Asthma-related Healthcare Costs Research Articles

Asthma-Related Healthcare Resource Use And Costs In Patients With Documented Food Allergies

Asthma is a common comorbidity in patients with food allergy (FA) leading to significant burden on patients. We quantified healthcare resource use (HRU) and medical costs related to asthma in patients with documented FA.

Clinical and economic burden of uncontrolled severe noneosinophilic asthma.

To quantify the clinical and economic burden of patients with severe asthma with low blood eosinophil counts (BECs) untreated with biologics. Retrospective cohort study in IBM MarketScan claims database. Patients 12 years and older with severe asthma with BEC data were selected between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2018 (date of the most recent BEC was used as the index date). Inclusion criteria were (1) presence of BEC laboratory test result, (2) continuous enrollment for 12 months preceding and following the index date, (3) meeting the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set definition of persistent asthma, (4) meeting the Global Initiative for Asthma definition of severe asthma, and (5) an absence of biologic treatment, other respiratory diagnoses, and malignancies 12 months preceding and following the index date. Asthma exacerbations, levels of disease control, and all-cause and asthma-related health care costs were reported during the 12-month postindex period for patients with a BEC less than 300 cells/mcL. The sample included 8073 patients with severe asthma; 78% (n = 6260) presented with a BEC less than 300 cells/mcL. Mean (SD) age of the sample was 54.8 (14.2) years; 64% were female. Eighteen percent of patients had an asthma exacerbation; 19% had either uncontrolled or suboptimally controlled asthma based on the frequency of asthma-related hospital admissions, emergency department visits, or corticosteroid prescription fills. One-year all-cause and asthma-related total health care costs were $25,845 and $2802, respectively. Patients with suboptimally controlled and uncontrolled asthma spent $1471 and $3872 more, respectively, on asthma-related claims compared with patients with controlled asthma. Among patients with severe asthma with low eosinophils untreated with biologics, there is a high burden of disease among those who have suboptimal disease control, highlighting an unmet need in severe asthma treatment.

Impact of adherence to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β-agonists on asthma outcomes in the United States.

Background:Suboptimal adherence to maintenance medication has been associated with poor outcomes in asthma. This study examined single-inhaler inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) adherence and asthma-related outcomes.Methods:This retrospective observational study of patients with asthma initiating ICS/LABA used data from IQVIA PharMetrics Plus (1 January 2014–31 March 2019). Patients included were ⩾18 years old and had ⩾12 months continuous eligibility before, and ⩾180 days follow-up after, the index date. Adherence was measured as proportion of days covered ([PDC] adherent ⩾ 0.8; non-adherent <0.8) each quarter, with outcomes measured each subsequent quarter. Endpoints were asthma-related overall and severe (inpatient/emergency department [ED] visit) exacerbations, rescue medication use, and asthma-related healthcare resource utilization and costs. Regression models evaluated associations between adherence and outcomes, controlling for repeated measures and differences in baseline characteristics.Results:Overall, 50,037 patients were included (mean age 45.3 years; mean follow-up 23.3 months). Adherent patients were less likely to experience asthma-related overall (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.942 [0.890, 0.998]; p = 0.041), or severe exacerbations (aOR [95% CI]: 0.778 [0.691, 0.877]; p < 0.001) per quarter versus non-adherent patients. Adherent patients had lower severe exacerbation rates (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] [95% CI]: 0.792 [0.702, 0.893]; p < 0.001) but similar overall exacerbation rates (aRR [95% CI]: 0.993 [0.945, 1.044]; p = 0.783) versus non-adherent patients. The odds of rescue medication use were lower per 20% PDC increase (aOR [95% CI] short-acting β2 agonist: 0.991 [0.985, 0.996]; p = 0.001; oral corticosteroid: 0.988 [0.982, 0.995]; p < 0.001). Adherent patients were less likely to visit EDs per quarter (aOR [95% CI]: 0.775 [0.680, 0.883]; p < 0.001) and odds of hospitalization were lower per 20% PDC increase (aOR [95% CI]: 0.930 [0.881, 0.982]; p = 0.009). Across most measures, adherent patients incurred lower costs.Conclusion:This real-world study highlights the short-term clinical and economic benefits of ICS/LABA adherence in asthma, particularly in reducing severe exacerbations.

