Uma Borate, Karen Seiter, Ravi Potluri, Debasish Mazumder, Manoj Chevli, Thomas Prebet, Lona Gaugler, Maria Strocchia, Alberto Vasconcelos, Jan Sieluk
{"title":"急性髓性白血病患者接受阿扎胞苷口服维持治疗与不接受维持治疗的医疗利用率和成本:美国索赔数据库研究》。","authors":"Uma Borate, Karen Seiter, Ravi Potluri, Debasish Mazumder, Manoj Chevli, Thomas Prebet, Lona Gaugler, Maria Strocchia, Alberto Vasconcelos, Jan Sieluk","doi":"10.1007/s12325-024-02947-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The substantial economic burden of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) could be reduced with post-remission maintenance therapies that delay relapse. Real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) data and costs among patients with AML receiving oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA) maintenance therapy or no maintenance are not well understood. We characterize HCRU and costs among these patients in clinical practice in the USA.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Data from IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus (January 1, 2016–June 30, 2022) were used. Patients ≥ 18 years who were newly diagnosed with AML, received first-line systemic induction therapy, and attained disease remission were eligible. Patients receiving Oral-AZA maintenance and those receiving no maintenance (“watch and wait” [W&W]) were matched 1:3 on baseline characteristics using propensity score matching (PSM) and followed until hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or end of continuous insurance enrollment, whichever occurred first. Outcomes included treatment patterns, inpatient and outpatient visits, and costs.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>After PSM, the Oral-AZA cohort included 43 patients and the W&W cohort 129. Of the 43 patients receiving Oral-AZA, 88.4% started at the recommended dose of 300 mg and 11.6% at 200 mg. The Oral-AZA cohort had significantly (<i>p</i> = 0.0025) longer median (95% CI) time to relapse from the index maintenance date (median not reached [NR; 9.0 months–NR] vs 3.3 months [0.8 months–NR]), and fewer per person per month (PPPM) hospitalizations (0.23 vs 0.61; <i>p</i> = 0.0005) and overall outpatient visits (5.77 vs 7.58; <i>p</i> = 0.0391) than the W&W cohort. Despite higher AML drug costs PPPM in the Oral-AZA cohort ($16,401 vs $10,651 for W&W), total healthcare costs PPPM were lower ($25,786 vs $38,530 for W&W; <i>p</i> < 0.0001).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with Oral-AZA maintenance in clinical practice had prolonged remission and lower HCRU and costs than patients receiving no maintenance therapy. These findings underscore the clinical and economic value of Oral-AZA in clinical practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":"41 11","pages":"4049 - 4064"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12325-024-02947-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Healthcare Utilization and Costs Among Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Receiving Oral Azacitidine Maintenance Therapy Versus No Maintenance: A US Claims Database Study\",\"authors\":\"Uma Borate, Karen Seiter, Ravi Potluri, Debasish Mazumder, Manoj Chevli, Thomas Prebet, Lona Gaugler, Maria Strocchia, Alberto Vasconcelos, Jan Sieluk\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12325-024-02947-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The substantial economic burden of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) could be reduced with post-remission maintenance therapies that delay relapse. Real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) data and costs among patients with AML receiving oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA) maintenance therapy or no maintenance are not well understood. We characterize HCRU and costs among these patients in clinical practice in the USA.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Data from IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus (January 1, 2016–June 30, 2022) were used. Patients ≥ 18 years who were newly diagnosed with AML, received first-line systemic induction therapy, and attained disease remission were eligible. Patients receiving Oral-AZA maintenance and those receiving no maintenance (“watch and wait” [W&W]) were matched 1:3 on baseline characteristics using propensity score matching (PSM) and followed until hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or end of continuous insurance enrollment, whichever occurred first. Outcomes included treatment patterns, inpatient and outpatient visits, and costs.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>After PSM, the Oral-AZA cohort included 43 patients and the W&W cohort 129. Of the 43 patients receiving Oral-AZA, 88.4% started at the recommended dose of 300 mg and 11.6% at 200 mg. The Oral-AZA cohort had significantly (<i>p</i> = 0.0025) longer median (95% CI) time to relapse from the index maintenance date (median not reached [NR; 9.0 months–NR] vs 3.3 months [0.8 months–NR]), and fewer per person per month (PPPM) hospitalizations (0.23 vs 0.61; <i>p</i> = 0.0005) and overall outpatient visits (5.77 vs 7.58; <i>p</i> = 0.0391) than the W&W cohort. Despite higher AML drug costs PPPM in the Oral-AZA cohort ($16,401 vs $10,651 for W&W), total healthcare costs PPPM were lower ($25,786 vs $38,530 for W&W; <i>p</i> < 0.0001).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with Oral-AZA maintenance in clinical practice had prolonged remission and lower HCRU and costs than patients receiving no maintenance therapy. These findings underscore the clinical and economic value of Oral-AZA in clinical practice.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"volume\":\"41 11\",\"pages\":\"4049 - 4064\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12325-024-02947-1.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-024-02947-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-024-02947-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Healthcare Utilization and Costs Among Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Receiving Oral Azacitidine Maintenance Therapy Versus No Maintenance: A US Claims Database Study
Introduction
The substantial economic burden of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) could be reduced with post-remission maintenance therapies that delay relapse. Real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) data and costs among patients with AML receiving oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA) maintenance therapy or no maintenance are not well understood. We characterize HCRU and costs among these patients in clinical practice in the USA.
Methods
Data from IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus (January 1, 2016–June 30, 2022) were used. Patients ≥ 18 years who were newly diagnosed with AML, received first-line systemic induction therapy, and attained disease remission were eligible. Patients receiving Oral-AZA maintenance and those receiving no maintenance (“watch and wait” [W&W]) were matched 1:3 on baseline characteristics using propensity score matching (PSM) and followed until hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or end of continuous insurance enrollment, whichever occurred first. Outcomes included treatment patterns, inpatient and outpatient visits, and costs.
Results
After PSM, the Oral-AZA cohort included 43 patients and the W&W cohort 129. Of the 43 patients receiving Oral-AZA, 88.4% started at the recommended dose of 300 mg and 11.6% at 200 mg. The Oral-AZA cohort had significantly (p = 0.0025) longer median (95% CI) time to relapse from the index maintenance date (median not reached [NR; 9.0 months–NR] vs 3.3 months [0.8 months–NR]), and fewer per person per month (PPPM) hospitalizations (0.23 vs 0.61; p = 0.0005) and overall outpatient visits (5.77 vs 7.58; p = 0.0391) than the W&W cohort. Despite higher AML drug costs PPPM in the Oral-AZA cohort ($16,401 vs $10,651 for W&W), total healthcare costs PPPM were lower ($25,786 vs $38,530 for W&W; p < 0.0001).
Conclusions
Patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with Oral-AZA maintenance in clinical practice had prolonged remission and lower HCRU and costs than patients receiving no maintenance therapy. These findings underscore the clinical and economic value of Oral-AZA in clinical practice.
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.