Methodological considerations in estimating adherence and persistence for a long-acting injectable medication

Inconsistencies in the days supply values reported in pharmacy claims databases for biologics with long maintenance intervals

BACKGROUND: Days supply values reported in large administrative claims databases are commonly used to estimate drug exposure and quantify adherence and persistence with prescribed therapy. In recent claims database studies assessing treatment patterns for biologic therapies, a high frequency of 28-31-days supply values has been observed for therapies with label-recommended maintenance dosing intervals longer than 4 weeks. Such inconsistencies suggest potential inaccuracy of days supply data. OBJECTIVE: To confirm the existence and describe the extent of inconsistencies in the reported days supply values and the documented fill intervals among prescription claims from administrative claims databases for 2 different biologics with label-recommended maintenance dosing intervals longer than 4 weeks and 2 biologics with intervals less than or equal to 4 weeks. METHODS: Using data from 2 large US administrative claims databases (IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart Socio-economic Status [SES]), the reported days supply values and associated intervals between consecutive fills for 2 biologics with maintenance dosing intervals longer than 4 weeks (guselkumab and ustekinumab) and 2 with intervals less than or equal to 4 weeks (adalimumab and ixekizumab) were described. For all fill pairs with reported days supply values of 28-31 days, the percentage with inconsistent fill intervals (defined as >45 days or >60 days) was calculated. RESULTS: Across all datasets, the proportions of fill pairs with inconsistent days supply values and fill intervals (ie, days supply values of 28-31 days but fill intervals of >45 days) were 41.8%-73.4% for guselkumab, 33.4%-59.4% for ustekinumab, 8.5%-9.5% for adalimumab, and 7.3%-11.4% for ixekizumab. The same trend was observed across these biologics when using more than 60 days to define an inconsistent fill interval. Unlike adalimumab and ixekizumab, a wide distribution of fill intervals was observed among guselkumab and ustekinumab fill pairs with 28-31 days supply values, with peaks evident at approximately 28-31 days as well as around the label-recommended maintenance dosing intervals for these therapies (56 or 84 days). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a large discrepancy between days supply values and fill intervals reported in administrative claims data for biologics with label-recommended maintenance dosing intervals longer than 4 weeks (ie, guselkumab and ustekinumab), potentially suggesting widespread underestimation of days supply values for these therapies. Such inconsistencies in the reported days supply values may lead to underestimation of treatment adherence and persistence for these biologics, which could be mitigated by systematic data imputation. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Ms Xu and Drs Ferrante, Fitzgerald, Pericone, and Wu are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and shareholders of Johnson & Johnson, of which Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, is a wholly owned subsidiary. Funding for programming support and medical writing and editorial assistance was provided by Janssen.

Antipsychotic utilization, healthcare resource use and costs, and quality of care among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia in the United States

BACKGROUND

No research to date has examined antipsychotic (AP) use, healthcare resource use (HRU), costs, and quality of care among those with schizophrenia in the Medicare program despite it serving as the primary payer for half of individuals with schizophrenia in the US.

OBJECTIVES

To provide national estimates and assess regional variation in AP treatment utilization, HRU, costs, and quality measures among Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of 100% Medicare claims data from 2019. The sample included all adult Medicare beneficiaries with continuous fee-for-service coverage and ≥1 inpatient and/or ≥2 outpatient claims with a diagnosis for schizophrenia in 2019. Summary statistics on AP use; HRU and cost; and quality measures were reported at the national, state, and county levels. Regional variation was measured using the coefficient of variation (CoV).

RESULTS

We identified 314,888 beneficiaries with schizophrenia. About 91% used any AP; 20% used any long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI); and 14% used atypical LAIs. About 28% of beneficiaries had ≥1 hospitalization and 47% had ≥1 emergency room (ER) visits, the vast majority of which were related to mental health (MH). Total annual all-cause, MH, and schizophrenia-related costs were $23,662, $15,000 and $12,109, respectively. Among those with hospitalizations, 18.4% and 27.3% had readmission within 7 and 30 days and 56% and 67% had a physician visit and AP fill within 30 days post-discharge, respectively. Overall, 81% of beneficiaries were deemed adherent to their AP medications. Larger interstate variations were observed in LAI use than AP use (CoV: 0.21 vs 0.02). County-level variations were larger than state-level variations for all measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first study examining a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia, we found low utilization rates of LAIs and high levels of hospital admissions/readmissions and ER visits. State and county-level variations were also found in these measures.

