 1QALY threshold., Conclusions: Given the relatively small 1-year cost difference between the two treatments, fesoterodine can be considered a cost-effective option relative to mirabegron for the first-line management of OAB with UUI in Spain., (Copyright © 2016 AEU. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Oral pharmacological treatment for overactive bladder (OAB) consists of antimuscarinics and the beta-3 adrenergic agonist mirabegron. Antimuscarinic adverse events (AEs) such as dry mouth, constipation, and blurry vision can result in frequent treatment discontinuation rates, leaving part of the OAB population untreated. Antimuscarinics also contribute to a patient's anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB), so the Beers Criteria recommends cautious use of antimuscarinics in elderly patients who take multiple anticholinergic medications or have cognitive impairment. Since mirabegron does not affect the cholinergic pathways, it is unlikely to contribute to a patient's ACB., Objective: To estimate the health care costs associated with the pharmacological treatment of OAB with mirabegron and antimuscarinics from U.S. commercial payer and Medicare Advantage perspectives, using a budget impact model., Methods: For this budget impact model, 2 analyses were performed. The primary analysis estimated the budgetary impact of increasing the use of mirabegron in a closed patient cohort treated with oral pharmacological treatments. The secondary analysis modeled the economic impact in an open cohort by allowing untreated patients to begin treatment with mirabegron after potential contraindication, intolerance, or lack of effectiveness of antimuscarinics. The analyses were performed over a 3-year time horizon. The economic impact of increased mirabegron use was quantified using direct medical costs, including prescription costs and health resource utilization (HRU) costs. Costs of comorbidities included pharmacy and medical costs of treating OAB-related urinary tract infections (UTI), skin rashes, and depression. An analysis of a large single-site integrated health network database was commissioned to quantify ACB-related HRU in terms of the increases in yearly outpatient and emergency department visits. Based on this analysis, the model associated each unit increase in ACB score with increased HRU and probability of mild cognitive impairment. Clinical outcomes of increased use of mirabegron were presented as the number of AEs and comorbidity episodes that could be avoided. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed to quantify the expected budget impact over the range of uncertainty for the key input variables., Results: Primary analysis calculated the impact of increasing the use of mirabegron from 4.5% to 5.3%, 7.1%, and 9.4% in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively, among oral pharmacological OAB treatments that included generic and branded antimuscarinics: oxybutynin, tolterodine, trospium, darifenacin, fesoterodine, and solifenacin. For a 1 million-member U.S. commercial payer plan, the total prescription costs increased, and the total medical costs decreased during the 3-year time horizon, yielding increases of $0.005, $0.016, and $0.031 from current per member per month (PMPM) costs and $0.90, $2.92, and $5.53 from current per treated member per month (PTMPM) costs, an average of less than 2% of current OAB treatment costs. For the Medicare Advantage plan, the resulting incremental PMPM costs were $0.010, $0.034, and $0.065, and the incremental PTMPM costs were $0.93, $3.04, and $5.76; all were less than 4% of the current cost. The secondary analysis estimated the budgetary effects of reducing the untreated population by 1% annually by initiating treatment with mirabegron. For a commercial payer, this resulted in PMPM cost increases of $0.156, $0.311, and $0.467 from the current value, while the incremental PTMPM cost increased by $6.17, $11.67, and $16.61. For the Medicare Advantage plan, the incremental increases in PMPM costs were $0.277, $0.553, and $0.830, and in PTMPM costs were $6.42, $12.15, and $17.29. Clinically, treating more OAB patients resulted in fewer OAB-related comorbidities from both health plan perspectives, since most events associated with nontreatment could be avoided. In the Medicare Advantage population of the secondary analysis, the total numbers of avoided events were predicted as 452 UTIs, 2,598 depression diagnoses, and 3,020 skin rashes during the time horizon of the model., Conclusions: Mirabegron addresses an unmet need for therapy for certain OAB patients, for whom antimuscarinics are not recommended because of a risk of cognitive impairment and who are intolerant to the anticholinergic AEs. Using mirabegron involves moderate additional economic cost to a commercial or Medicare Advantage health plan for which medical cost savings can offset a substantial part of increased pharmacy costs., Disclosures: Funding for this study was provided by Astellas. Perk, Wielage, T. Klein, and R. Klein are employed by Medical Decision Modeling, a contract research company that was paid to perform the described outcomes research and build the model contained in this study. Campbell and Perkins are employed by the Regenstrief Institute, which conducted a database analysis for this research. Campbell reports consultancy fees from Astellas, as well as pending grants from Merck, Sharpe, and Dohme Corp. Posta, Yuran, and Ng are employed by Astellas Pharma Global Development, the developer of mirabegron. Study concept and design were contributed by Perk, Wielage, R. Klein, and Ng. Campbell, T. Klein, and Perkins took the lead in data collection, assisted by Perk, Wielage, and Ng. Data interpretation was performed by Posta and Yuran, along with Perk, Wielage, R. Klein, Ng, Campbell, and Perkins. The manuscript was written by Perk and R. Klein, along with Wielage, T. Klein, Posta, Yuran, and Ng, and revised by all the authors.