Real-world impact of mepolizumab in patients with life-threatening asthma: US insurance claims database analysis

PurposePatients with life-threatening asthma typically experience recurrent exacerbations, are dependent on oral corticosteroids (OCSs), and have considerable asthma-related health care costs. Data on the impact of mepolizumab on exacerbations and OCS use in patients with life-threatening asthma in real-world clinical practice are limited. This study assessed the impact of mepolizumab on exacerbation rates and OCS use in patients with life-threatening asthma in a real-word setting. MethodsThis retrospective study utilized data from US administrative claims from patients with life-threatening asthma. Eligible patients were treated between November 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017; were ≥12 years of age upon mepolizumab initiation (index date); and had undergone at least two mepolizumab administrations during the 6 months postindex. Data from the 12 months before (baseline) and after (follow-up) index were collected, with each patient serving as his or her own control. Life-threatening asthma was defined as at least three exacerbations and/or at least one asthma-related hospitalization during baseline, and/or a history of endotracheal intubation. Asthma exacerbation frequency and OCS use were assessed. FindingsThe analysis included 327 patients who received a mean (SD) of 10.6 (4.3) mepolizumab doses during follow-up. The percentage of patients experiencing at least one exacerbation and the mean exacerbation rate were significantly reduced from baseline to follow-up with mepolizumab, from 94.5% to 67.9% (P < 0.001), and from 3.2 to 1.5 events per patient per year, corresponding to a 53.1% relative reduction (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients with OCS claims was reduced by 12.6%, from 99.1% to 86.5% (P < 0.001). Of the patients who had a reduction in mean daily OCS use, most (57.9%, 140/242) had a reduction in mean daily OCS use of at least 50%. ImplicationsThese data from patients with life-threatening asthma in clinical practice demonstrated that asthma exacerbation and OCS use were significantly reduced with mepolizumab treatment.

Evaluating the Financial Sustainability of the School-Based Telemedicine Asthma Management Program.

Using telemedicine to improve asthma management in underserved communities has been shown to be highly effective. However, program operating costs are perceived as the main barrier to dissemination and scaling up. This study evaluated whether a novel, evidence-based School-Based Telemedicine Enhanced Asthma Management (SB-TEAM) program, designed to overcome barriers to care for families of urban school-aged children, can be financially sustainable in real-world urban school settings. Eligible children (n = 400) had physician-diagnosed asthma with persistent or poorly controlled symptoms at baseline. Total costs included the cost of implementing and running the SB-TEAM program, asthma-related health care costs, cost of caregiver lost productivity in wages related to child illness, and school absenteeism fees. Using data from the SB-TEAM study and national data on wages and equipment costs, the authors modeled low, actual, and high-cost scenarios. The actual cost of administering the SB-TEAM program averaged $344 per child. Expenses incurred by families for medical care ($982), caregiver productivity cost ($415), and school absenteeism costs ($284) in SB-TEAM were not different from the costs in the control group ($1594, $492, and $318 [P > 0.05]). The study findings remained robust under sensitivity analyses for various state- and school-specific regulations, staffing requirements, and wages. The authors concluded that the SB-TEAM program operating costs may be offset by the reduction in health care costs, caregiver lost wages, and school absenteeism associated with the program health benefit.

Association of step count with PROMIS pediatric health-related quality of life measures in children and adolescents with persistent asthma

Asthma is a common chronic condition that affects approximately 4.7 million US children.1 Poor asthma control accounts for most total asthma-related health care costs.2,3 Differing patient–provider viewpoints of what constitutes asthma control likely contribute to challenges in disease management. For example, clinicians typically use spirometry and frequency of rescue medication use whereas adolescents perceive physical activity limitations as important indicators of asthma control.4 Collecting data that provide insight into how a patient's life is affected by asthma outside the clinic setting is essential to develop sustainable interventions to improve asthma control.