Paliperidone Palmitate: A Breakthrough Treatment for Schizophrenia? A Review on Patient Adherence Levels, Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs

International guidelines suggest long-term antipsychotic therapies for treating schizophrenia; however, medication compliance remains a critical issue in schizophrenia. Paliperidone palmitate (PP) is a second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectable (SGA-LAI) approved for the treatment of schizophrenia. To date, the majority of studies on PP compliance patterns did not use specific instruments to assess medications' adherence, have been performed in not naturalistic samples and present partially overlapping populations. We conducted a systematic review in which we aimed to review the current knowledge on PP-LAI adherence levels and to describe healthcare resource utilisation and costs related to PP-LAI treatment. The evaluation has been conducted by searching in different databases (PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) from inception to September 2022. Our findings suggest that paliperidone palmitate should be considered a good treatment strategy for patients affected by schizophrenia: PP showed both a good efficacy and tolerability and better adherence patterns and more favourable healthcare resource utilisation and costs, compared to OA.

Systematic Review of Real-World Treatment Patterns of Oral Antipsychotics and Associated Economic Burden in Patients with Schizophrenia in the United States

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a chronic mental disorder associated with substantial morbidity and mortality affecting 0.25-1.6% of adults in the USA. Antipsychotic treatment is the standard of care for schizophrenia, but real-world treatment patterns and associated costs have not been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review to summarize treatment patterns and associated costs related to oral antipsychotic treatment of patients with schizophrenia in the USA.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline (via PubMed) and Embase to identify relevant observational studies published from January 1, 2008, to June 1, 2018; costs were converted to 2018 US dollars.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY

Observational, real-world studies reporting on patterns of treatment and/or associated costs for adult patients with schizophrenia treated with oral antipsychotics in the USA were included.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies were identified. Frequently prescribed oral second-generation antipsychotics were olanzapine (up to 50.9%), risperidone (up to 40.0%), and quetiapine (up to 30.7%). Suboptimal adherence was common across studies. Antipsychotic switching occurred in about half of patients, while antipsychotic combination therapy occurred in nearly 30%; all were associated with increased medication-related costs. Mean annual direct medical costs differed by treatment, with reported costs of $17,115 to $26,138 for patients treated with olanzapine, $18,395 for risperidone, and $17,656 to $28,101 for quetiapine.

LIMITATIONS

This systematic review is limited by the variations in definitions of schizophrenia-related clinical terms used between studies and by the inclusion of studies focused on only the US health care system.

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of schizophrenia, suboptimal adherence, antipsychotic switching, and antipsychotic augmentation were all associated with high costs of care in comparison to patients who were adherent and did not require antipsychotic switching or augmentation. These findings illustrate the need for the development of new treatments that address efficacy and adherence challenges of currently available therapies.

Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in a Prescription Claims Data Source: A Validation Study

Background

The effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) has been demonstrated in studies using prescription claims data. However, the validity of claims data for LAIAs has not been established.

Objective

We aimed to validate date dispensed, quantity dispensed and days supplied fields in prescription claims data, and to compare claims- and medical record-derived persistence estimates.

Methods

We evaluated LAIA dispensations in the Drug Programs Information Network prescription claims database from Manitoba, Canada against a random sample of medical records. Adults with one or more LAIA prescription between April 2015 and March 2016 were eligible. Results were stratified by LAIA type (first-generation LAIA, risperidone LAI or paliperidone LAI). Persistence estimates were assessed using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and proportion of patients covered method.

Results

Claims data had high positive predictive value, ranging from 80.0% (95% CI 51.9–95.7) to 100.0% (95% CI 89.7–100.0), but low negative predictive value, ranging from 0.0% (95% CI 0.0–2.5) to 62.5% (95% CI 40.6–81.2). Quantity dispensed and days supplied exactly matched dose and dosing interval, respectively, for 99.7% and 97.1% of risperidone LAI doses, 100.0% and 76.6% of paliperidone doses, and 8.9% and 28.3% of first-generation LAIA doses. There were no significant differences in claims-derived versus medical record-derived persistence estimates.

Conclusions

Quantity dispensed and days supplied provide valid estimates of dose and dosing interval for second-generation LAIAs, but underestimated these parameters for first-generation LAIAs. However, a large proportion of medical record-confirmed doses were missing from claims data, and dose and dosing interval are underestimated in claims data.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40801-022-00297-4.

