TY - JOUR
T1 - A real-world study comparing pre-post billed annualized bleed rates and total cost of care among non-inhibitor patients with hemophilia A switching from FVIII prophylaxis to emicizumab
AU - Batt, Katharine
AU - Schultz, Bob G.
AU - Caicedo, Jorge
AU - Hollenbeak, Christopher S.
AU - Agrawal, Neha
AU - Chatterjee, Sagnik
AU - Bullano, Michael
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Objective: Factor VIII (FVIII) replacement and emicizumab have demonstrated efficacy for prevention of bleeds among patients with hemophilia A (PwHA) compared to on-demand (OD) use. Evidence investigating clinical outcomes and healthcare costs of non-inhibitor PwHA switching from prophylaxis with FVIII concentrates to emicizumab has not been well-established within large real-world datasets. This study aimed to investigate billed annualized bleed rates (ABRb) and total cost of care (TCC) among non-inhibitor PwHA switching from FVIII-prophylaxis to emicizumab-prophylaxis. Methods: This retrospective, observational study was conducted using IQVIA PharMetrics Plus, a US administrative claims database. The date of first claim for emicizumab was defined as the index date. OD patients and inhibitor patients were excluded. Bleeds were identified using a list of 535 diagnosis codes. Bayesian models were developed to estimate the probability ABRb worsens and TCC increases after switching to emicizumab. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to test statistical significance of changes in ABRb and TCC after switch. Results: Among the 121 identified patients, the difference in mean ABRb between FVIII-prophylaxis (0.68 [SD = 1.28]) and emicizumab (0.55 [SD = 1.48]) was insignificant (p =.142). The mean annual TCC significantly increased for patients switching from FVIII-prophylaxis ($518,151 [SD = $289,934]) to emicizumab ($652,679 [SD = $340,126]; p <.0001). The Bayesian models estimated a 21.0% probability of the ABRb worsening and a 99.9% probability of increasing TCC after switch. Conclusions: This study found that in male non-inhibitor PwHA, switching from FVIII prophylaxis to emicizumab incurs substantial cost increase with no significant benefit in ABRb. This evidence may help guide providers, payers, and patients in shared decision-making conversations around best treatment options.
AB - Objective: Factor VIII (FVIII) replacement and emicizumab have demonstrated efficacy for prevention of bleeds among patients with hemophilia A (PwHA) compared to on-demand (OD) use. Evidence investigating clinical outcomes and healthcare costs of non-inhibitor PwHA switching from prophylaxis with FVIII concentrates to emicizumab has not been well-established within large real-world datasets. This study aimed to investigate billed annualized bleed rates (ABRb) and total cost of care (TCC) among non-inhibitor PwHA switching from FVIII-prophylaxis to emicizumab-prophylaxis. Methods: This retrospective, observational study was conducted using IQVIA PharMetrics Plus, a US administrative claims database. The date of first claim for emicizumab was defined as the index date. OD patients and inhibitor patients were excluded. Bleeds were identified using a list of 535 diagnosis codes. Bayesian models were developed to estimate the probability ABRb worsens and TCC increases after switching to emicizumab. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to test statistical significance of changes in ABRb and TCC after switch. Results: Among the 121 identified patients, the difference in mean ABRb between FVIII-prophylaxis (0.68 [SD = 1.28]) and emicizumab (0.55 [SD = 1.48]) was insignificant (p =.142). The mean annual TCC significantly increased for patients switching from FVIII-prophylaxis ($518,151 [SD = $289,934]) to emicizumab ($652,679 [SD = $340,126]; p <.0001). The Bayesian models estimated a 21.0% probability of the ABRb worsening and a 99.9% probability of increasing TCC after switch. Conclusions: This study found that in male non-inhibitor PwHA, switching from FVIII prophylaxis to emicizumab incurs substantial cost increase with no significant benefit in ABRb. This evidence may help guide providers, payers, and patients in shared decision-making conversations around best treatment options.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85135536088&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85135536088&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/03007995.2022.2105072
DO - 10.1080/03007995.2022.2105072
M3 - Article
C2 - 35880468
AN - SCOPUS:85135536088
SN - 0300-7995
VL - 38
SP - 1685
EP - 1693
JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion
JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion
IS - 10
ER -