Translational Effect of Provider-Focused, Multi-State, Multi-Clinic Asthma Care Quality Improvement Program on Patient-Level Health Care Costs.

Introduction/Objectives:Enhancing Care for Patients with Asthma (ECPA), a year-long provider-focused, multi-state, multi-clinic quality improvement program, decreased avoidable utilizations among patients with asthma, but its effects on health care expenditures were not determined. This study examined the translational and sustainable effects of improved care through ECPA on individual-level total health care costs due to asthma.Methods:We conducted a retrospective pretest-posttest quasi-experimental study in which attributed 1683 patients in a 12-month pre-ECPA implementation period served as their own control. We constructed the total annual asthma-related health care costs per patient occurred during pre-ECPA implementation, ECPA implementation, and post-ECPA completion. We used 3-level generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) to estimate the ECPA effect on the annual health care costs and account for correlation between the repeated outcome measures for each patient and nested clinic. All costs were adjusted for inflation to 2014 U.S. dollars, the last year of program observation.Results:Total asthma-related health care costs among the 1683 included patients decreased from an average of $7033 to $3237 per person-year (pre-ECPA implementation vs implementation). Using the cost data from the 12-month pre-ECPA implementation period as a reference, GLMMs found that the ECPA implementation was associated with a reduction in total annual asthma-related health care costs by 56.4% (95% CI −60.7%, −51.8%). During the 12-months after ECPA completion period, health care costs were also found to be significantly lower, experiencing a 57.3% reduction.Conclusions:The economic benefits of ECPA provide a justification to adopt this quality improvement initiative to more primary care clinics at a national level.

Characterization and burden of severe eosinophilic asthma in New Zealand: Results from the HealthStat Database.

BackgroundThis retrospective cohort study aimed to characterize epidemiology, medication use and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) of patients diagnosed with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) compared to other patients with asthma in New Zealand.MethodsAdult patients with asthma with no concurrent diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (COPD) were identified from the HealthStat primary care database and the National Minimum Dataset using asthma diagnosis, hospital codes and prescriptions. Patients with SEA were identified using a 1-year baseline period (2011) and were those with: inhaled corticosteroid prescription above medium dose (including high dose) plus controller medication, ≥2 exacerbations, and eosinophils ≥300 cells/μl (or ≥150 in 6 weeks prior to index date); patients were followed for 1 year (2012).Results160/3,276 (4.9%) asthmatics with available eosinophil counts met SEA criteria. Patients with SEA were more likely to be Māori, former smokers, have more comorbidities, higher mean BMI and higher neutrophil counts compared with other patients with asthma. In the follow up period, SEA patients had over 4 times as many exacerbations; incidence of exacerbations of the same frequency was highest in Māori patients.ConclusionsCompared with other patients with asthma, SEA patients had over 1.5 times as many respiratory treatment prescriptions and higher all-cause HCRU and total healthcare costs; asthma-related healthcare costs were 3.6 times greater.

Clinical and Economic Outcomes in Patients with Persistent Asthma Who Attain Healthcare Effectiveness and Data Information Set Measures