Real-World Evidence of the Clinical and Economic Impact of Long-Acting Injectable Versus Oral Antipsychotics Among Patients with Schizophrenia in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, compared with oral antipsychotics (OA), have been found to significantly improve patient outcomes, including reduced hospitalizations and emergency room (ER) admissions and increased medication adherence among adult patients with schizophrenia. In turn, the clinical benefits achieved may translate into lower economic burden. Real-world evidence of the comparative effectiveness of LAI is needed to understand the potential benefits of LAI outside of the context of clinical trials. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive synthesis of recent published real-world studies comparing healthcare utilization, costs, and adherence between patients with schizophrenia treated with LAI versus OA in the United States.

METHODS

In this systematic literature review, MEDLINE^® was searched for peer-reviewed, real-world studies (i.e., retrospective or pragmatic designs) published in English between January 1, 2010 and February 10, 2020. Comparative studies reporting hospitalizations, ER admissions, healthcare costs, or medication adherence (measured by proportion of days covered [PDC]) in adults with schizophrenia treated with LAI versus OA (or pre- vs post-LAI initiation) in the United States were retained. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted among eligible studies to evaluate the association of LAI versus OA use on hospitalizations, ER admissions, healthcare costs, and treatment adherence. A sensitivity analysis among the subset of studies that compared OA with paliperidone palmitate once monthly (PP1M), specifically, was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 1083 articles were identified by the electronic literature search, and two publications were manually added subsequently. Among the 57 publications meeting the inclusion criteria, 25 provided sufficient information for inclusion in the meta-analyses. Compared with patients treated with OA, patients initiated on LAI had lower odds of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.71, n = 7), fewer hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio [IRR] [95% CI] 0.75 [0.65-0.88], n = 9), and fewer ER admissions (IRR [95% CI] 0.86 [0.77-0.97], n = 6). The initiation of LAI was associated with higher per-patient-per-year (PPPY) pharmacy costs (mean difference [MD] [95% CI] $5603 [3799-7407], n = 6), which was offset by lower PPPY medical costs (MD [95% CI] - $5404 [- 7745 to - 3064], n = 6), resulting in no significant net difference in PPPY total all-cause healthcare costs between patients treated with LAI and those treated with OA (MD [95% CI] $327 [- 1565 to 2219], n = 7). Patients initiated on LAI also had higher odds of being adherent to their medication (PDC ≥ 80%; OR [95% CI] 1.89 [1.52-2.35], n = 9). A sensitivity analysis on a subset of publications evaluating PP1M found results similar to those of the main analysis conducted at the LAI class level.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on multiple studies with varying sub-types of patient populations with schizophrenia in the United States published in the last decade, this meta-analysis demonstrated that LAI antipsychotics were associated with improved medication adherence and significant clinical benefit such as reduced hospitalizations and ER admissions compared with OA. The lower medical costs offset the higher pharmacy costs, resulting in a non-significant difference in total healthcare costs. Taken together, these findings provide strong evidence on the clinical and economic benefits of LAI compared with OA for the treatment of schizophrenia in the real world.

Transitioning from Once-Monthly to Once-Every-3-Months Paliperidone Palmitate Among Veterans with Schizophrenia

PURPOSE

Compared to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M), once-every-3-months paliperidone palmitate (PP3M) reportedly increases treatment adherence. The objective of this study was to compare treatment patterns, utilization, and costs among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients with schizophrenia who transitioned to PP3M versus those remaining on PP1M.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult VHA patients with ≥2 health care encounters (inpatient or outpatient) that included a schizophrenia diagnosis who initiated PP1M between January 1, 2015, and March 31, 2018 (identification period) were included in this exploratory retrospective cohort study. Propensity scores were used to match cases (PP1M users who transitioned to PP3M during the identification period) with controls (any patient initiating PP1M during the identification period). Data were assessed until death, health plan disenrollment, or study end. Outcomes were compared using chi-square and t-tests.

RESULTS

A total of 257 eligible PP3M and 2973 eligible PP1M patients were identified among adult VHA patients; mean ages were 53.1 and 53.7 years, respectively. After propensity score matching, the PP3M and PP1M cohorts each held 111 patients. Comorbidities of patients treated with PP3M versus PP1M, respectively, included anxiety (12.5% vs 20%; standardized difference [STD] = 20.6), tobacco use (28.4% vs 43.2%; STD = 31.2), depressive disorder (26.5% vs 36.2%; STD = 21.1), and substance abuse (37.4% vs 44.2%; STD = 13.9). For the PP3M cohort, adherence (proportion of days covered ≥80%) to any antipsychotic agent was higher (78.4% vs 57.7%, P = 0.0009), and all-cause inpatient lengths of stay (LOS) were shorter (3.0 vs 8.3 days, P = 0.0354). Increased all-cause pharmacy costs with PP3M were offset by reduced all-cause medical costs, resulting in overall health care cost-neutrality.

