Health Care Cost in Patients With Schizophrenia Treated With Brexpiprazole Versus Other Oral Atypical Antipsychotic Therapy

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.

Real-world evidence of improved healthcare utilization in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder after early treatment of paliperidone palmitate once-monthly treatment in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

Very few data are available to demonstrate the economic benefit of early paliperidone palmitate once-monthly long-acting injectable (PP1M) treatment in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This study has retrospectively compared the healthcare utilization and associated costs of pre- and post-PPIM treatment in 413 patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder recruited from three major public hospitals providing psychiatric services in Hong Kong. Patients were categorized into early treatment (≤3 years since diagnosis) and chronic (>3 years) groups, and also whether they were receiving polypharmacy (POP).

RESULTS

It was found that patients who were started on early therapy with no POP had the most favourable outcomes. Overall results of the entire cohort, including both early and late treatments, indicate that there was a slight increase in annual in-patient days (IP) per patient and outpatient visit (OP) by 3.18 and 1.87, respectively, and a decrease in emergency room visit (ER) of 0.9 (p < 0.05). For non-polypharmacy (NP) patients receiving early PP1M therapy, there was a significant decrease in IP and ER of 21.56 (p < 0.05) and 1.15 (p < 0.05), respectively, but an increase in OP of 1.88 (p < 0.05). For patients with POP, there was an all-across increase in IP and all-across decrease in OP and ER. In monetary terms, a NP patient receiving early therapy may have an overall saving of HKD40,878 (USD5,241, 1USD = 7.8HKD) per year compared to HKD6,224 (USD798) in patients where therapy was given after 3 years. For patients with POP, there was an all-across increase in overall spending despite reductions in OP and ER.

CONCLUSIONS

From the 413 patients studied, potential annual savings is higher by early administration of PPIM in patients with NP. Analysis using multivariate linear regression based on generalized estimating equations and sensitivity analysis using a linear mixed model supported the findings.

The prospective economic impact of once monthly paliperidone palmitate versus oral atypical antipsychotics in Medicaid patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVES

Multiple real-world studies have reported potential cost savings associated with second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectable therapies (SGA-LAIs), including once monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M). Yet, only about 12% of Medicaid patients with schizophrenia initiate SGA-LAIs, with poor adherence contributing to frequent relapse among patients on oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs). The objective of this study was to project the economic impact when an incremental proportion of non-adherent patients with a recent relapse switched from OAAs to PP1M.

METHODS

A 12 month decision-tree model was developed from a Medicaid payers' perspective. The target population was non-adherent OAA patients with a recent relapse. At equal adherence, risk of relapse was equal between PP1M and OAAs, and OAA patients remained non-adherent until treatment switch. Outcomes included number of relapses, relapse costs and pharmacy costs.

RESULTS

Based on a hypothetical health plan of 1 million members, 3037 schizophrenia patients were non-adherent on OAAs with a recent relapse. Compared to continuing OAAs, switching 5% of patients (n = 152) to PP1M resulted in net schizophrenia-related cost savings of $674,975 at a plan level, $4445 per patient switched per year and $0.0562 per member per month, with a total of 92 avoided relapses over 12 months. Total annual plan level schizophrenia-related costs were $114.1 M when all patients switched to PP1M before any subsequent relapse (n = 3037), $123.4 M when patients switched to PP1M after a first subsequent relapse (n = 2631), and $127.6 M when all patients continued OAAs. Switching all patients to PP1M before any subsequent relapse averted 917 relapses, at a lower cost per patient switched ($37,559) compared to switching after a first subsequent relapse ($45,089) or continuing OAAs ($42,005).

CONCLUSION

Over 12 months, pharmacy costs associated with switching patients from OAAs to PP1M were offset by reduced relapse rates and schizophrenia-related healthcare expenditures, with earlier use of PP1M projected to generate greater cost savings.

A comparison of treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and costs among young adult Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate or oral atypical antipsychotics in the US

BACKGROUND

Much of the burden associated with schizophrenia is attributed to its early onset and chronic nature. Treatment with once monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) is associated with lower healthcare utilization and better adherence as compared to oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs). This study aimed to evaluate real-world effectiveness of PP1M and OAA therapies among US-based adult Medicaid patients with schizophrenia, overall and among young adults aged 18-35 years.