Attainment of asthma-specific US Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures may be associated with improved clinical outcomes and reduced economic burden. We examined the relationship between the attainment of HEDIS measures asthma medication ratio (AMR) and medication management for people with asthma (MMA) on clinical and economic outcomes. This retrospective claims database analysis linked to ambulatory electronic medical records enrolled US patients aged ≥5 years with persistent asthma between May 2015 and April 2017. The attainment of AMR ≥0.5 and MMA ≥75% was determined over a 1-year premeasurement period. Asthma exacerbations and asthma-related health care costs were evaluated during the subsequent 12-month measurement period, comparing patients attaining 1 or both measures with those not attaining either. In total, 32,748 patients were included, 75.2% of whom attained AMR (n= 24,388) and/or MMA (n= 12,042) during the premeasurement period. Fewer attainers of 1 or more HEDIS measures had ≥1 asthma-related hospitalizations, emergency department visit, corticosteroid burst, or exacerbation (4.9% vs 7.3%; 9.6% vs 18.2%; 43.8% vs 51.6%; 14.3% vs 23.3%, respectively; all P < .001) compared with nonattainers. In adjusted analyses, HEDIS attainment was associated with a lower likelihood of exacerbations (odds ratio: 0.63, [95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.67]; P < .001). The attainment of ≥1 HEDIS measures lowered total and asthma-related costs, and asthma exacerbation-related health care costs per patient relative to nonattainers (cost ratio: 0.87, P < .001; 0.96, P= .02; and 0.59, P < .001, respectively). Overall and asthma-specific costs were lower for patients attaining AMR, but not MMA. HEDIS attainment was associated withsignificantly improved asthma outcomes and lower asthma-specific costs.

Direct costs of overdiagnosed asthma: a longitudinal, population-based cohort study in British Columbia, Canada

ObjectivesA current diagnosis of asthma cannot be objectively confirmed in many patients with physician-diagnosed asthma. Estimates of resource use in overdiagnosed cases of asthma are necessary to measure the burden...

Comparative effectiveness of budesonide inhalation suspension and montelukast in children with mild asthma in Korea

Objective: The comparative effectiveness of low-dose budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) versus oral montelukast (MON) in managing asthma control among children with mild asthma was assessed in Korea.Methods: Claims from Korea’s national health insurance database for children (2–17 years) with mild asthma (GINA 1 or 2) who initiated BIS or MON during 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Pre- and post-index windows were 1 year each. Adherence, persistency, asthma control, asthma-related health-care resource utilization, and costs were evaluated using unadjusted descriptive statistics and propensity score-matched regression analyses.Results: The number of children identified was 26,052 for unmatched (n = 1,221 BIS; n = 24,831 MON) and 2,290 for matched populations (n = 1,145 per cohort). Medication adherence, measured by proportion of days covered, was low for both cohorts but significantly higher for MON versus BIS (13.8% vs. 4.5%; p < .001). Time to loss of persistency was longer for MON versus BIS (82.3 vs. 78.4 days, respectively; p < .001). Mean number of post-index asthma-related office visits was 6.6 for BIS versus 8.3 for MON (p < .001). However, a greater proportion of patients in the BIS cohort had an asthma exacerbation-related office visit than the MON cohort (78.3% vs. 56.1%; p < .001). Asthma-related total health-care costs were higher with MON versus BIS (₩ 190,185 vs. ₩ 167,432, respectively; p < .001), likely driven by higher pharmaceutical costs associated with MON (₩ 69,113 vs. ₩ 49,225; p < .001).Conclusions: Montelukast patients had better adherence, a longer time to loss of persistency, and were less likely to experience an exacerbation-related office visit in the post-index period than BIS patients.

Disease burden in patients with asthma before initiating biologics: A retrospective cohort database study.