Background and Purpose: The objective of the study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of oral anticoagulants among atrial fibrillation patients at an increased stroke risk., Methods: A Markov model was constructed to project the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted survival (QALYs) of oral anticoagulants using a private payer's perspective. The distribution of stroke risk (CHADS2 score: congestive heart failure, hypertension, advanced age, diabetes mellitus, stroke) and age of the modeled population was derived from a cohort of commercially insured patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Probabilities of treatment specific events were derived from published clinical trials. Event and downstream costs were determined from the cost of illness studies. Drug costs were obtained from 2015 National Average Drug Acquisition Cost data., Results: In the base case analysis, warfarin was the least costly ($46 241; 95% CI, 44 499-47 874) and apixaban had the highest QALYs (9.38; 95% CI, 9.24-9.48 QALYs). Apixaban was found to be a cost-effective strategy over warfarin (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio=$25 816) and dominated other anticoagulants. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that apixaban had at least a 61% chance of being the most cost-effective strategy at willingness to pay value of $100 000 per QALY. Among patients with CHADS2 ≥3, dabigatran was the dominant strategy. The model was sensitive to efficacy estimates of apixaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban and the cost of these drugs., Conclusions: All the newer oral anticoagulants compared were more effective than adjusted dosed warfarin. Our model showed that apixaban was the most effective anticoagulant in a general atrial fibrillation population and has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50 000/QALY. For those with higher stroke risk (CHADS2≥3), dabigatran was the most cost-effective treatment option., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Objective: To estimate the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and cost-effectiveness of high-dose edoxaban compared with adjusted-dose warfarin in patients at risk for stroke who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and a creatinine clearance (Clcr ) of 15-95 ml/minute., Methods: A Markov model was created to compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose edoxaban and adjusted-dose warfarin in patients with a Clcr of 15-95 ml/minute. The model was performed from a U.S. societal perspective and assumed patients initiated therapy at 70 years of age, had a mean CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 or older, diabetes, stroke) score of 3, and no contraindications to anticoagulation. The model assumed a cycle length of 1 month and a lifetime horizon (maximum of 30 years/360 cycles). Data sources included renal subgroup analysis of the Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation (ENGAGE-AF) trial and other published studies. Outcomes included lifetime costs (2014 US$), QALYs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The robustness of the model's conclusions was tested using one-way and 10,000-iteration probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA)., Results: Patients treated with high-dose edoxaban lived an average of 10.50 QALYs at a lifetime treatment cost of $99,833 compared with 10.11 QALYs and $123,516 for those treated with adjusted-dose warfarin. The model's conclusions were found to be robust upon one-way sensitivity analyses. PSA suggested high-dose edoxaban was economically dominant compared with adjusted-dose warfarin in more than 99% of the 10,000 iterations run., Conclusions: High-dose edoxaban appears to be an economically dominant strategy when compared with adjusted-dose warfarin for the prevention of stroke in NVAF patients with a Clcr of 15-95 ml/minute and an appreciable risk of stroke., (© 2016 Pharmacotherapy Publications, Inc.)