METHODS

Adult patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and at least two claims for PP1M or OAA between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014 were selected from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan Medicaid Database. Treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization and costs were compared between PP1M and OAA treatment groups following inverse probability of treatment (IPT) weighting to adjust for potential differences. Utilization and cost outcomes were estimated using OLS and weighted Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

After IPT weighting, the young adult PP1M and OAA cohorts were comprised of 3,095 and 3,155 patients, respectively. PP1M patients had a higher duration of continuous treatment exposure (168.2 vs 132.5 days, p = .004) and better adherence on the index medication (proportion of days covered ≥80%: 19.0% vs 17.1%, p < .049). Young adults treated with PP1M were 37% less likely to have an all-cause inpatient admission (odds ratio [OR] = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.53-0.74) and 33% less likely to have an ER visit (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.55-0.81) compared to OAA young adult patients, but 27% more likely to have an all-cause outpatient office visit (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.02-1.56). PP1M patients incurred significantly lower medical costs as compared to OAA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicaid patients with schizophrenia treated with PP1M have higher medication adherence and have fewer hospitalizations as compared to patients treated with OAAs. PP1M may lead to reduced healthcare utilization and improved clinical outcomes.

Economic evaluation of paliperidone palmitate once monthly for treating chronic schizophrenia patients in the United Arab Emirates

OBJECTIVE

Schizophrenia is one of the most debilitating diseases in the United Arab Emirates. Oral antipsychotics (OA) are commonly used in terms of pharmacotherapy; however, these treatments can be rendered ineffective by poor patient adherence. Paliperidone palmitate once monthly (PP1M) is a long acting antipsychotic which can offer an adherence advantage when compared to oral treatments. The study objective is to estimate the cost effectiveness of PP1M in the UAE setting.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A 1-year validated decision-tree model was adapted to the UAE setting using published literature and expert opinion. Patients on PP1M were compared with or without oral supplementation to patients on any oral antipsychotic. Patient outcomes studied were incremental cost per quality adjusted life years gained, incremental cost per hospitalizations, relapses, and emergency room visits averted.

RESULTS

After 1 year, patients on PP1M monotherapy when compared to oral antipsychotics had better outcomes (0.840 vs 0.811 QALYs; 31 relapse days averted as well as 9 and 24 percentage points of ER and hospitalizations averted, respectively), and better healthcare savings (AED 1405). PP1M economically dominated oral antipsychotics. The results were stable across a broad range of deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. PP1M plus oral antipsychotics could not be evaluated due to the absence of clinical data that would provide insight into the clinical value of combination therapy.

CONCLUSION

PP1M is estimated to save the UAE healthcare system money, while at the same time improving patient outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of 3-month paliperidone therapy for chronic schizophrenia in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

A new depot formulation of paliperidone has been developed that provides effective treatment for schizophrenia for 3 months (PP3M). It has been tested in phase-3 trials, but no data on its cost-effectiveness have been published.

PURPOSE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of PP3M compared with once-monthly paliperidone (PP1M), haloperidol long-acting therapy (HAL-LAT), risperidone microspheres (RIS-LAT), and oral olanzapine (oral-OLZ) for treating chronic schizophrenia in The Netherlands.

METHODS

A previous 1-year decision tree was adapted, based on local inputs supplemented with data from published literature. The primary analysis used DRG costs in 2016 euros from the insurer perspective, as derived from official lists. A micro-costing analysis was also conducted. For the costing scenario, official list prices were used. Clinical outcomes included relapses (treated as outpatients, requiring hospitalization, total), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Rates and utility scores were derived from the literature. Economic outcomes were the incremental cost/QALY-gained or relapse-avoided. Model robustness was examined in scenario, 1-way, and probability sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The expected cost was lowest with PP3M (8,781€), followed by PP1M (10,325€), HAL-LAT (11,278€), RIS-LAT (11,307€), and oral-OLZ (13,556€). PP3M had the fewest total relapses/patient (0.36, 0.94, 1.39, 1.21, and 1.70, respectively), hospitalizations (0.11, 0.46, 0.40, 0.56, and 0.57, respectively), emergency room visits (0.25, 0.48. 0.99, 0.65, and 1.14, respectively) and the most QALYs (0.847, 0.735, 0.709, 0.719, and 0.656, respectively). In both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, PP3M dominated all other drugs. Sensitivity analyses confirmed base case findings. In the costing analysis, total costs were, on average, 31.9% higher than DRGs.