Background: Real-world data on the characteristics and burden of disease among patients with asthma before receiving asthma-specific biologics would improve the understanding of the use of these therapies in a clinical setting. Currently, limited data are available on the use of mepolizumab and omalizumab for the treatment of asthma. Objective: To determine the characteristics and disease burden among patients with asthma before initiating treatment with mepolizumab or omalizumab. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of commercial and Medicare Advantage Plan members from a medical claims database with a new claim for mepolizumab or omalizumab between January 1, 2015, and March 31, 2017 (GSK ID: HO-17-18283). Eligible patients had a diagnosis of asthma and continuous enrollment in the health plan, with clinical and pharmacy benefits for 12 months before initiating asthma-specific biologic treatment (baseline period), and no diagnosis of chronic idiopathic urticaria during the baseline period. Patient characteristics, exacerbations, and asthma-related health care resource utilization and costs were assessed during the baseline period. Results: Overall, 188 and 901 patients prescribed mepolizumab and omalizumab, respectively, were included. In the 12 months before initiating asthma-specific biologic therapy, the patients prescribed mepolizumab were older, had higher blood eosinophil counts, more-frequent exacerbations (2.9 versus 2.0 exacerbations/year; p < 0.001), and more inhaled corticosteroid and systemic corticosteroid use compared with those prescribed omalizumab. Overall, asthma-related health-care resource utilization and costs were similar across both treatment cohorts, although patients prescribed mepolizumab had more pharmacy fills, higher pharmacy costs, and lower clinic costs compared with patients prescribed omalizumab (20.8 versus 16.9 fills, $4504 versus $3102, and $1816 versus $2709, respectively; all p < 0.001). Conclusion: In the 12 months before initiating asthma-specific biologic therapy, the patients prescribed mepolizumab may have a greater disease burden than those prescribed omalizumab. Overall, health-care resource utilization and costs were broadly similar across both treatment cohorts.

The prevalence and disease burden of severe eosinophilic asthma in Japan

Background: There are limited data on the prevalence and burden of severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) both in Japan and globally. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and burden of SEA in Japan. Methods: This study was a retrospective, observational cohort analysis using health records or health insurance claims from patients with severe asthma treated at Kyoto University Hospital. The primary outcome was the prevalence of SEA, defined as a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/μL. Secondary outcomes included frequency and risk factors of asthma exacerbations, and asthma-related healthcare resource utilization and costs. Results: Overall, 217 patients with severe asthma were included; 160 (74%) had eosinophil assessments. Of these, 97cases (61%), 54cases (34%), and 33cases (21%) had a blood eosinophil count ≥150, ≥300, and ≥500 cells/μL, respectively. Proportion of SEA was 34%. Blood eosinophil count was not associated with a significantly increased frequency of exacerbations. In the eosinophilic group, lower % forced expiratory volume in 1 second and higher fractional exhaled nitric oxide were predictive risk factors, while the existence of exacerbation history was a predictive risk factor for asthma exacerbations in the non-eosinophilic group. Severe asthma management cost was estimated as ¥357,958/patient-year, and asthma exacerbations as ¥26,124/patient-year. Conclusions: Approximately, one-third of patients with severe asthma in Japan have SEA. While risk factors for exacerbations differed between SEA and severe non-eosinophilic asthma, both subgroups were associated with substantial disease and economic burden. From subgroup analysis, blood eosinophil counts could be an important consideration in severe asthma management.

Real-world characteristics and disease burden of patients with asthma prior to treatment initiation with mepolizumab or omalizumab: a retrospective cohort database study.

PurposePatients with severe asthma are eligible for asthma-specific biologics as add-on therapies, such as mepolizumab and omalizumab, when optimized controller therapies are unable to control their symptoms. However, few real-world data are available to describe the characteristics and associated economic burden of patients considered to be candidates for mepolizumab or omalizumab therapy.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study investigated patients with asthma (≥12 years of age) identified at the time of first mepolizumab or omalizumab administration (index date) in the MarketScan™ Commercial Database. Data were collected during the 12-month period before the index date (baseline period) for two mutually exclusive patient groups (patients prescribed mepolizumab and omalizumab, respectively). Baseline demographics, history of exacerbations, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and medical costs were investigated.ResultsIn total, 413 and 1,834 patients who had been prescribed mepolizumab or omalizumab, respectively, were identified. During the baseline period, patients prescribed mepolizumab experienced more exacerbations (81.4% vs 57.5%, P<0.001), had higher asthma-related HCRU for outpatient services (all P<0.01), and had higher total asthma-related healthcare costs (US$11,000 vs US$7,400, P<0.001) compared with patients prescribed omalizumab. Allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, and chronic idiopathic urticaria were more common among patients prescribed omalizumab vs mepolizumab. In contrast, sinusitis, nasal polyps, and comorbid COPD were more common among patients prescribed mepolizumab vs omalizumab. Prescriptions of fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) and ICS/LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonist triple therapy during the baseline period were higher among patients prescribed mepolizumab vs omalizumab (80.4% vs 56.8% and 27.1% vs 14.4%, respectively, both P<0.001).ConclusionIn the 12 months prior to initiation of asthma-specific biologics, patients prescribed mepolizumab had a different prevalence of certain comorbidities, higher disease burden, higher HCRU, and higher healthcare costs compared with patients prescribed omalizumab.