Background and Objectives: Benefits and/or harms (including costs) of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin therapy need appreciation in relative and absolute terms., Methods: Accordingly, we derived clinically relevant relative and absolute benefit/harm parameters for NOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban) compared to warfarin from four clinical trials involving atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. For each trial, we tabulated patient numbers enduring four important outcomes and calculated unadjusted relative risk reduction (RRR) and number needed to treat (NNT)/year values (and 95% confidence intervals) for the NAOC compared to warfarin. These outcomes were as follows: stroke/systemic embolism (primary endpoint), hemorrhagic stroke, major bleeds, and death. We also addressed drug acquisition costs., Results: Each NOAC was noninferior to warfarin for primary-outcome prevention; RRRs were 12-33% and NNT/year values were 182-481, and all but one indicated statistically significant superiority. All the NOACs yielded statistically significant reductions in hemorrhagic stroke risk; RRRs were 42-74% and NNT/year values were 364-528. Major bleeding risk was comparable in both groups. Apixaban yielded a lower NNT/year for preventing death than for primary-outcome prevention. Compared to warfarin, NOAC acquisition costs were 70- to 140-fold greater., Conclusions: For the primary outcome, the absolute benefits of NOACs were modest (NNT/year values being large). Reduced hemorrhagic stroke rates with NOACs could be due to superior embolic infarct prevention and fewer consequential hemorrhagic transformations. Among apixaban recipients, the absolute mortality benefit exceeded that for the primary outcome, indicating prevention of additional unrelated deaths. The substantially greater NOAC acquisition costs need viewing against probable greater safety and the avoidance of monitoring bleeding risks., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Relevance: The present paper presents, for the first time in Russia, a comparative pharmacoeconomic analysis of using mirabegron (Betmiga) to treat overactive bladder (OAB)., Materials and Methods: Three medical technologies were evaluated: treatment of OAB with mirabegron 50 mg/day, solifenacin 5 mg/day and solifenacin 10 mg/day. In addition, the strategies of mirabegron and botulinum toxin type A were analyzed as a result of simulating the second-line treatment., Results: When modeling for 1-year horizon, the lowest cost was found in mirabegron strategy, which was 16% lower than with solifenacin. When comparing the second line strategies using mirabegron and botulinum toxin type A, costs of mirabegron group were 61% lower. According to the selected performance criteria, mirabegron was more effective in comparison with other strategies. The findings of the budget impact analysis revealed that using mirabegron was preferable compared with solifenacin as the first line treatment, and compared with botulinum toxin type A as the second-line treatment. The analysis of cost-effectiveness and availability of technology showed growth when using mirabegron strategy; there was an increase in the efficiency of mirabegron strategy relative to solifenacin strategy, accompanied by cost reduction and, as a consequence, reducing the burden on the budget., Conclusions: Thus, using mirabegron to treat OAB both as the first and the second line treatment is absolutely cost-effective and profitable medical technology.

Background: Over the last decade, actions following some adverse drug events received major publicity. This study investigated changes in usage patterns of medications in Australia following two examples - rofecoxib market withdrawal (2004) and warnings about jaw necrosis following bisphosphonates (2007)., Methods: Dispensing data for COX-2 inhibitors (2000-2008) and anti-osteoporosis medications (2003-2012) were obtained from the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme database. For bisphosphonates, data on Australian marketing expenditures were purchased from Cegedim(R)., Results: For COX-2 inhibitors, celecoxib dispensing halved after rofecoxib withdrawal, but meloxicam dispensing increased by 60 %. When lumiracoxib was introduced (2006) there was uptake of prescribing at a faster rate than meloxicam in 2002, its first year of use. For bisphosphonates, alendronate had highest use at the time of the warnings (8.3 DDD/1000/day), dropping to 4.9 DDD/1000/day by 2012. In contrast, risedronate use rose 2007-2012 from 4.1 to 4.9 DDD/1000/day. There was 49 % increase in reported annual expenditure on detailing for risedronate from 2007 to 2008 (to AUD$7.3 million) and only 29 % increase for alendronate (to AUD$3.1 million)., Conclusions: The rapid uptake of prescribing of lumiracoxib and increased use of meloxicam flagged a concern, especially after rofecoxib withdrawal due to safety issues. Bisphosphonates are useful drugs, however the dramatic rise in expenditure on detailing, followed by a rise in utilisation of risedronate could suggest that adverse publicity triggered a marketing response. These examples highlight the importance of tracking utilisation of medication classes in real time, using different data as needed, to ensure that due caution is exercised (and quick intervention provided if needed) for medications in the same class.