CONCLUSION

Relative to those remaining on PP1M, VHA patients with schizophrenia who transitioned to PP3M experienced improved antipsychotic medication adherence and significantly shorter all-cause inpatient LOS; costs remained neutral.

Time to Treatment Discontinuation in German Patients with Schizophrenia: Long-Acting Injectables versus Oral Antipsychotics

Background and Objective

Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are associated with better treatment adherence and persistence than oral antipsychotics (OAPs) in patients with schizophrenia. However, real-world evidence assessing the impact of treatment with LAIs in Germany is limited. To fill this gap, we compared antipsychotic medication adherence and risk of treatment discontinuation (TD) among schizophrenia patients newly initiated on LAI or who switched their OAP regimen (overall cohort; OC).

Methods

Claims data of German schizophrenia patients who initiated LAIs or switched their OAP during 2012–2016 (index date) were retrospectively analyzed. Treatment switch was defined as add-on medication to existing prescription or terminating the existing prescription and initiating another OAP. Adherence and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) were estimated. Determinants of treatment discontinuation were analyzed using two Cox regression models. Model 1 controlled for age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI); model 2 also included insurance status, and medication, visit, and psychiatric inpatient stay costs. Sensitivity analysis on patients who terminated existing prescriptions and initiated new OAPs (complete switch cohort; CSC) was performed.

Results

In OC (n = 2650), LAI users had better adherence (35.4% vs. 11.6%), persistence (no 60-day gap; 40.7% vs. 19.8%), and longer TTD (median [95% confidence interval (CI)] 216 [193–249] vs. 50 [46–56] days) than OAP users. OAP usage (hazard ratio [HR] 1.89, 95% CI 1.73–2.06; p < 0.001) and greater CCI (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00–1.07; p = 0.023) were associated with greater risk of TD in model 1. Model 2 showed similar results. LAI users in CSC also had better adherence, persistence, and longer TTD. In CSC too, OAP usage and greater CCI were associated with greater risk of TD in model 1, but only CCI was significant in model 2. Higher pre-index psychiatric inpatient costs were associated with lower risk of TD (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98–1.00; p = 0.014).

Limitations

Inherent limitations of claims data and lack of control on OAP administration may have influenced the results.

Conclusion

This real-world study associates LAIs with better medication adherence and lower antipsychotic discontinuation risk than OAPs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40261-020-00990-8.

Transitioning from oral risperidone or paliperidone to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate: a real-world analysis among Veterans Health Administration patients with schizophrenia who have had at least one prior hospitalization

Objective: To address gaps in the literature on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among patients with schizophrenia and prior hospitalization who transition from oral risperidone or paliperidone (oral ris/pali) to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) in a real-world setting by comparing treatment patterns, HRU, and costs 12-months pre- and post-transition to PP1M among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients affected by schizophrenia who have had ≥1 hospitalization.Methods: VHA patients with schizophrenia (aged ≥18 years) who initiated oral ris/pali, had ≥1 all-cause inpatient stay, and transitioned to PP1M from January 2015-March 2017 were included from the VHA database. The first transition date to PP1M was identified as the index date. Patients were required to have continuous health plan eligibility for 12 months pre- and post-PP1M. Outcomes were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar's test, as appropriate.Results: The study included 319 patients (mean [SD] age = 51.6 [4.2] years) during 12 months of baseline and follow-up. During pre-PP1M transition, 7.2% of the patients were adherent (proportion of days covered [PDC] ≥ 80%) to oral ris/pali. Post-PP1M transition, 27.6% of the patients were adherent to PP1M. Comparison of HRU outcomes from the pre- to post-PP1M transition revealed significantly lower all-cause inpatient stays (3.5 vs 1.4, p < .0001) and shorter inpatient length of stay (43.4 vs 18.3 days, p < .0001). Similar trends were seen for mental health and schizophrenia-related HRU. Cost outcome comparison indicated significantly lower all-cause inpatient costs ($64,702 vs $24,147, p < .0001), total medical costs ($87,917 vs $56,947, p < .0001), and total costs ($91,181 vs $69,106, p < .0001). A similar trend was observed for mental health and schizophrenia-related costs.Conclusions: Transitioning from oral ris/pali to PP1M may significantly improve HRU and provide potential cost savings in VHA patients with schizophrenia and ≥1 prior hospitalization.