CONCLUSIONS

PP3M dominated all commonly used drugs. It is cost-effective for treating chronic schizophrenia in the Netherlands. Results were robust over a wide range of sensitivity analyses. For patients requiring a depot medication, such as those with adherence problems, PP3M appears to be a good alternative anti-psychotic treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of 3-month paliperidone treatment for chronic schizophrenia in Spain

BACKGROUND

A 3-month long treatment of paliperidone palmitate (PP3M) has been introduced as an option for treating schizophrenia. Its cost-effectiveness in Spain has not been established.

AIMS

To compare the costs and effects of PP3M compared with once-monthly paliperidone (PP1M) from the payer perspective in Spain.

METHODS

This study used the recently published trial by Savitz et al. as a core model over 1 year. Additional data were derived from the literature. Costs in 2016 Euros were obtained from official lists and utilities from Osborne et al. The authors conducted both cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses. For the former, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained was calculated. For the latter, the outcomes were relapses and hospitalizations avoided. To assure the robustness of the analyses, a series of 1-way and probability sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The expected cost was lower with PP3M (4,780€) compared with PP1M (5,244€). PP3M had the fewest relapses (0.080 vs 0.161), hospitalizations (0.034 v.s 0.065), and emergency room visits (0.045 v.s 0.096) and the most QALYs (0.677 v.s 0.625). In both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, PP3M dominated PP1M. Sensitivity analyses confirmed base case findings. For the primary analysis (cost-utility), PP3M dominated PP1M in 46.9% of 10,000 simulations and was cost-effective at a threshold of 30,000€/QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

PP3M dominated PP1M in all analyses and was, therefore, cost-effective for treating chronic relapsing schizophrenia in Spain. For patients who require long-acting therapy, PP3M appears to be a good alternative anti-psychotic treatment.

Health care resource utilization and costs of California Medicaid patients with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate once monthly or atypical oral antipsychotic treatment

OBJECTIVE

To compare all-cause health care utilization and costs between patients with schizophrenia treated with once monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M; Invega Sustenna ¹ ) and atypical oral antipsychotic therapy (OAT).

METHODS

This was a retrospective claims-based analysis among adult California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) patients with schizophrenia having ≥2 claims for PP1M or OAT from 1 July 2009 to 31 December 2013 and continuous health plan enrollment for ≥1 year pre- and post-index date (PP1M or OAT initiation date). Baseline characteristics were reported descriptively. Propensity score matching with a 1:1 greedy match method was used to create two matched cohorts. Treatment patterns, all-cause health care utilization, and costs for the 12 month follow-up period were compared between the two matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Two well matched cohorts of 722 patients were produced with similar baseline characteristics. During the 12 month follow-up period, PP1M patients were significantly less likely to discontinue treatment (30.6% vs. 39.5%, p < .001) or switch to a new therapy (21.6% vs. 27.7%, p = .007). PP1M patients had fewer inpatient visits (5.0 vs. 7.9, p < .001), lower mean hospitalization days (15.0 vs. 27.7 days, p < .001) and inpatient costs ($5060 vs. $10,880, p < .001). While pharmacy costs were significantly higher in the PP1M cohort ($16,347 vs. $9115, p < .001), total costs were not significantly different between the matched cohorts ($25,546 vs. $25,307, p = 0.853).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with schizophrenia treated with PP1M had significantly fewer inpatient hospitalizations and associated costs with no significant difference in the total costs between the two cohorts. This study is subject to limitations associated with claims data such as miscoding, inability to examine clinical severity, etc.

Cost-Minimisation Analysis of Paliperidone Palmitate Long-Acting Treatment versus Risperidone Long-Acting Treatment for Schizophrenia in Spain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Long-acting formulations for paliperidone (PPLAT) and risperidone (RLAT) are effective second-generation antipsychotics. This study aimed to compare treatment costs between PPLAT and RLAT in schizophrenia patients.