Purpose: The purpose of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of apixaban 5 mg BID versus high- and low-dose edoxaban (60 mg and 30 mg once daily) as intended starting dose strategies for stroke prevention in patients from a UK National Health Service perspective., Methods: A previously developed and validated Markov model was adapted to evaluate the lifetime clinical and economic impact of apixaban 5 mg BID versus edoxaban (high and low dose) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. A pairwise indirect treatment comparison was conducted for clinical end points, and price parity was assumed between apixaban and edoxaban. Costs in 2012 British pounds, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, discounted at 3.5% per annum, were estimated., Findings: Apixaban was predicted to increase life expectancy and QALYs versus low- and high-dose edoxaban. These gains were achieved at cost-savings versus low-dose edoxaban, thus being dominant and nominal increases in costs versus high-dose edoxaban. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of apixaban versus high-dose edoxaban was £6763 per QALY gained., Implications: Apixaban was deemed to be dominant (less costly and more effective) versus low-dose edoxaban and a cost-effective alternative to high-dose edoxaban., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban (Lixiana(®)) is a new direct oral anticoagulant recently approved in the EU for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolic events (SEE) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and one or more risk factors. In the large, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, oral edoxaban dosages of 30 and 60 mg once daily for a median treatment duration of 907 days in patients with moderate-to-high-risk nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were noninferior to warfarin for the incidence of first stroke or SEE. Both high-dose and low-dose edoxaban were associated with significantly lower rates than warfarin of major bleeding, including intracranial haemorrhage, and death from cardiovascular causes. Edoxaban has a rapid onset of action, a short half-life, few drug interactions and offers the convenience of oral, once-daily, fixed-dose administration, without the need for coagulation monitoring and without regard to food. Therefore, edoxaban is an effective and well tolerated therapeutic option in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Background: Mirabegron, a first-in-class selective oral β3-adrenoceptor agonist, has similar efficacy to most antimuscarinic agents and a lower incidence of dry mouth in patients with overactive bladder (OAB)., Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mirabegron 50 mg compared with oral antimuscarinic agents in adults with OAB from a UK National Health Service perspective., Methods: A Markov model including health states for symptom severity, treatment status, and adverse events was developed. Cycle length was 1 month, and the time horizon was 5 years. Antimuscarinic comparators were tolterodine extended release, solifenacin, fesoterodine, oxybutynin extended release and immediate release (IR), darifenacin, and trospium chloride modified release. Transition probabilities for symptom severity levels and adverse events were estimated from a mirabegron trial and a mixed treatment comparison. Estimates for other inputs were obtained from published literature or expert opinion. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total health care costs, including costs of drug acquisition, physician visits, incontinence pad use, and botox injections, were modeled. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed., Results: Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £367 (vs. solifenacin 10 mg) to £15,593 (vs. oxybutynin IR 10 mg) per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY gained, the probability of mirabegron 50 mg being cost-effective ranged from 70.2% versus oxybutynin IR 10 mg to 97.8% versus darifenacin 15 mg. A limitation of our analysis is the uncertainty due to the lack of direct comparisons of mirabegron with other agents; a mixed treatment comparison using rigorous methodology provided the data for the analysis, but the studies involved showed heterogeneity., Conclusions: Mirabegron 50 mg appears to be cost-effective compared with standard oral antimuscarinic agents for the treatment of adults with OAB from a UK National Health Service perspective., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Medical costs that may be avoided when any of the four new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, are used instead of warfarin for the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) were estimated and compared. Additionally, the overall differences in medical costs were estimated for NVAF and venous thromboembolism (VTE) patient populations combined., Methods: Medical cost differences associated with NOAC use vs warfarin or placebo among NVAF and VTE patients were estimated based on clinical event rates obtained from the published trial data. The clinical event rates were calculated as the percentage of patients with each of the clinical events during the trial periods. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were conducted for the medical-cost differences determined for NVAF patients. A hypothetical health plan population of 1 million members was used to estimate and compare the combined medical-cost differences of the NVAF and VTE populations and were projected in the years 2015-2018., Results: In a year, the medical-cost differences associated with NOAC use instead of warfarin were estimated at -$204, -$140, -$495, and -$340 per patient for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, respectively. In 2014, among the hypothetical population, the medical-cost differences were -$3.7, -$4.2, -$11.5, and -$6.6 million for NVAF and acute VTE patients treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, respectively. In 2014, for the combined NVAF, acute VTE, and extended VTE patient populations, medical-cost differences were -$10.0, -$10.9, -$21.0, and -$21.0 million for dabigatran, rivaroxaban, 2.5 mg apixaban, and 5 mg apixaban, respectively. Medical-cost differences associated with use of NOACs were projected to steadily increase from 2014 to 2018., Conclusions: Medical costs are reduced when NOACs are used instead of warfarin/placebo for the treatment of NVAF or VTE, with apixaban being associated with the greatest reduction in medical costs.

Objective: To evaluate the costs and outcomes associated with different sequences of oral anti-muscarinic agents and the selective β(3)-adrenoceptor agonist, mirabegron, for the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB)., Methods: A Markov model with monthly cycle length and time horizon up to 3 years was designed to compare two different sequences of up to three lines of oral therapy for OAB. Patients who discontinued one oral medication could switch to another oral medication or could discontinue treatment. Patients whose symptoms were not controlled were considered for botulinum toxin or sacral nerve stimulation. Outcomes were measured by (a) number of patients with controlled symptoms (no incontinence episodes and <8 micturitions per 24 h); (b) patients with no incontinence episodes per 24 hours; and (c) patients with <8 micturitions per 24 h., Results: Including a third-line oral medication before considering other treatment options improved all patient outcomes, irrespective of the specific drugs used. A three-line sequence including two generic (oxybutynin first line and tolterodine extended-release second line) and one branded drug (solifenacin 5 mg third line) resulted in inferior patient outcomes at costs similar to a sequence of branded drugs (mirabegron first line, solifenacin 5 mg second line, solifenacin 10 mg third line): controlled patients (generic 29.6/1000 vs branded 38.7/1000); patients with no incontinence episodes (103.6/1000 vs 123.7/1000); patients with <8 micturitions (228.7/1000 vs 262.1/1000). Annual treatment costs per patient were similar (generic £1299 vs branded £1385)., Conclusions: In the treatment of OAB, low-cost generic treatments are not necessarily more cost-effective than branded drugs, primarily because a better efficacy and tolerability balance improves both symptom control and persistence.

Background: Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treatment guidelines recommend first-line therapy with either first- or second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (1GTKI, 2GTKI), but do not specify which generation should be used first., Objective: To examine the association between initiation of 2GTKI versus 1GTKI and medication adherence, health services utilization, and healthcare costs., Method: This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing administrative claims data from a single health plan within the US of commercial and Medicare patients newly initiating 1GTKI or 2GTKI therapy for CML between June 2010 and December 2011. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the association between TKI therapy and adherence, defined as proportion of days covered ≥0.85. Multivariate logistic regression and generalized linear models examined the association between TKI and health services utilization and direct healthcare costs (plan and patient paid) during the 12 month follow-up period., Results: Among the 368 patients included, there was no difference in adherence between patients initiating a 2GTKI compared to a 1GTKI (odds ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-1.40). Initiating a 2GTKI was associated with increased outpatient visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.12, 95% CI 1.06-1.20); however, there were no statistically significant differences in emergency room visits or inpatient visits between the treatment groups. Total costs were 1.3 times higher for 2GTKI initiators versus 1GTKI initiators ($86,509 versus $66,443; p = 0.001), with a significant difference in TKI pharmacy costs., Conclusions: Although there were no differences in adherence, hospitalizations, or emergency room visits among patients initiating a second- versus first-generation TKI, total all-cause costs and outpatient visits were higher for 2GTKI initiators. With the impending release of generic imatinib, these comparative data will become germane in the selection of a first-line TKI therapy. Because this study used claims from a single health plan, it may not be generalizable to the general population.