Health Outcomes Among Patients Diagnosed with Schizophrenia in the US Veterans Health Administration Population Who Transitioned from Once-Monthly to Once-Every-3-Month Paliperidone Palmitate: An Observational Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is limited literature on treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and costs among patients who transition from once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) to once-every-3-month paliperidone palmitate (PP3M) in a real-world setting. Hence, this study compared treatment patterns, HRU, and costs 12-month pre- and post-PP3M transition among Veteran's Health Administration (VHA) patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Patients with schizophrenia (aged ≥ 18 years) who initiated PP1M and transitioned per on-label criteria to PP3M (no treatment gap of > 45 days in PP1M during the 4 months prior, same dose strength of the last two PP1M claims, and appropriate dose conversion from last PP1M to first PP3M claim) from January 2015 to March 2017 were included from the VHA database. The first transition date to PP3M was identified as the index date. Patients were required to have 12-month pre- and post-PP3M continuous health plan eligibility. Outcomes were compared using the Wilcoxon-signed rank and McNemar's test, appropriately.

RESULTS

The study included 122 patients [mean (SD) age: 54 (13.7) years]. Pre- and post-PP3M transition, 64.8% and 61.5% of patients were adherent (proportion of days covered ≥ 80%) to PP1M and PP3M, respectively. Comparison of HRU outcomes pre- and post-PP3M transition exhibited lower all-cause outpatient (37.5 vs. 31.1, p < 0.0001) and pharmacy visits (56.1 vs. 46.7, p < 0.0001). Similar trends were seen for mental health and schizophrenia-related outpatient and pharmacy HRU. Comparison of cost outcomes resulted in lower all-cause outpatient ($27,221 vs. $22,356, p = 0.0033), higher pharmacy ($16,349 vs. $17,003, p = 0.0076), lower total medical ($35,834 vs. $28,900, p = 0.0257), and no difference in total costs ($52,183 vs. $45,903, p = 0.3118). Similar trends were seen for mental health and schizophrenia-related costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Transition to PP3M was associated with a decline in outpatient and pharmacy visits. All-cause medical cost reduction fully offset increased pharmacy costs among VHA patients with schizophrenia who transitioned from PP1M to PP3M.

FUNDING

Janssen Scientific Affairs.

Understanding healthcare burden and treatment patterns among young adults with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a serious public health problem that affects ∼1% of the US population.

AIMS

To examine treatment patterns and evaluate healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs among young adults (18-35 years) with schizophrenia who were early in the disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged 18-64 years with ≥2 schizophrenia diagnoses in the identification period (January 1, 2012-September 30, 2015) and continuous enrollment for ≥12 months pre- and post-index date were identified from the OptumInsight Clinformatics DataMart. Demographics, clinical characteristics, HRU, costs, and treatment patterns were compared between schizophrenia and non-schizophrenia "controls" cohorts and between young (18-35 years) and older adults (36-64 years) with schizophrenia.

RESULTS

Among 9,889 schizophrenia patients, 23.70% were young adults (aged 18-35), had higher all-cause per-patient-per-year (PPPY) costs ($22,338 vs $7,332; p < .0001), higher inpatient costs ($8,857 vs $1,289; p < .0001), and longer inpatient length-of-stay (LOS) (5.0 vs 0.4 days, p < .0001; adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 12.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 11.5-14.3) than controls. Among young adults with schizophrenia, there were more mental-health-related and fewer non-mental-health-related diagnoses compared to older adults with schizophrenia; 63.40% were male. Young adults with schizophrenia incurred higher inpatient costs ($15,692 vs $10,274; p < .0001) and longer inpatient LOS (9.6 vs 5.9 days, p < .0001; aIRR = 1.6; 95% CI = 1.4-1.8) compared to older adults with schizophrenia. A substantial proportion of patients were treated with oral antipsychotics vs long-acting injectables in both cohorts (young adults: 98.72% vs 9.71%; older adults: 98.10% vs 13.31%).

LIMITATIONS

Claims data are collected for payment and not research. The presence of a prescription claim does not indicate medication was consumed or taken as prescribed.