METHODS

A cost-minimization analysis was performed from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System (NHS), in line with the approach accepted by the Scottish Medicine Consortium evaluation. Only direct health costs (€, 2015) were included, i.e. medication (including oral antipsychotic drug supplementation), hospitalization and cost of administration in the community. Two time horizons were used: 1 year (to compare initiation treatment) and 2 years (to compare maintenance treatment). Base-case considered the following assumptions: setting for treatment initiation (50 % hospital and 50 % community); 50 % of patients initiating from a long-acting treatment and 50 % from an oral antipsychotic; no reduction in the length of stay. One-way sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed.

RESULTS

The estimated costs/patient were €7698 (PPLAT) and €8168 (RLAT) for the first year, and €4314 (PPLAT) and €5003 (RLAT) for the second year. Cost savings related to PPLAT therapy were €470 and €689 for first and second year, respectively. SA results confirmed the robustness of the model results, even in the most conservative scenarios: (1) if 100 % of patients initiate treatment in hospital, the savings could be €454 per patient; (2) if 100 % of patients initiate treatment from an oral antipsychotic, the savings could be €277 per patient/year; and (3) if PPLAT could not reduce the length of stay by approximately one-third, as some studies indicate, the savings could be €470 per patient/year.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PPLAT instead of RLAT could be a cost-saving strategy for the Spanish NHS.

Economic analysis of paliperidone long-acting injectable for chronic schizophrenia in Portugal

OBJECTIVE

Patients with chronic schizophrenia suffer a huge burden, as do their families/caregivers. Treating schizophrenia is costly for health systems. The European Medicines Agency has approved paliperidone palmitate (PP-LAI; Xeplion), an atypical antipsychotic depot; however, its pharmacoeconomic profile in Portugal is unknown. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the viewpoint of the Portuguese National Health Service.

METHODS

PP-LAI was compared with long acting injectables risperidone (RIS-LAI) and haloperidol (HAL-LAI) and oral drugs (olanzapine; oral-OLZ) adapting a 1-year decision tree to Portugal, guided by local experts. Clinical information and costs were obtained from literature sources and published lists. Outcomes included relapses (both requiring and not requiring hospitalization) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were expressed in 2014 euros. Economic outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs); including cost-utility (outcome = QALYs) and cost-effectiveness analyses (outcomes = relapse/hospitalization/emergency room (ER) visit avoided).

RESULTS

The base-case cost of oral-OLZ was 4447€ (20% drugs/20% medical/60% hospital); HAL-LAI cost 4474€ (13% drugs/13% medical/74% hospital); PP-LAI cost 5326€ (49% drugs/12% medical/39% hospital); RIS-LAI cost 6223€ (44% drugs/12% medical/44% hospital). Respective QALYs/hospitalizations/ER visits were oral-OLZ: 0.761/0.615/0.242; HAL-LAI: 0.758/0.623/0.250; PP-LAI: 0.823/0.288/0.122; RIS-LAI: 0.799/0.394/0.168. HAL-LAI was dominated by oral-OLZ and RIS-LAI by PP-LAI for all outcomes. The ICER of PP-LAI over oral-OLZ was 14,247€/QALY, well below NICE/Portuguese thresholds (≈24,800€/30,000€/QALY). ICERs were 1973€/relapse avoided and 2697€/hospitalization avoided. Analyses were robust against most variations in input values, as PP-LAI was cost-effective over oral-OLZ in >99% of 10,000 simulations.

CONCLUSION

In Portugal, PP-LAI dominated HAL-LAI and RIS-LAI and was cost-effective over oral-OLZ with respect to QALYs gained, relapses avoided, and hospitalizations avoided.

