Real-World Healthcare Resource Utilization in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Lymphoma: Differences between Patients Treated with Ibrutinib or Bendamustine + Rituximab

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the real-world differences in healthcare resource utilization in chronic lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL) patients treated with either first-line ibrutinib monotherapy (IM) or first-line bendamustine + rituximab (BR) therapy using U.S. administrative claims data. METHODS: The MarketScan® Research Databases were used to identify patients aged 18 years or older with commercial or Medicare supplemental insurance plans based on their first prescription (index date) of either IM or BR therapy between 02/01/2014 and 08/30/2017. Patients were required to be diagnosed with CLL and be treatment naïve, as well as be continuously enrolled (CE) for 6 months prior to and at least 30 days following the index date. All-cause and CLL-related healthcare resource utilization (e.g., inpatient admission (IP) and emergency room (ER) visits) were evaluated during a 12-month follow-up period from the index date among the subset of patients with 12 months of continuous enrollment and were reported per-patient per-month (PPPM). Statistical differences in the distribution of IP and ER visits between the IM versus BR therapy groups were estimated using chi-squared test for categorical variables and t-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: A total of 1,886 CLL patients were identified, with 1,157 patients in the IM cohort and 729 patients in the BR cohort. The IM cohort was significantly older (mean = 69.3 years; SD = 11.6) then the BR cohort (mean age = 66.4 years; SD = 9.8). There was a similar proportion of females (IM = 36%; BR = 32%), and no significant difference in the National Cancer Institute Comorbidity Index score was observed between the two cohorts (IM=0.9 vs BR=0.8, p=0.34). The results of the comparisons between the two groups with 12 months of follow-up (IM = 589; BR = 436) are provided in Table 1. For all-cause healthcare utilization, the proportion of patients experiencing at least one IP admission and the PPPM number of admissions was significantly higher in the IM cohort compared to the BR cohort. The proportion of patients with at least one ER visit was higher in the IM than in the BR cohort, but the difference was not statistically significant. However, the PPPM number of ER visits was significantly higher in the IM cohort. A similar pattern was found for the CLL-related healthcare utilization variables with two exceptions. First, the average length of stay (ALOS) per CLL-related IP admission was significantly longer for the IM than BR cohort; whereas, ALOS per all-cause IP admission was longer for the IM cohort, but the difference was not significantly different. Second, while patients in the IM cohort experienced more CLL-related ER visits, they were not significantly higher in the IM cohort than in the BR cohort. Conclusions: The current study examined differences in healthcare utilization during a 12 month period among CLL-patients initially treated in a front-line setting with either ibrutinib or BR combination therapy. Results indicated that not only did more ibrutinib patients experience an IP admission and ER visits, both all-cause and CLL-related, but they also experienced more repeat admissions and ER visits. These real-world findings highlight the importance of considering the healthcare resource utilization of CLL patients which may be associated with their first-line therapy. Disclosures Irwin: Teva: Consultancy. Zhang:Teva: Consultancy. Wilson:Teva: Consultancy. Hoehn:Teva: Employment. Szabo:Teva: Employment. Tang:Teva: Employment.