Search

Objective: To assess the impact of the HealthPrize RespiPoints™ program on treatment adherence and persistence in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, program participants and nonparticipants receiving tiotropium bromide (TIO) or TIO and olodaterol between 1 January 2015–31 March 2020 were propensity score matched (PSM), from the linked database of the HealthPrize patient list and IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus. Treatment adherence, persistence, healthcare resource utilization, and costs were compared. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the odds of adherence (≥80% proportion of days covered [PDC]), adjusted risk of discontinuation, and adjusted total healthcare costs. Results: Program participants (n = 262) demonstrated a 44% greater adherence during followup than nonparticipants (n = 262) (mean [standard deviation] PDC: 0.72 [0.27] vs 0.50 [0.36], p < 0.0001). Participants had higher odds of adherence vs nonparticipants (adjusted odds ratio: 2.51; 95% confidence interval: 1.72–3.66, p < 0.0001) and a lower percentage of participants discontinued their index medication (19.85% vs 33.59%, p = 0.0004). Fewer participants were hospitalized during follow-up (13.74% vs 17.56%, p = 0.23); adjusted total medical costs were 24% lower (p = 0.08). Higher pharmacy costs partially offset lower healthcare costs. Conclusions: Program participants showed improved COPD medication adherence and persistence compared to nonparticipants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This is one of the first head-to-head real-world evidence studies comparing stroke-related and bleed-related healthcare and resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients initiating oral anticoagulants.Methods: Adult NVAF patients newly diagnosed and treated with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin between 10/01/2010 and 12/31/2014 were identified using MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases. Per-patient-per-month stroke and bleed-related HCRU and costs were reported.Results: Dabigatran patients were matched 1:1 to 26,592 rivaroxaban and 33,024 warfarin patients (mean age=68 years). Compared to rivaroxaban, dabigatran patients had lower bleed-related inpatient and outpatient HCRU (0.004 vs. 0.005; 0.099 vs. 0.145) and significantly lower adjusted bleed-related costs ($116 vs. $172), all p <0.05. Compared to warfarin, dabigatran patients had significantly lower stroke-related outpatient visits (0.034 vs. 0.048, p<0.001) and higher bleed-related outpatient visits (0.101 vs. 0.091, p=0.045). Multivariate adjusted bleed-related costs were significantly lower for dabigatran patients than warfarin patients ($94 vs. $138, p<0.001).Conclusions: The results suggest that dabigatran patients had lower bleed-related HCRU and costs than rivaroxaban patients, and lower outpatient stroke-related HCRU, higher bleed-related outpatient HCRU, and lower bleed-related costs than warfarin patients. It provides valuable stroke-related and bleed-related HCRU and costs information among commercially insured and Medicare patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Compare costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) among newly-diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients newly treated with dabigatran vs apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin.Methods: Newly-diagnosed adult NVAF patients initiating dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin (index event) between October 1, 2010-December 31, 2014 were identified using MarketScan claims data, and followed until medication discontinuation, switch, inpatient death, enrollment end, or study end (December 31, 2015). Dabigatran patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 separately with apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin patients. Per-patient-per-month (PPPM) all-cause cost, HCRU, and 30-day re-admissions were reported. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models.Results: Final cohorts, each matched with dabigatran patients, included 8,857 apixaban patients, 26,592 rivaroxaban patients, and 33,046 warfarin patients. Dabigatran patients had lower adjusted PPPM total healthcare, inpatient, and outpatient costs compared to rivaroxaban ($4,093 vs $4,636, $1,476 vs $1,862, and $2,016 vs $2,121, respectively, all p ≤ .001) and warfarin ($4,199 vs $4,872, $1,505 vs $1,851, and $2,049 vs $2,514, respectively, all p < .001). Adjusted costs were similar for dabigatran and apixaban. Dabigatran patients had significantly fewer hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy claims than rivaroxaban patients (0.06 vs 0.07, 4.84 vs 4.96 and 4.80 vs 4.93, respectively, all p < .020) and warfarin patients (0.06 vs 0.07, 4.77 vs 6.88, and 4.76 vs 5.89, respectively, all p < .001). Dabigatran patients had similar hospitalizations to apixaban, but higher outpatient visits (4.70 vs 4.31) and pharmacy claims (4.86 vs 4.61), both p < .001.Conclusions: This real-world study found adjusted all-cause costs were lower for dabigatran compared to rivaroxaban and warfarin patients and similar to apixaban patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]