Cost Effectiveness of Paliperidone Long-Acting Injectable Versus Other Antipsychotics for the Maintenance Treatment of Schizophrenia in France

BACKGROUND

French clinical recommendations suggest prescribing long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics to patients with a maintenance treatment indication in schizophrenia. Despite this, and due to their relatively high acquisition and administration costs, LAIs are still underused in clinical practice in France, thus highlighting the need for pharmacoeconomic evaluations.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to estimate the cost effectiveness of paliperidone LAI (or paliperidone palmitate), a once-monthly second-generation LAI antipsychotic, compared with the most common antipsychotic medications for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia in France.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to simulate the progression of a cohort of schizophrenic patients through four health states (stable treated, stable non-treated, relapse and death) and to consider up to three lines of treatment to account for changes in treatment management. Paliperidone LAI was compared with risperidone LAI, aripiprazole LAI, olanzapine LAI, haloperidol LAI (or haloperidol decanoate) and oral olanzapine. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and number of relapses were assessed over 5 years based on 3-month cycles with a discount rate of 4% and from a French health insurance perspective. Patients were considered to be stabilised after a schizophrenic episode and would enter the model at an initiation phase, followed by a prevention of relapse phase if successful. Data (e.g. relapse or discontinuation rates) for the initiation phase came from randomised clinical trials, whereas relapse rates in the prevention phase were derived from hospitalisation risks based on real-life French data to capture adherence effects. Safety and utility data were derived from international publications. Additionally, costs were retrieved from French health insurance databases and publications. Finally, expert opinion was used for validation purposes or in case of gaps in data. The robustness of results was assessed through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

All LAI antipsychotics were found to have similar costs over 5 years: approximatively €55,000, except for paliperidone LAI which had a discounted cost of €50,880. Oral olanzapine was less costly than LAIs (i.e. €50,379 after 5 years) but was associated with fewer QALYs gained and relapses avoided. Paliperidone LAI dominated aripiprazole LAI, olanzapine LAI and haloperidol LAI in terms of costs per QALY, and it was associated with slightly fewer QALYs when compared with risperidone LAI (i.e. 3.763 vs 3.764). This resulted in a high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (i.e. €4,770,018 per QALY gained) for risperidone LAI compared with paliperidone LAI. Paliperidone LAI was more costly than olanzapine oral but associated with more QALYs (i.e. ICER of €2411 per QALY gained for paliperidone LAI compared with oral olanzapine). Paliperidone LAI had a probability of being the optimal strategy in more than 50% of cases for a willingness-to-pay threshold of €8000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

This analysis, to the best of our knowledge, is the first of its kind to assess the cost effectiveness of antipsychotics based on French observational data. Paliperidone LAI appeared to be a cost-effective option in the treatment of schizophrenia from the French health insurance perspective.

Pharmacoeconomics of long-acting atypical antipsychotics for acutely relapsed chronic schizophrenia in Finland

BACKGROUND

Atypical long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics are increasingly available for treating chronic schizophrenia in patients chronically non-adherent to prescribed regimens. Few economic studies have compared these products.

PURPOSE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of aripiprazole (ARI-LAI), paliperidone (PP-LAI), olanzapine (OLZ-LAI), and risperidone (RIS-LAI) in patients with chronic schizophrenia in Finland.

METHODS

A 1-year decision tree model was adapted with guidance from an expert panel. Patients started hospitalized in relapse; those who responded continued treatment, others were switched to secondary drugs, then clozapine in the event of 2nd line failure. Rates of adherence, stable disease, relapse, and hospitalization were taken from pivotal trials, and utilities from published research. Included were direct costs paid by the Finnish Ministry of Health, in 2015 euros. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), hospitalization rates, and rates of relapse not requiring hospitalization. Model robustness was assessed using a series of 1-way and multivariate sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Expected costs were lowest for PP-LAI at 41,148€, followed by 41,543€ for ARI-LAI, 42,067€ for RIS-LAI and 45,406€ for OLZ-LAI. Respective QALYs were 0.683, 0.671, 0.666, and 0.672. Re-hospitalization rates and non-admitted relapses were 23.6% and 3.9% for PP-LAI, 28.5% and 4.1% for ARI-LAI, 28.8% and 5.0% for RIS-LAI, 28.3% and 5.2% for OLZ-LAI. PP-LAI treatment was associated with the most days with stable disease (132.0), followed by OLZ-LAI (125.5), ARI-LAI (122.6), and RIS-LAI (114.4). Sensitive inputs between PP-LAI and ARI-LAI included rates of adherence, dropouts, and relapses plus drug prices; dropout and relapse rates for RIS-LAI; OLZ-LAI results were insensitive. In probability sensitivity analyses, PP-LAI dominated ARI-LAI in 75.8% of the 10,000 iterations, RIS-LAI in 83.1% and OLZ-LAI in 95.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

PP-LAI dominated the other atypicals. It appears to be the preferred option for treating chronic relapsing schizophrenia.

