AstraZeneca, Wilmington, Deleware.
Truven Health Analytics, An IBM Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018 Mar;20(3):672-680. doi: 10.1111/dom.13145. Epub 2017 Nov 26.
To compare healthcare utilization and costs between patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with exenatide (Bydureon) once weekly (EQW) and patients treated with insulin glargine (IG).
Using the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult US patients with claim with a diagnosis of T2D, initiating EQW or IG from February 1, 2012 to June 30, 2014 (first claim = index date). All-cause and diabetes-related utilization and costs were measured during the 12 months after the index date. EQW patients were matched 1:1 to IG patients, using propensity scores. Logistic and ordinary least-squares regression models were fit to model differences between the matched cohorts.
There were 7749 EQW patients matched to 7749 IG patients. EQW patients had significantly (P < .05) lower odds of all-cause inpatient (IP) admissions (odds ratio = 0.737 [95% confidence interval, 0.661, 0.822]), diabetes-related IP admissions (0.720 [95% confidence interval, 0.635, 0.815]) and diabetes-related IP admissions or emergency room visits (0.778 [95% confidence interval, 0.713, 0.847]). EQW patients had significantly (P < .05) lower all-cause (cost difference = -113 USD [95% confidence interval, -120 USD, -106 USD]) and diabetes-related (-806 USD [95% confidence interval, -871 USD, -746 USD]) medical costs, and had significantly (P < .05) higher all-cause total costs (ie, medical plus pharmacy) (3228 USD [95% confidence interval, 3110 USD, 3367 USD]), diabetes-related total costs (1951 USD [95% confidence interval, 1873 USD, 2036 USD]), all-cause pharmacy costs (2792 USD [95% confidence interval, 2700 USD, 2928 USD]) and diabetes-related pharmacy costs (1923 USD [95% confidence interval, 1890 USD, 1957 USD]) than those of IG patients.
Among adults with T2D, EQW initiators had lower odds of IP admission and lower medical costs in the 12 months after initiation than IG initiators. Higher total costs in EQW patients were driven by greater pharmacy costs.
比较每周一次接受艾塞那肽(百泌达)治疗和接受甘精胰岛素治疗的 2 型糖尿病(T2D)患者的医疗保健利用情况和成本。
利用 MarketScan 商业和医疗保险补充数据库,我们对 2012 年 2 月 1 日至 2014 年 6 月 30 日期间有 T2D 诊断记录、开始接受艾塞那肽或甘精胰岛素治疗的美国成年患者进行了回顾性队列研究(首次索赔=索引日期)。在索引日期后的 12 个月内,测量了所有原因和糖尿病相关的使用情况和成本。使用倾向得分对艾塞那肽患者进行了 1:1 匹配,以匹配甘精胰岛素患者。使用逻辑回归和最小二乘回归模型对匹配队列之间的差异进行建模。
有 7749 名艾塞那肽患者与 7749 名甘精胰岛素患者相匹配。与甘精胰岛素组相比,艾塞那肽组患者的全因住院(IP)入院(优势比=0.737 [95%置信区间,0.661,0.822])、糖尿病相关 IP 入院(0.720 [95%置信区间,0.635,0.815])和糖尿病相关 IP 入院或急诊就诊(0.778 [95%置信区间,0.713,0.847])的可能性显著降低(P<0.05)。与甘精胰岛素组相比,艾塞那肽组患者的全因(成本差异=-113 美元[95%置信区间,-120 美元,-106 美元])和糖尿病相关(-806 美元[95%置信区间,-871 美元,-746 美元])医疗费用显著降低,全因总费用(即医疗和药房费用)(3228 美元[95%置信区间,3110 美元,3367 美元])、糖尿病相关总费用(1951 美元[95%置信区间,1873 美元,2036 美元])、全因药房费用(2792 美元[95%置信区间,2700 美元,2928 美元])和糖尿病相关药房费用(1923 美元[95%置信区间,1890 美元,1957 美元])显著增加(P<0.05)。
在患有 T2D 的成年人中,与甘精胰岛素相比,艾塞那肽组患者在起始后 12 个月内 IP 入院的几率较低,医疗成本也较低。艾塞那肽患者的总费用较高,主要是由于药房费用较高。