Background: Overactive bladder (OAB) is highly prevalent and is associated with considerable morbidity and reduced health-related quality of life. β3-adrenergic receptor (β3-AR) stimulation is a novel alternative to antimuscarinic therapy for OAB., Objective: The objective of this analysis was to assess the cost effectiveness of the β3-AR agonist mirabegron relative to tolterodine extended release (ER) in patients with OAB from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective., Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the management, course of disease, and effect of complications in OAB patients over a period of 5 years. Transition probabilities for symptom severity levels and probabilities of adverse events were estimated from the results of the randomised, double-blind SCORPIO trial in 1,987 patients with OAB. Other model inputs were derived from the literature and on assumptions based on clinical experience., Results: Total 5-year costs per patient were £1,645.62 for mirabegron 50 mg/day and £1,607.75 for tolterodine ER 4 mg/day. Mirabegron was associated with a gain of 0.009 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with an additional cost of £37.88. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £4,386/QALY gained. In deterministic sensitivity analyses in the general OAB population and several subgroups, ICERs remained below the generally accepted willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £20,000/QALY gained. The probability of mirabegron 50 mg being cost effective relative to tolterodine ER 4 mg was 89.4 % at the same WTP threshold., Conclusions: Mirabegron 50 mg/day is likely to be cost effective compared with tolterodine ER 4 mg/day for adult patients with OAB from a UK NHS perspective.

Edoxaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, has been found non-inferior to warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), with a lower rate of intracranial bleeding. The aim of our investigation was to assess the cost-effectiveness of edoxaban versus warfarin from the perspective of the Italian health-care system. A Markov decision model was used to evaluate lifetime cost and quality-adjusted life expectancy of NVAF patients treated with warfarin or edoxaban. Transition probabilities were obtained from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, cost estimates were based on Italian prices and tariffs, utilities were obtained from the literature. One-way and second-order sensitivity analyses were performed. In the base case, lifetime costs were €18,658 for edoxaban and €14,060 for warfarin. Discounted quality-adjusted survival was 9.022 years for edoxaban and 8.425 years for warfarin, leading to an incremental cost-utility ratio of €7,713 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Results were sensitive to time horizon, time in therapeutic range of warfarin and to the relative impact of warfarin versus edoxaban therapy onto quality of life. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed edoxaban to be cost-effective versus warfarin in 92.3 % of the simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000 per QALY. In conclusion, edoxaban proved to be a cost-effective alternative to warfarin in patients with moderate-to-high-risk NVAF.

Objective: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with almost 300,000 deaths per year in the United States. Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) offer an alternative to warfarin-based therapy without monitoring requirements and with fewer drug and food interactions. Edoxaban, a direct Xa inhibitor, is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), based upon results of the Hokusai-VTE Phase 3 trial. The trial demonstrated that edoxaban administered once daily after initial treatment with heparin was non-inferior in reducing the risk of VTE recurrence and caused significantly less major and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding compared to warfarin. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of edoxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of adults with VTE., Methods: A cost-effectiveness model was developed using patient-level data from the Hokusai-VTE trial, clinical event costs from real-world databases, and drug acquisition costs for warfarin of $0.36 and edoxaban of $9.24 per tablet., Results: From a U.S. health-care delivery system perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $22,057 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that edoxaban had an ICER <$50,000 per QALY gained relative to warfarin in 67% of model simulations. The result was robust to variation in key model parameters including the cost and disutility of warfarin monitoring., Conclusion: Despite its higher drug acquisition cost, edoxaban is a cost-effective alternative to warfarin for the treatment of VTE.