Comparison of Medicaid spending in schizoaffective patients treated with once monthly paliperidone palmitate or oral atypical antipsychotics

BACKGROUND

Compared to oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs), long-acting injectable antipsychotics require less frequent administration, and thus may improve adherence and reduce risk of relapse in schizoaffective disorder (SAD) patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of once monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP) versus OAAs on healthcare resource utilization, Medicaid spending, and hospital readmission among SAD patients.

METHODS

Using FL, IA, KS, MS, MO, and NJ Medicaid data (January 2009-December 2013), adults with ≥2 SAD diagnoses initiated on PP or OAA (index date) were identified. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were assessed during the 12month pre- and post-index periods, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to reduce confounding and compare the estimated treatment effect for PP versus OAA.

RESULTS

A total of 10,778 OAA-treated patients and 876 PP-treated patients were selected. Compared to OAAs, PP was associated with significantly lower medical costs (PSM: mean monthly cost difference [MMCD] = -$383, p < 0.001; IPTW: MMCD = -$403, p = 0.016), which offset the higher pharmacy costs associated with PP (PSM: MMCD = $270, p < 0.001; IPTW: MMCD = $350, p < 0.001) and resulted in similar total healthcare cost (PSM: MMCD = -$113, p = 0.414; IPTW: MMCD = -$53, p = 0.697) for PP versus OAA. Reduced risk of hospitalization (PSM: incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.85, p = 0.128; IPTW: IRR = 0.96, p = 0.004) and fewer hospitalization days (PSM: IRR = 0.74, p = 0.008; IPTW: IRR = 0.85, p < 0.001) were observed in PP versus OAA patients. Among hospitalized patients, PP was associated with a lower risk of 30 day hospital readmission compared to OAA (IPTW: odds ratio = 0.89, p = 0.041). Limitations The Medicaid data may not be representative of the nation or other states, and includes pre-rebate pharmacy costs (potentially over-estimated). Also changes in treatment over time were possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Total healthcare costs associated with the use of once monthly PP versus OAAs appeared comparable; higher pharmacy costs for PP users were offset by lower medical costs related to fewer and shorter inpatients visits.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Aripiprazole Once-Monthly for the Treatment of Schizophrenia in the UK

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a severe and debilitating psychiatric disorder. Pharmacological interventions aim to ameliorate symptoms and reduce the risk of relapse and costly hospitalisation. Despite the established efficacy of antipsychotic medication, compliance to treatment is poor, particularly with oral formulation. The emergence of long acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic formulations in recent years has aimed to counteract the poor compliance rates observed and optimise long term patient outcomes.

AIMS OF THE STUDY

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of aripiprazole once-monthly 400mg (AOM 400) vs. risperidone long acting injectable (RLAI), paliperidone long acting injectable (PLAI) and olanzapine long acting injectable (OLAI) in the maintenance treatment of chronic, stable schizophrenia patients in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to emulate the treatment pathway of a hypothetical cohort of patients initiating maintenance treatment with LAI antipsychotics. The economic analysis was conducted from a National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a 10 year time horizon. Efficacy and safety probabilities were derived from mixed treatment comparisons (MTCs) where possible. Analyses were conducted assuming pooled dosing from randomised clinical trials included in the MTCs.

RESULTS

The model estimates that AOM 400 improves clinical outcomes by reducing relapses per patient comparative to other LAIs over the model time horizon (2.38, 2.53, 2.70, and 2.67 for AOM 400, RLAI, PLAI and OLAI respectively). In the deterministic analysis, AOM 400 dominated PLAI and OLAI; an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 3,686 per QALY gained was observed against RLAI. Results from the univariate sensitivity analyses highlighted the probability and cost of relapse as main drivers for cost-effectiveness. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, AOM 400 demonstrated a marginally higher probability of being cost-effective (51%) than RLAI, PLAI and OLAI (48%, 1% and 0%, respectively) at a willingness to pay threshold of GBP 20,000.