CONCLUSIONS

The economic burden for schizophrenia patients is substantial, especially among young adults. Based on this analysis, further research is warranted to better understand the association between adherent treatment patterns earlier in the disease and long-term health outcomes among patients with schizophrenia.

Projecting the Potential Effect of Using Paliperidone Palmitate Once-Monthly and Once-Every-3-Months Long-Acting Injections Among Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Once-monthly and once-every-3-months long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations of paliperidone palmitate (PP1M and PP3M, respectively) are available for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. However, information on the comparative effectiveness and costs of using these LAIs versus oral antipsychotics (OAs) is not available. The population effectiveness of using these treatments is also not known.

OBJECTIVE

To project the effect of using PP1M and PP3M LAIs on psychiatric (Psych) and all-cause (AC) hospitalization rates over 18 months in patients with schizophrenia receiving Medicaid and treated with OAs.

METHODS

A decision model, informed by data from 3 randomized controlled trials (PRIDE [NCT01157351], 3001 [NCT00111189], and 3012 [NCT01529515]), was developed to compare 3 strategies: (a) initiating OA and switching only to OA; (b) initiating with PP1M and continuing PP1M if the patient was stable at 6 months (or switching to OA if unstable; PP1M→PP1M); and (c) initiating with PP1M and switching to PP3M if the patient was stable at 6 months (or switching to OA if unstable; PP1M→PP3M). PRIDE data were used to inform the first 6-month outcomes; 3001 and 3012 data were used to inform outcomes in stable patients over the following 12 months. The primary outcome for this decision model study was Psych hospitalizations. AC hospitalizations and time to discontinuation were also assessed. Outcomes from each arm and time portions within an arm were reweighted to reflect the distribution of patient characteristics found in the real-world Medicaid sample with PRIDE trial inclusion/exclusion criteria applied. Several validation exercises were carried out to ensure that the reweighted results could reproduce observed outcomes in the Medicaid sample.

RESULTS

Our final target real-world sample size was N=4,609. We found that in the Medicaid sample, compared with initiating treatments with OA, the PP1M→PP1M strategy was projected to produce a per patient decrease of 0.27 (95% CI = -0.43-0.97) and 0.28 (95% CI = -0.28-0.84) in Psych- and AC-related hospitalizations, respectively. Similarly, the PP1M→PP3M strategy was projected to produce a per patient decrease of 0.31 (95% CI = -0.27-0.87) in both Psych- and AC-related hospitalizations over OA. Validation exercises ensured that the reweighting methodology used could replicate observed outcomes in the Medicaid sample. These incremental reductions in hospitalization rates are worth about $3.4-$3.8 billion over an 18-month period in patients with schizophrenia receiving Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that using PP1M and PP3M treatment strategies for patients with schizophrenia receiving Medicaid could result in reduced hospitalizations. This finding, along with improvement to patients' health, should be considered when assessing the value of these LAIs.

DISCLOSURES

This study was supported by Janssen Scientific Affairs and by unrestricted funds from a consortium of 12 biomedical life sciences companies to the University of Washington. Janssen Scientific Affairs was responsible for the design and conduct of the study; the collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of data; the preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Basu received financial support from Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and his time on this project was also partly covered through unrestricted gift funds from the consortium of biomedical life sciences companies. Benson and Alphs are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs and are stockholders of Johnson & Johnson. Opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Washington. This study was presented as a poster at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy 2017 Annual Meeting; March 27-30, 2017; Denver, CO.

Impact of Out-of-Pocket Pharmacy Costs on Branded Medication Adherence Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence is pivotal for the successful treatment of diabetes. However, medication adherence remains a major concern, as nonadherence is associated with poor health outcomes. Studies have indicated that increasing patients' share of medication costs significantly reduces adherence. Little is known about a potential out-of-pocket (OOP) cost threshold where substantial reduction in adherence may occur.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of diabetes OOP pharmacy costs on antihyperglycemic medication adherence and identify the potential threshold at which significant reduction in adherence may occur among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective cohort study using longitudinal U.S. pharmacy and medical claims data from the IMS Health Medical Claims (Dx) database. Patients with T2DM who initiated therapy with a branded antihyperglycemic medication during the index period (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011) and had 3 years of follow-up data were included. The primary outcome was adherence to antihyperglycemic medications, measured as the number of days covered. Propensity scores were calculated using baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics to control for potential confounding factors. Four strata were created based on mean propensity scores. Across each stratum, patients were assigned to 5 diabetes OOP pharmacy (including generics) cost levels: $0-$10, $11-$40, $41-$50, $51-$75, and > $75. Multivariate regression models were used to estimate association of diabetes OOP pharmacy costs and adherence for each stratum. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of total OOP pharmacy costs and index drug category OOP costs on adherence.

