PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / PubMed Indexed Publications Collection
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11779/1928
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Article Citation - WoS: 7Citation - Scopus: 8The Use of Decomposition Methods in Real-World Treatment Benefits Evaluation for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Initiating Different Injectable Therapies: Findings From the Initiator Study(Elsevier Science Inc, 2017-12-01) Ke, Xuehua; Buysman, Erin; Wei, Wenhui; Xie, Lin; Grabner, Michael; Brekke, Lee; Başer, OnurBackground: Determining characteristics of patients likely to benefit from a particular treatment could help physicians set personalized targets. OBJECTIVES: To use decomposition methodology on real-world data to identify the relative contributions of treatment effects and patients' baseline characteristics. METHODS: Decomposition analyses were performed on data from the Initiation of New Injectable Treatment Introduced after Antidiabetic Therapy with Oral-only Regimens (INITIATOR) study, a real-world study of patients with type 2 diabetes started on insulin glargine (GLA) or liraglutide (LIRA). These analyses investigated relative contributions of differences in baseline characteristics and treatment effects to observed differences in 1-year outcomes for reduction in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and treatment persistence. RESULTS: The greater HbA1c reduction seen with GLA compared with LIRA (-1.39% vs. -0.74%) was primarily due to differences in baseline characteristics (HbA1c and endocrinologist as prescribing physician; P < 0.050). Patients with baseline HbA1c of 9.0% or more or evidence of diagnosis codes related to mental illness achieved greater HbA1c reductions with GLA, whereas patients with baseline polypharmacy (6-10 classes) or hypogylcemia achieved greater reductions with LIRA. Decomposition analyses also showed that the higher persistence seen with GLA (65% vs. 49%) was mainly caused by differences in treatment effects (P < 0.001). Patients 65 years and older, those with HbA1c of 9.0% or more, those taking three oral antidiabetes drugs, and those with polypharmacy of more than 10 classes had higher persistence with GLA; patients 18 to 39 years and those with HbA1c of 7.0% to less than 8.0% had higher persistence with LIRA. CONCLUSIONS: Although decomposition does not demonstrate causal relationships, this method could be useful for examining the source of differences in outcomes between treatments in a real-world setting and could help physicians identify patients likely to respond to a particular treatment. Copyright (C) 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Article Citation - WoS: 25Citation - Scopus: 25Impact of Switching From an Initial Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor on Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis(Elsevier, 2015-07-01) Roy, Sanjoy; Ganguli, Arijit; Xie, Lin; Başer, Onur; Cifaldi, MaryPurpose: Despite improved clinical outcomes for the majority of patients, nearly 30% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who initiate tumor necrosis factor antagonist (anti-TNF) biologic agents fail to respond to their first-line anti-TNF and switch to another anti-TNF or a non-TNF biologic. How this change affects health care costs and resource utilization is unknown. We therefore compared RA patients taking first-line anti-TNFs who switched to a second anti-TNF versus those patients who switched to an alternate biologic. Methods: Health care claims data were obtained from a large US database for eligible adults with confirmed RA diagnoses who initiated anti-TNF treatment and switched to another biologic. Health care costs and utilization during the first 12 months' postswitch were compared. Generalized linear models were used to adjust for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics before switching. Findings: Patients who switched to a second anti-TNF rather than a non-TNF biologic were generally younger (53.0 vs. 55.3 years; P < 0.0001) and less likely to be female (79.7% vs. 82.7%; P = 0.0490). Of the 3497 eligible patients who switched from first-line anti-TNFs, 2563 (73.3%) switched to another anti-TNF and 934 (26.7%) switched to a non-TNF. Adalimumab was the most frequently prescribed (43.4%) second-line anti-TNF, and abatacept was the most common non anti-TNF (71.4%). Patients who switched to a second anti-TNF remained on their first medication for a significantly shorter period (342.5 vs 420.6 days; P < 0.0001) and had lower comorbidity indices and higher disease severity at baseline than those who switched to a non anti-TNF. After adjusting for baseline differences, patients who switched to second anti-TNFs versus a non-TNF incurred lower RA-related costs ($20,938.9 vs $22,645.2; P = 0.0010) and total health care costs ($34,894.6 vs $38,437.2; P = 0.0010) 1 year postswitch. These differences were driven by increased physician office visit costs among the non-TNF group. Implications: Among the anti-TNF initiators who switched therapy, more patients switched to a second anti-TNF than to a non-TNF. Switching to a second anti-TNF treatment was associated with lower all-cause and RA-related health care costs and resource utilization than switching to a non-TNF. Because switching therapy may be unavoidable, finding a treatment algorithm mitigating this increase to any extent should be considered. These data are limited by their retrospective design. Additional confounding variables that could not be controlled for may affect results. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier HS journals, Inc.