HE1 - Effect of a Provider-Focused Asthma Care Quality Improvement Program on Patient-Level Asthma-Related Health Care Costs

Enhancing Care for Patients with Asthma (ECPA) is a real-world quality improvement program that has been executed in health centers that serve patients with asthma in Illinois, New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma. The ECPA focused on furnishing asthma guidelines-based processes as a structural quality improvement approach. While the ECPA has been implemented in these states since 2013, the translational and sustainable effect on reducing patient-level health care costs is unknown. The study objective was to examine the effect of this multi-state, multi-center quality improvement program on individual-level asthma-related health care costs. This study employed a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design and utilized administrative claims data from a private insurer providing coverage to patients receiving asthma care from participating health centers. Patients were attributed to a health center if they had at least one asthma claim in a participating center during the 12-month pre-implementation and 12-month active implementation periods. Asthma-related total annual health care costs per patient were determined during pre-implementation, implementation, and post-program completion. Three-level generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) with lognormal distribution estimated the ECPA effect on annual health care costs and accounted for correlation of repeated outcome measures of each patient and nested health centers. All costs were inflated to constant U.S. dollars. 1,696 patients with asthma were attributed to participating health centers. Asthma-related total annual health care costs decreased from $11,914,326 during 12-month pre-implementation period to $5,544,536 during 12-month implementation period (53.5% cost reduction). GLMMs results found ECPA implementation was associated with a 56.5% reduction in total health care costs (95% CI -60.71%, -51.87%; p-value<.0001); post-program completion was associated with a 57.4% reduction (95% CI -61.83%, -52.44%; p-value<.0001). Asthma quality improvement efforts at the health center level are associated with sustainable reductions in asthma-related ER and total health care costs measured at the patient level.

An algorithmic approach for the treatment of severe uncontrolled asthma.

A small subgroup of patients with asthma suffers from severe disease that is either partially controlled or uncontrolled despite intensive, guideline-based treatment. These patients have significantly impaired quality of life and although they constitute <5% of all asthma patients, they are responsible for more than half of asthma-related healthcare costs. Here, we review a definition for severe asthma and present all therapeutic options currently available for these severe asthma patients. Moreover, we suggest a specific algorithmic treatment approach for the management of severe, difficult-to-treat asthma based on specific phenotype characteristics and biomarkers. The diagnosis and management of severe asthma requires specialised experience, time and effort to comprehend the needs and expectations of each individual patient and incorporate those as well as his/her specific phenotype characteristics into the management planning. Although some new treatment options are currently available for these patients, there is still a need for further research into severe asthma and yet more treatment options.