DISCUSSION

The model was built to accommodate results of an adjusted MTC analysis. Furthermore the model effectively captures repercussions of deteriorating compliance to treatment by incorporating three levels of compliance with elevated risks of relapse for partial compliance and non-compliance. Limitations of the analysis include the limited number of studies incorporated in the MTC, the extrapolation of short term clinical data and the exclusion of the wider societal burden.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE

Comparative to other atypical antipsychotics, AOM 400 represents value for money in the maintenance treatment of chronic, stable schizophrenia; however, in light of the PSA findings and comparable cost-effectiveness (i.e. against RLAI), the product profile and wider benefits of the respective treatments must be taken into account when prescribing antipsychotics.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Future research should assess the use of LAI antipsychotics earlier in the disease course of schizophrenia to see whether improved compliance and outcomes shortly following the onset of psychosis has the potential to alter the disease trajectory. Moreover it should be assessed whether changes in the disease trajectory can alleviate cost and resource pressures placed on national health services.

Health Care Utilization and Treatment Persistence Associated with Oral Paliperidone and Lurasidone in Schizophrenia Treatment

BACKGROUND

Oral paliperidone and lurasidone are new second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). Empirical evidence on the comparative costs and persistence of these 2 agents are absent in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

To assess health care use and persistence associated with the 2 new agents oral paliperidone and lurasidone and other SGAs.

METHODS

Schizophrenia patients who initiated SGA therapy were identified in the January 2007-June 2013 claims databases of a large managed care organization. Multivariate regressions using aripiprazole as the comparator were conducted. Ordinary least squares regressions were used to estimate the total medical and pharmacy costs associated with each drug. Poisson regressions were conducted to evaluate the frequency of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits associated with each drug. A censored regression model was used to evaluate the comparative persistence. Sensitivity analyses using generalized linear models, two-part models, hurdle models, and instrumental variable regressions were also performed.  

RESULTS

Compared with aripiprazole, paliperidone was not associated with significantly different total costs, yet lurasidone was associated with lower total costs (-$7,052; 95% CI = -$9,221, -$4,882). Lurasidone was also associated with significantly lower medical services costs (-$5,025; 95% CI = -$7,096, -$2,955), drug costs (-$2,026; 95% CI = -$2,695, -$1,357), hospital costs (-$3,026; 95% CI = -$4,731, -$1,321), outpatient costs (-$1,999; 95% CI = -$2,536, -$1,463), and ED costs (-$2,284; 95% CI = -$3,069, -$1,499), whereas paliperidone did not have significant effects on any types of costs. Paliperidone users had fewer ED visits (-0.25; 95% CI = -0.42, -0.08), while lurasidone users had fewer hospitalizations (-5.98; 95% CI = -6.61, -5.35) and fewer ED visits (-2.51; 95% CI = -2.92, -2.10). Both paliperidone and lurasidone were associated with lower levels of treatment persistence.

CONCLUSIONS

Paliperidone does not associate with lower total costs compared with commonly used SGAs, whereas lurasidone is associated with lower total health costs. Thus, high access fees of lurasidone are not necessarily a major concern in prescription.

Healthcare utilization and costs of Veterans Health Administration patients with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate long-acting injection or oral atypical antipsychotics

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare real world healthcare costs and resource utilization between patients with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate long-acting injection (PP) and oral atypical antipsychotics (OAT).

METHODS

Patients (18-64 years) were selected from the Veterans Health Administration dataset (1 July 2007-31 May 2012). Patients with 2+ claims for PP or 2+ claims for the same OAT comprised the two study cohorts with the first prescription date designated as the index date. Participation in the VA healthcare system for 24 months pre- and 12 months post-index, schizophrenia diagnosis (International Classification of Disease 9th Revision Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] code 295.1x-6x, 295.8x-9x) and ≥1 claim for an antipsychotic medication during the baseline period were required. Propensity scores and Mahalanobis metric distances with calipers were used to create two matched cohorts. All-cause healthcare utilization and costs for the 12-month follow-up period were compared between matched cohorts.