Background: Gout is the most common inflammatory arthritis in the United States., Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of urate-lowering treatment strategies for the management of gout., Design: Markov model., Data Sources: Published literature and expert opinion., Target Population: Patients for whom allopurinol or febuxostat is a suitable initial urate-lowering treatment., Time Horizon: Lifetime., Perspective: Health care payer., Intervention: 5 urate-lowering treatment strategies were evaluated: no treatment; allopurinol- or febuxostat-only therapy; allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy; and febuxostat-allopurinol sequential therapy. Two dosing scenarios were investigated: fixed dose (80 mg of febuxostat daily, 0.80 success rate; 300 mg of allopurinol daily, 0.39 success rate) and dose escalation (≤120 mg of febuxostat daily, 0.82 success rate; ≤800 mg of allopurinol daily, 0.78 success rate)., Outcome Measures: Discounted costs, discounted quality-adjusted life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios., Results of Base-Case Analysis: In both dosing scenarios, allopurinol-only therapy was cost-saving. Dose-escalation allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy was more costly but more effective than dose-escalation allopurinol therapy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $39 400 per quality-adjusted life-year., Results of Sensitivity Analysis: The relative rankings of treatments did not change. Our results were relatively sensitive to several potential variations of model assumptions; however, the cost-effectiveness ratios of dose escalation with allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy remained lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $109 000 per quality-adjusted life-year., Limitation: Long-term outcome data for patients with gout, including medication adherence, are limited., Conclusion: Allopurinol single therapy is cost-saving compared with no treatment. Dose-escalation allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy is cost-effective compared with accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds., Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Objective: This study evaluated differences in medical costs associated with clinical end-points from randomized clinical trials that compared the new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, to standard therapy for treatment of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE)., Research Design and Methods: Event rates of efficacy and safety end-points from the clinical trials (RE-COVER, RE-COVER II, EINSTEIN-Pooled, AMPLIFY, Hokusai-VTE trial) were obtained from published literature. Incremental annual medical costs among patients with clinical events from a US payer perspective were obtained from the literature or healthcare claims databases and inflation adjusted to 2013 costs. Differences in total medical costs associated with clinical end-points for the NOACs vs standard therapy were then estimated. One-way and Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses were carried out., Results: A lower rate of major bleedings was associated with use of any of the NOACs vs standard therapy. Except for dabigatran, use of NOACs was also associated with a lower rate of recurrent VTE/death. As a result of the reduction in clinical event rates, the overall medical cost differences were -$146, -$482, -$918, and -$344 for VTE patients treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, respectively, vs patients treated with standard therapy., Conclusions: When any of the four NOACs are used instead of standard therapy for acute VTE, treatment medical costs are reduced. Apixaban is associated with the greatest reduction in medical costs, which is driven by medical cost reductions associated with both efficacy and safety end-points. Further evaluation may be needed to validate these results in the real-world setting.

Overactive bladder is a difficult to treat condition affecting a large proportion of adults resulting in considerable economic impact to society. First-line treatments such as behavioral therapy or antimuscarinic medication are frequently not effective in adequately controlling symptoms or have intolerable side effects. Patients subsequently require second-line therapy including, sacral neuromodulation through either posterior tibial nerve stimulation or sacral nerve stimulation or intra-detrusor injection of Onabotulinumtoxin-A. Mirabegron, a relatively new drug in a separate class, is also employed in the treatment of overactive bladder. The question of which novel therapy to initiate depends on several factors including patient preference, effectiveness and cost. The purpose of this review is to present and discuss the most recent studies pertaining to the cost-effectiveness of novel therapies for overactive bladder.