RESULTS

A total of 15,416 patients were assessed. Across each stratum in the diabetes OOP pharmacy cost analysis group, mean patient age ranged from 52.3 to 56.1 years, mean number of antihyperglycemic medication classes ranged from 1.5 to 3.2, and mean household income ranged from $60,763 to $79,373. Most patients used a commercial plan (55%-85%). The propensity-stratified multivariate regression model revealed an overall negative relationship between diabetes OOP pharmacy costs and adherence across several OOP cost levels. Diabetes OOP pharmacy cost level $51-$75 appeared as the threshold at which adherence reduced significantly (77-78 fewer days of coverage over 3 years of follow-up; P < 0.05) when compared with the lowest OOP costs ($0-$10) across all strata. Adherence reduced further (99-145 fewer days of coverage; P < 0.0001) for the higher diabetes OOP pharmacy cost levels (> $75) when compared with the lowest OOP cost levels. Sensitivity analyses with total OOP pharmacy costs and index drug category OOP costs revealed negative association with adherence across all strata.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes OOP pharmacy cost was negatively associated with patient adherence, and a potential OOP cost threshold ($51-$75) was identified at which adherence reduced significantly. The study findings may be beneficial in informing the design of health care plans to achieve optimal adherence and improve disease management in patients with T2DM.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Eli Lilly and Company. Eli Lilly and Company was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; preparation of the manuscript; and decision to submit for publication. Fu is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company. Taylor and Kwan are employees of Lilly USA. Fu and Kwan hold stock or stock options in Eli Lilly and Company. Bibeau was an employee of Eli Lilly and Company at the time of this study and initial submission of this manuscript. Bibeau is currently employed by Janssen Scientific Affairs. The abstract for this study was presented at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2016; April 19-22, 2016; San Francisco, California. Bibeau and Fu contributed to the study design and collected the data. All authors contributed equally to data interpretation and manuscript preparation and revision.

Factors associated with high 24-month persistence with denosumab: results of a real-world, non-interventional study of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis in Germany, Austria, Greece, and Belgium

Persistence with osteoporosis therapy is vital for fracture prevention. This non-interventional study of postmenopausal women receiving denosumab in Germany, Austria, Greece, and Belgium found that persistence with denosumab remains consistently high after 24 months in patients at high risk of fracture.

PURPOSE

Continued persistence with osteoporosis therapy is vital for fracture prevention. This non-interventional study of clinical practice evaluated medication-taking behavior of postmenopausal women receiving denosumab in Germany, Austria, Greece, and Belgium and factors influencing persistence.

METHODS

Subcutaneous denosumab (60 mg every 6 months) was assigned according to prescribing information and local guidelines before and independently of enrollment; outcomes were recorded during routine practice for up to 24 months. Persistence was defined as receiving the subsequent injection within 6 months + 8 weeks of the previous injection and adherence as administration of subsequent injections within 6 months ± 4 weeks of the previous injection. Medication coverage ratio (MCR) was calculated as the proportion of time a patient was covered by denosumab. Associations between pre-specified baseline covariates and 24-month persistence were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The 24-month analyses included 1479 women (mean age 66.3-72.5 years) from 140 sites; persistence with denosumab was 75.1-86.0%, adherence 62.9-70.1%, and mean MCR 87.4-92.4%. No covariate had a significant effect on persistence across all four countries. For three countries, a recent fall decreased persistence; patients were generally older with chronic medical conditions. In some countries, other covariates (e.g., older age, comorbidity, immobility, and prescribing reasons) decreased persistence. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 2.3-6.9% patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-four-month persistence with denosumab is consistently high among postmenopausal women in Europe and may be influenced by patient characteristics. Further studies are needed to identify determinants of low persistence.

