PSY29 ECONOMIC BURDEN OF ALOPECIA AREATA IN A US MANAGED CARE POPULATION

Abstract

Alopecia areata (AA) has high humanistic burden and no FDA-approved treatments exist. There is limited information in the current literature regarding economic burden of AA. This study assessed the all cause direct medical costs of AA patients compared to non-AA matched controls. A retrospective claims analysis was performed using the PharMetrics Plus database. Patients with 1+ medical claim with a diagnosis of AA (ICD10 L63.*) at any time during 2016 were included (first claim = index). AA patients were matched with non-AA patients based on age, sex, geographic region, and payor employing a 1:3 ratio. All cause 12-month post-index costs were calculated for patients with at least 12-months continuous enrollment pre/post-index. AA patients were stratified by extent of disease based on diagnosis (i.e. alopecia totalis or alopecia universalis [AT L63.0/AU L63.1] vs. other alopecia areata [AA only]). The study included 17,006 AA patients and 51,003 controls. Among AA patients and controls, mean (SD) age was 40.6 (14.8), 64.8% were female, and 95.0% were commercially insured. Total mean (SD) 12-month all-cause costs for AA patients were higher compared to controls [$8,853 ($24,716) vs. $5,548 ($19,456), p<0.0001). Higher mean (SD) costs among AA patients were driven primarily by differences in ambulatory [$4,138 ($13,177) vs.$2,266 ($9,245); p<0.0001] and pharmacy [$2,422 ($10,428) vs. $1,372 ($6,560); p<0.0001] costs. Among AA patients, the 8.7% (1,482/17,006) patients with AT/AU had higher mean (SD) costs compared to patients with AA only [$12,654 ($30,254) vs. $8,490 ($24,091); p<0.0001]. This study demonstrates AA imposes an increased economic burden in the US managed care population. Among AA patients, those with AT/AU forms have significantly higher costs compared to AA only. Further research is required to investigate cost differences when further adjusted by patient characteristics.