Background and Objectives: Ziprasidone is increasingly used for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. The purpose of this study was to compare healthcare costs and use associated with ziprasidone and olanzapine., Methods: Ziprasidone and olanzapine treatment episodes of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients were identified in the 01/2007-12/2010 IMS LifeLink™ Database. The period of analysis for each episode has three components: 6 months prior to the episode initiation date (pre-episode period), 1 month immediately following the episode initiation date (initiation month), and up to 12 months after the end of the initiation month (follow-up period). Ordinary least squares regressions, general linear models, and two-part models were used to compare various types of costs (2007 US$) associated with the use of ziprasidone and olanzapine. Logistic regressions, Poisson regressions, and Hurdle models were used to compare the number of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations associated with each drug., Results: We identified 7,138 (46.93 %) ziprasidone episodes and 8,072 (53.07 %) olanzapine episodes, and found that patients using ziprasidone were significantly younger (41.50 vs. 45.38 years) and were significantly less likely to be male (29.81 vs. 44.21 %). Regression analysis showed no significant differences in total costs between the two drugs. However, ziprasidone was associated with significantly higher medication costs (US$232, p < 0.01) and outpatient costs (US$501, p < 0.05), yet lower ED costs (-US$73, p < 0.05). Ziprasidone was also associated with fewer ED visits (0.266, p < 0.001) and hospitalizations (1.117, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Ziprasidone is associated with higher medication costs and outpatient costs than olanzapine; however, it reduces patients' use of ED and inpatient services.

Objective: To compare the cost-effectiveness of alternate treatment strategies using second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for patients with schizophrenia., Methods: We developed a Markov model to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for different sequences of treatments for 40-year-old patients with schizophrenia. We considered first-line treatment with one of the four SGAs: olanzapine (OLZ), risperidone (RSP), quetiapine (QTP), and ziprasidone (ZSD). Patients could switch to another of these antipsychotics as second-line therapy, and only clozapine (CLZ) was allowed as third-line treatment. We derived parameter estimates from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trial of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study and published sources., Results: The ZSD-QTP strategy (first-line treatment with ZSD, change to QTP if ZSD is discontinued, and switch to CLZ if QTP is discontinued) was most costly while yielding the greatest QALYs, with an incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) of $542,500 per QALY gained compared with the ZSD-RSP strategy. However, the ZSD-RSP strategy had an ICER of $5,200/QALY gained versus the RSP-ZSD strategy and had the greatest probability of being cost-effective given a willingness-to-pay threshold between $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY. All other treatment strategies were more costly and less effective than another strategy or combination of other strategies. Results varied by different time horizons adopted., Conclusions: The ZSD-RSP strategy was most cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold between $5,200 and $542,500 per QALY. Our results should be interpreted with caution because they are based largely on the CATIE trial with potentially limited generalizability to all patient populations and doses of SGAs used in practice., (Copyright © 2014 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Our objective was to evaluate data on the cost-effectiveness of febuxostat compared with standard clinical practice with allopurinol in patients with gout that was presented to the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) in 2010. A Markov health-state model estimated the direct health-related costs and clinical benefits expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Adults with chronic gout and established hyperuricaemia received treatment sequences of daily doses of allopurinol 300 mg alone or allopurinol 300 mg followed by febuxostat 80 mg/120 mg. The proportion of patients achieving the target serum uric acid (sUA) level of less than 6 mg/dl (0.36 mmol/l) was linked to the utility per sUA level to generate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Second-line therapy with febuxostat 80 mg/120 mg versus with allopurinol alone resulted in an ICER of £3,578 per QALY over a 5-year time horizon. Additional univariate analyses showed that ICER values were robust and ranged from £2,550 to £7,165 per QALY when different parameters (e.g., low- and high-dose allopurinol titrations and variations in treatment-induced flare rates) were varied. Febuxostat reduces sUA below the European League Against Rheumatism target of 0.36 mmol/l (6 mg/dl) in significantly more patients with gout than allopurinol in its most frequently prescribed dose of 300 mg per day. The SMC accepted febuxostat as cost-effective as a suitable second-line option for urate-lowering therapy for the treatment of patients with chronic hyperuricaemia in conditions where urate deposition has already occurred (including a history or presence of tophus and/or gouty arthritis) when treatment with allopurinol was inadequate, not tolerated, or contraindicated.