Evaluation of Real-World Experience with Tofacitinib Compared with Adalimumab, Etanercept, and Abatacept in RA Patients with 1 Previous Biologic DMARD: Data from a U.S. Administrative Claims Database

BACKGROUND

Real-world data comparing tofacitinib with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare characteristics, treatment patterns, and costs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving tofacitinib versus the most common bDMARDs (adalimumab [ADA], etanercept [ETN], and abatacept [ABA]) following a single bDMARD in a U.S. administrative claims database.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective cohort analysis of patients aged ≥ 18 years with an RA diagnosis (ICD-9-CM codes 714.0x-714.4x; 714.81) and 1 previous bDMARD filling ≥ 1 tofacitinib or bDMARD claim in the Truven MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims databases (November 1, 2012-October 31, 2014). Monotherapy was defined as absence of conventional synthetic DMARDs within 90 days post-index. Persistence was evaluated using a 60-day gap. Adherence was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC). RA-related total, pharmacy, and medical costs were evaluated in the 12-month pre- and post-index periods. Treatment patterns and costs were adjusted using linear models including a common set of clinically relevant variables of interest (e.g., previous RA treatments), which were assessed separately using t-tests and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Overall, 392 patients initiated tofacitinib; 178 patients initiated ADA; 118 patients initiated ETN; and 191 patients initiated ABA. Tofacitinib patients were older versus ADA patients (P = 0.0153) and had a lower proportion of Medicare supplemental patients versus ABA patients (P = 0.0095). Twelve-month pre-index bDMARD use was greater in tofacitinib patients (77.6%) versus bDMARD cohorts (47.6%-59.6%). Tofacitinib patients had greater 12-month pre-index RA-related total costs versus bDMARD cohorts (all P < 0.0001) and greatest index use of monotherapy (P = 0.0080 vs. ABA). A similar (all P > 0.10) proportion of patients were persistent with tofacitinib (42.6%) versus ADA (37.6%), ETN (42.4%), and ABA (43.5%). Mean PDC was 0.55 for tofacitinib versus 0.57 (ADA), 0.59 (ETN), and 0.44 (ABA; P = 0.0003). Adjusted analyses generated similar findings to the unadjusted treatment patterns. Tofacitinib had lower adjusted 12-month post-index mean RA-related total costs ($23,568) versus ADA ($29,278; P < 0.0001), ETN ($26,885; P = 0.0248), and ABA ($30,477; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, tofacitinib was more commonly used as monotherapy and yielded at least comparable persistence and adherence with lower adjusted mean RA-related total costs versus ADA, ETN, and ABA. Further analysis is warranted given the greater 12-month pre-index bDMARD use and RA-related costs for tofacitinib versus bDMARDs.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Harnett, Gerber, Gruben, Koenig, and Chen are employees and shareholders of Pfizer. Some data reported in this manuscript have been previously presented at the Academy of Managed Care Nexus 2015; Orlando, Florida; October 26-29, 2015, and was submitted in abstract form to the European League Against Rheumatism Congress; London, United Kingdom; June 8-11, 2016. All authors were involved in the conception and design of this study. Harnett and Gruben were involved in data collection and analysis. All authors interpreted the data, critically reviewed and revised the manuscript, and read and approved the final manuscript.

Adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy is underestimated using days supply values in electronic pharmacy claims data

PURPOSE

Days supply (prescription duration) values are commonly used to estimate drug exposure and quantify adherence to therapy, yet accuracy is not routinely assessed, and potential inaccurate reporting has been previously identified. We examined the impact of cleaning days supply values on the measurement of adherence to oral bisphosphonates.

METHODS

We identified new users of oral bisphosphonates among Ontario seniors (April 2001-March 2011). Days supply values were examined by dose, and we identified misclassification by comparing observed values to dose-specific expected values. Days supply values not matching expected values were cleaned using dose-specific algorithms. One-year adherence to therapy was defined using measures of compliance (mean proportion of days covered [PDC], and categorized into high [PDC ≥ 80%], medium [50% < PDC < 80%], low [PDC ≤ 50%]) and persistence (30-day permissible gap). Estimates were compared using the observed and cleaned days supply values, stratified by site of patient residence (community or long-term care [LTC]).

RESULTS

We identified 337 729 (5% LTC) eligible new users. Among LTC patients, adherence estimates increased significantly following data cleaning: mean PDC (59 to 83%), proportion with high compliance (47 to 76%), and proportion persisting with therapy (62 to 78%). Modest increases were identified among community-dwelling patients following data cleaning (mean PDC, 71 to 74%; high compliance, 54 to 58%; and persistence, 56 to 61%).

CONCLUSIONS

Data cleaning to correct for exposure misclassification can influence estimates of adherence with oral bisphosphonate therapy, particularly in LTC. Results highlight the importance of developing data cleaning strategies to correct for exposure misclassification and improve transparency in pharmacoepidemiologic studies.