Cost-Effectiveness of Asthma Step-Up Therapy as an Increased Dose of Extrafine-Particle Inhaled Corticosteroid or Add-On Long-Acting Beta2-Agonist

Data from different healthcare systems on relative cost-effectiveness of asthma step-up therapy strategies are required to inform decision-makers and clinicians. Our objective was to compare cost-effectiveness from the United Kingdom National Health Service perspective of three step-up strategies for patients with asthma uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) monotherapy. This was a historical matched cohort cost-effectiveness analysis of anonymized medical records for patients with asthma of age 12–80 years. We conducted two-way comparisons of step-up therapy using increased dose (≥50%) of extrafine-particle ICS or add-on long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) via fixed-dose combination (FDC) ICS/LABA inhaler or via separate inhaler. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated using asthma-related direct costs during one outcome year and a composite measure of risk-domain asthma control (no asthma-related hospital attendance, acute oral corticosteroids, or consultation for lower respiratory tract infection). Patients prescribed ICS dose step-up (n = 3036) had significantly lower baseline-adjusted, mean asthma-related healthcare costs during the outcome year than those prescribed FDC ICS/LABA (n = 3036; mean difference, £124/year). ICS dose step-up had 56% probability of being less costly and marginally less effective (a trade-off), with ICER of £51,449 per additional patient controlled with FDC; and ICS dose step-up had 44% probability of being the preferred treatment strategy (less costly and more effective). In a second comparison, ICS step-up (n = 3232) had 100% probability of being cheaper and more effective than adding LABA to ICS via separate inhalers (n = 6464). For asthma step-up therapy, increasing ICS dose using extrafine-particle ICS is significantly less costly from the payer perspective and marginally (non-significantly) less effective than FDC ICS/LABA therapy containing standard fine-particle ICS. These findings apply primarily to the UK healthcare system but warrant consideration when developing guidelines in settings with strong economic constraints. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01697722. Teva Pharmaceuticals Limited, Petach Tikva, Israel.

Impact of comorbid depression on medication adherence and asthma-related healthcare costs in Texas Medicaid patients with asthma

AbstractObjectivesTo compare: (1) rates of adherence to asthma controllers (ACs) between patients with asthma alone (A) and patients with asthma and comorbid depression (A + D); (2) rates of adherence to AC between patients who adhere to antidepressants and patients who do not adhere to antidepressants; and (3) asthma-related healthcare costs between the A and A + D groups.MethodsTexas Medicaid insurance claims from 1 January 2007 to 31 October 2011 were extracted for adults (18–63 years) diagnosed with asthma with at least two fills of the same AC (inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta agonists, fixed-dose combinations (FDC) and leukotriene modifiers) in the A group, and at least two antidepressant claims in the A + D group. Proportion of days covered (PDC) was used to assess adherence to antidepressants and AC, while controlling for demographics, chronic disease score (CDS) and AC therapy type (monotherapy, FDC, dual therapy). Asthma-related healthcare costs included asthma-related prescriptions, inpatient and outpatient costs. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon test and regression analyses were used.Key findingsThe patients (n = 3626) were 40.1 ± 14.0 years, primarily women (75.0%), Caucasians (37.3%), FDC therapy users (56.3%), with CDS = 0 (74.2%). Results showed that compared to the A group (n = 3400), patients in the A + D group (n = 226) were 1.6 times more likely to adhere (PDC ≥50%) to their AC (odds ratio (OR) = 1.596; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.198–2.128; P &amp;lt; 0.001). Compared to patients who do not adhere to antidepressants (PDC &amp;lt; 80%) (n = 140), patients who adhered to antidepressants (PDC ≥80%) (n = 86) were 2.5 times more likely to adhere (PDC ≥50%) to AC, while controlling for covariates (OR = 2.517; 95% CI = 1.304–4.855; P = 0.006). After controlling for covariates, compared to the A group, the A + D disorder group had significantly lower total asthma-related healthcare costs (P &amp;lt; 0.001).ConclusionsIn the A + D group, the higher costs of asthma-related prescriptions was offset by the lower costs of inpatient and outpatient claims. Patients in the A + D group should be encouraged to adhere to both their ACs and antidepressants.

Switching patients from other inhaled corticosteroid devices to the Easyhaler(®): historical, matched-cohort study of real-life asthma patients.