RESULTS

The matching process produced two cohorts of 335 patients with similar baseline characteristics. During the 12-month follow-up period, patients in the PP cohort had lower mean inpatient costs (18,560 vs $31,505, p = 0.002), lower frequency of hospitalization (34% vs 53%, p < 0.001) and fewer average inpatient days (13.24 vs 24.18, p = 0.002) vs matched OAT patients. While mean pharmacy costs were higher for the PP cohort ($10,063 vs $4167, p < 0.001), mean total healthcare costs were not significantly different ($45,529 vs $52,569, p = 0.128).

CONCLUSION

VA patients, diagnosed with schizophrenia and treated with PP, had lower inpatient costs and admission rates compared to a matched cohort of OAT patients. Total healthcare costs were not significantly different.

Cost effectiveness of paliperidone palmitate versus oral antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and a history of criminal justice involvement

OBJECTIVE

Conduct a cost effectiveness analysis for the Paliperidone palmitate Research In Demonstrating Effectiveness (PRIDE) trial.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

PRIDE was a 15 month, prospective, randomized, open-label study in which once monthly paliperidone palmitate significantly delayed the time to first treatment failure (healthcare or criminal justice system [HC/CJS] events) versus oral antipsychotics in recently incarcerated adults with schizophrenia. The present analysis used a state government perspective and HC/CJS event data that were collected on a resource use questionnaire (RUQ) every 3 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Since cost information was not collected in the trial, cost estimates from published literature and an analysis of multistate Medicaid data for CJS and HC events, respectively, were applied to RUQ event data. Effectiveness and costs were adjusted to 456 days (trial duration). Incremental cost effectiveness was calculated as the adjusted cost difference divided by the adjusted effectiveness difference.

RESULTS

Adjusted costs (in US dollars) in the paliperidone palmitate group (n = 198) and the oral antipsychotic group (n = 193), respectively, were: non-drug costs $22,331 and $25,027; drug costs $18,592 and $7833; and total costs $40,923 and $32,860. Adjusted effectiveness differences and corresponding incremental cost effectiveness per event avoided (in parentheses) for paliperidone palmitate versus oral antipsychotics were as follows: 0.33 fewer CJS events ($24,409), 0.13 fewer psychiatric hospitalizations ($60,484), 0.46 fewer psychiatric hospitalizations or CJS events combined ($17,391), and 0.30 fewer incarcerations ($26,754).

CONCLUSIONS

Costs for HC/CJS events avoided offset 25% of the greater drug cost for the paliperidone palmitate versus oral antipsychotic treatment group in this vulnerable population. Use of a recall-dependent RUQ for event rates and cost estimates instead of actual costs are potential limitations and may make the results conservative from a state government perspective. Indirect costs are likely to be substantial for this population, but were not considered in the analysis.

Estimated medical cost reductions for paliperidone palmitate vs placebo in a randomized, double-blind relapse-prevention trial of patients with schizoaffective disorder

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this economic model was to estimate the difference in medical costs among patients treated with paliperidone palmitate once-monthly injectable antipsychotic (PP1M) vs placebo, based on clinical event rates reported in the 15-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of paliperidone palmitate evaluating time to relapse in subjects with schizoaffective disorder.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Rates of psychotic, depressive, and/or manic relapses and serious and non-serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were obtained from the long-term paliperidone palmitate vs placebo relapse prevention study. The total annual medical cost for a relapse from a US payer perspective was obtained from published literature and the costs for serious and non-serious TEAEs were based on Common Procedure Terminology codes. Total annual medical cost differences for patients treated with PP1M vs placebo were then estimated. Additionally, one-way and Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Lower rates of relapse (-18.3%) and serious TEAEs (-3.9%) were associated with use of PP1M vs placebo as reported in the long-term paliperidone palmitate vs placebo relapse prevention study. As a result of the reduction in these clinical event rates, the total annual medical cost was reduced by $7140 per patient treated with PP1M vs placebo. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that variations in relapse rates had the greatest impact on the estimated medical cost differences (range: -$9786, -$4670). Of the 10,000 random cycles of Monte Carlo simulations, 100% showed a medical cost difference <$0 (reduction) for patients using PPIM vs placebo. The average total annual medical differences per patient were -$8321 for PP1M monotherapy and -$6031 for PPIM adjunctive therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of PP1M for treatment of patients with schizoaffective disorder was associated with a significantly lower rate of relapse and a reduction in medical costs compared to placebo. Further evaluation in the real-world setting is warranted.