Healthcare Utilization and Costs of Care in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation or Chronic Idiopathic Constipation After Initiating Oral Therapies: Real-World Analysis in the US Medicare Population
Eric Shah, Tsung-Ying Lee, Zachary Baldwin, Jens Kort, Masakazu Ando, Steven W. Champaloux, Mena Boules, Yuri Sanchez Gonzalez
{"title":"Healthcare Utilization and Costs of Care in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation or Chronic Idiopathic Constipation After Initiating Oral Therapies: Real-World Analysis in the US Medicare Population","authors":"Eric Shah, Tsung-Ying Lee, Zachary Baldwin, Jens Kort, Masakazu Ando, Steven W. Champaloux, Mena Boules, Yuri Sanchez Gonzalez","doi":"10.1007/s12325-025-03163-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) are common functional intestinal disorders which impact all age groups, yet there is limited comparative evidence on the economic benefits of treatment of these conditions on the elderly. We assessed differences in healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and total costs of care among Medicare-insured patients initiating linaclotide, lubiprostone, or plecanatide after 1 year.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Retrospective analysis from the Merative™ MarketScan<sup>®</sup> Medicare Database (January 2017–September 2023), including adult patients who initiated a qualifying IBS-C/CIC medication (linaclotide, lubiprostone, plecanatide) (index date defined as date of initiation) and had at least 6 months of pre-index and 12 months of post-index continuous benefit coverage under fee-for-service Medicare plans. For HCRU and all-cause total cost (medical + pharmacy) outcomes, 12-month comparisons were characterized via count (for HCRU) or cost ratios between linaclotide and lubiprostone, and linaclotide and plecanatide. Generalized linear regression models adjusting for key baseline patient characteristics and 6-month pre-index HCRU and cost were used to estimate differences in outcomes at 12 months between treatment groups.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 7916 Medicare patients were included in the analysis, of whom 5773 initiated linaclotide, 1856 initiated lubiprostone, and 287 initiated plecanatide. After adjusting for key patient characteristics and pre-index HCRU, count ratios > 1 demonstrated that patients who received lubiprostone versus linaclotide had significantly greater HCRU (<i>P</i> < 0.05) at 12 months. After 12 months follow-up, adjusted all-cause total costs of care were significantly lower among patients who received linaclotide versus lubiprostone or plecanatide, largely driven by lower all-cause medical costs observed in patients who received linaclotide (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>These findings suggest that linaclotide treatment may be associated with lower total healthcare costs compared to lubiprostone and plecanatide for patients initiating IBS-C/CIC-related drugs in Medicare populations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":"42 5","pages":"2500 - 2512"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12325-025-03163-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-025-03163-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) are common functional intestinal disorders which impact all age groups, yet there is limited comparative evidence on the economic benefits of treatment of these conditions on the elderly. We assessed differences in healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and total costs of care among Medicare-insured patients initiating linaclotide, lubiprostone, or plecanatide after 1 year.
Methods
Retrospective analysis from the Merative™ MarketScan® Medicare Database (January 2017–September 2023), including adult patients who initiated a qualifying IBS-C/CIC medication (linaclotide, lubiprostone, plecanatide) (index date defined as date of initiation) and had at least 6 months of pre-index and 12 months of post-index continuous benefit coverage under fee-for-service Medicare plans. For HCRU and all-cause total cost (medical + pharmacy) outcomes, 12-month comparisons were characterized via count (for HCRU) or cost ratios between linaclotide and lubiprostone, and linaclotide and plecanatide. Generalized linear regression models adjusting for key baseline patient characteristics and 6-month pre-index HCRU and cost were used to estimate differences in outcomes at 12 months between treatment groups.
Results
A total of 7916 Medicare patients were included in the analysis, of whom 5773 initiated linaclotide, 1856 initiated lubiprostone, and 287 initiated plecanatide. After adjusting for key patient characteristics and pre-index HCRU, count ratios > 1 demonstrated that patients who received lubiprostone versus linaclotide had significantly greater HCRU (P < 0.05) at 12 months. After 12 months follow-up, adjusted all-cause total costs of care were significantly lower among patients who received linaclotide versus lubiprostone or plecanatide, largely driven by lower all-cause medical costs observed in patients who received linaclotide (P < 0.05).
Conclusion
These findings suggest that linaclotide treatment may be associated with lower total healthcare costs compared to lubiprostone and plecanatide for patients initiating IBS-C/CIC-related drugs in Medicare populations.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Therapy is an international, peer reviewed, rapid-publication (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance) journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of therapeutics and interventions (including devices) across all therapeutic areas. Studies relating to diagnostics and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged.
The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Advances in Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.