PurposeTo investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of switching real-life asthma patients from other types of inhalers to the Easyhaler® (EH) for the administration of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).Patients and methodsHistorical, matched-cohort study of 1,958 asthma patients (children and adults) treated in UK primary-care practices, using data obtained from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database and Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Other inhalers (OH) included pressurized metered-dose inhalers, breath-actuated inhalers, and dry-powder inhalers, delivering beclomethasone, budesonide, fluticasone, or ciclesonide. Patients remaining on OH unchanged (same drug, dosage, and device; n=979) were matched 1:1 with those switched to the EH (beclomethasone or budesonide) at the same or lower ICS dosage (n=979), based on age, sex, year of index patient review/switch, most recent ICS drug, dosage, and device, and the number of severe exacerbations and average daily short-acting β2 agonist (SABA) dosage in the preceding year. Clinical outcomes and health care costs were compared between groups for 12 months before and after the switch. Co-primary clinical outcomes were: 1) risk domain asthma control (RDAC) – no asthma-related hospitalization, acute oral steroid use, or lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI); 2) exacerbation rate (American Thoracic Society [ATS] definition) – where exacerbation is asthma-related hospitalization or acute oral steroid use; 3) exacerbation rate (clinical definition) – where exacerbation is ATS exacerbation or LRTI; and 4) overall asthma control (OAC) – RDAC plus average salbutamol-equivalent SABA dosage ≤200 μg/day. Non-inferiority (at least equivalence) of EH was tested against OH for the four co-primary outcomes in order (hierarchical approach) by comparing the difference in proportions of patients [EH-OH] achieving asthma control or having no exacerbations in the outcome year, using a limit of 10% difference.ResultsNon-inferiority was shown for the EH for all four co-primary outcomes. There were no significant differences between groups for RDAC or exacerbation rates, but EH patients were significantly more likely to achieve OAC (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.26 [1.05, 1.52]), as significantly more EH than OH patients had an average SABA dosage of ≤200 μg/day (52% versus 47%, respectively; P<0.001). Mean asthma-related health care costs increased from baseline to outcome years in both groups, but SABA costs increased significantly more in OH than EH patients (mean difference £5.5/patient/year) and consultation costs decreased significantly more in EH than OH patients (mean difference £13.5/patient/year).ConclusionTypical asthma patients may be switched from other ICS devices to the Easyhaler® with no reduction in clinical effectiveness or increase in cost.

Health-care utilization and costs with fluticasone propionate and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in asthma patients at risk for exacerbations

Although studies have established that adding long-acting beta agonists (LABA) to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) monotherapy among patients with inadequately controlled asthma is associated with better outcomes than increasing ICS dosage, outcomes with ICS versus fixed-dose ICS/LABA combination among patients with recent asthma exacerbation or frequent use of rescue medication are unavailable. This study was designed to compare health-care utilization/costs among patients with recent asthma exacerbation or frequent rescue medication use who received fluticasone propionate (FP) alone versus fixed-dose FP/salmeterol combination (FSC). A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a large health insurance data set. Patients with one or more claims with asthma diagnosis, two or more prescriptions for FSC (250/50- or 100/50-mg formulations) or FP (220- or 110-mg formulations), and one or more asthma exacerbations or five or more short-acting beta agonist (SABA) prescriptions within 1 year before initial receipt of study medications were included. Health-care utilization/costs and controller therapy compliance were compared for patients receiving FSC versus FP using multivariate regression analysis controlling for FP dose and baseline characteristics. A total of 7779 patients met inclusion criteria (5769, FSC, and 2010, FP) with comparable mean follow-up (FSC, 685 days; FP, 670 days; p = 0.151). Controlling for FP dosage and baseline characteristics, FSC patients had lower risks of asthma-related exacerbations, fewer SABAs and systemic corticosteroids, higher costs of asthma medications and total asthma-related health care, and lower total asthma-related health-care costs excluding study medication cost. In asthma patients with recent exacerbation or frequent SABA use, receipt of FSC reduced asthma-related exacerbation risks and rescue medication use versus receipt of FP.