VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, and Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle.
Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Aug;27(8):1056-1066. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.8.1056.
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an alternative to warfarin for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Evidence demonstrating the efficacy and safety of DOACs has primarily been from clinical trial settings. The real-world effectiveness of DOACs in specific nontrial populations that differ in age, comorbidity burden, and socioeconomic status is unclear. To compare total downstream medical expenditure between AF patients treated with warfarin and DOACs dually enrolled in the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System and fee-for-service Medicare. This was an exploratory treatment effectiveness study that analyzed VA administrative data and Medicare claims. We examined patients with an incident diagnosis for AF and initiated warfarin or DOAC treatment between 2012 and 2015. The primary outcome was total medical expenditure over 3 years following treatment initiation. To address potential informative censoring, we applied a multipart estimator that extends traditional 2-part models to separate differences between groups due to survival and cost accumulation effects. Inverse probability weighting was applied to address potential treatment selection bias. We identified 31,276 and 17,021 patients receiving warfarin and DOACs, respectively. Mean unadjusted (SD) expenditure was higher for warfarin ($56,265 [$96,666]) compared with DOAC patients ($32,736 [$52,470]). Compared with patients receiving DOACs, adjusted 3-year expenditure was $25,688 ( < 0.001) higher for patients receiving warfarin. VA patients with AF initiating warfarin incurred markedly higher downstream expenditure compared with similar patients receiving DOACs. The benefits of DOACs found in previous clinical trials were present in this population, suggesting that these DOACs may be the preferred option for treatment of AF in older VA patients. This study was funded by a VA Health Services Research and Development Investigator Initiated Research Award (IIR 15-139). Support for VA/CMS data was provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Research and Development, Health Services Research and Development, VA Information Resource Center (Project Numbers SDR 02-237 and 98-004). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the University of Washington, Northeastern University, and Boston University. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. This research includes data obtained from the VHA Office of Performance Measurement (17API2), which resides within the Office of Analytics and Performance Integration (API), under the Office of Quality and Patient Safety (QPS; formerly known as RAPID). An oral presentation documenting a subset of the findings from this study was presented at the 2020 AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting, delivered virtually on July 29, 2020.
直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC)是治疗心房颤动(AF)的华法林替代疗法。证明 DOAC 有效性和安全性的证据主要来自临床试验环境。在年龄、合并症负担和社会经济地位不同的特定非试验人群中,DOAC 的真实世界效果尚不清楚。
比较同时参加退伍军人事务部(VA)医疗保健系统和按服务收费医疗保险的 AF 患者使用华法林和 DOAC 治疗的总下游医疗支出。这是一项探索性的治疗效果研究,分析了 VA 行政数据和医疗保险索赔。我们检查了在 2012 年至 2015 年期间有 AF 首发诊断并开始使用华法林或 DOAC 治疗的患者。主要结局是治疗开始后 3 年内的总医疗支出。为了解决潜在的信息性删失问题,我们应用了多部分估计器,该估计器将传统的两部分模型扩展到由于生存和成本积累效应而导致的组间差异。应用逆概率加权来解决潜在的治疗选择偏倚。
我们确定了 31276 名和 17021 名分别接受华法林和 DOAC 治疗的患者。未经调整的平均(SD)支出华法林组($56265 [$96666])高于 DOAC 组($32736 [$52470])。与接受 DOAC 的患者相比,接受华法林治疗的患者调整后的 3 年支出高$25688(<0.001)。
与接受 DOAC 治疗的患者相比,启动华法林治疗的 AF 退伍军人患者的下游支出明显更高。在这一人群中发现了 DOAC 先前临床试验的益处,这表明这些 DOAC 可能是老年 VA 患者 AF 治疗的首选方案。
本研究由 VA 医疗服务研究与发展调查员发起的研究奖(IIR 15-139)资助。VA/CMS 数据的支持由退伍军人事务部、退伍军人健康管理局、研究与发展办公室、医疗服务研究与发展、VA 信息资源中心(项目编号 SDR 02-237 和 98-004)提供。资助者在研究设计、数据收集和分析、出版决定或手稿准备方面没有任何作用。本文观点仅代表作者观点,不一定反映退伍军人事务部、华盛顿大学、东北大学和波士顿大学的立场或政策。作者声明没有利益冲突。本研究包括从 VHA 绩效测量办公室(17API2)获得的数据,该办公室位于分析和绩效整合办公室(API)内,隶属于质量和患者安全办公室(QPS;前身为 RAPID)。一份记录本研究部分发现的口头报告于 2020 年 7 月 29 日在 2020 年学院健康年度研究会议上以虚拟形式发表。