Department of Pharmacy, CHOICE Institute, University of Washington, Seattle.
GSK, Value Evidence and Outcomes, Collegeville, PA.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2023 Aug;29(8):917-926. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2023.29.8.917.
Despite recent advancements in the therapeutic landscape, multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable. There are multiple treatment options available with a novel mechanism of action, but there is limited evidence describing the economic burden among patients with MM exposed to different drug classes and combinations and across different health care settings. To describe all-cause and MM-related health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients with MM exposed to different drug classes and combinations (ie, double-class and triple-class-exposed) and characterize the economic burden in different health care settings among these patients with MM. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the IBM MarketScan databases. The study included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with MM between December 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. The study sample comprised double-class-exposed (DCE) and triple-class-exposed (TCE) cohorts, categorized based on their earliest exposure to different combinations of immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, or targeted monoclonal antibody. Patients with at least 1 subsequent line of therapy following the categorization were included, and the start date of the first subsequent line of therapy was the index date. The primary outcomes were all-cause and MM-related HCRU and costs during the follow-up period. Costs were stratified across 8 care settings defined by place of service. The Kaplan-Meier sample average technique was used to estimate the cumulative mean outcomes, accounting for differential follow-up periods. The outcomes were reported as per patient per month (PPPM). 18 years) diagnosed with MM between December 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. The study sample comprised double-class-exposed (DCE) and triple-class-exposed (TCE) cohorts, categorized based on their earliest exposure to different combinations of immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, or targeted monoclonal antibody. Patients with at least 1 subsequent line of therapy following the categorization were included, and the start date of the first subsequent line of therapy was the index date. The primary outcomes were all-cause and MM-related HCRU and costs during the follow-up period. Costs were stratified across 8 care settings defined by place of service. The Kaplan-Meier sample average technique was used to estimate the cumulative mean outcomes, accounting for differential follow-up periods. The outcomes were reported as per patient per month (PPPM). The study included 1,521 patients with MM, of whom 1,016 (66.8%) were DCE and 505 (33.2%) were TCE. The mean total all-cause health care costs were $20,338 PPPM, and approximately 85% of the total all-cause costs were MM-related. The mean all-cause and MM-related total costs were driven by overall drug costs primarily attributed to MM treatment and administration costs. The TCE cohort was associated with more HCRU and incurred higher costs than the DCE cohort across all categories. The hospital-based ambulatory setting had the highest all-cause and MM-related costs during the follow-up period: $7,302 (95% CI = $6,801-$7,784) PPPM and $6,695 (95% CI = $6,239-$7,136) PPPM, respectively. The study findings suggest that the economic burden following exposure to multiple drug classes and combinations is substantial, especially among the TCE cohort and in the ambulatory setting. These findings highlight the need for more effective treatments that can mitigate the economic burden of patients with MM. Future research on the HCRU and costs related to recently approved MM treatments with novel mechanisms is warranted. At the time of this study, Dr Yang was a postdoctoral fellow and the fellowship was supported by GSK. Dr Boytsov is a full-time employee of GSK. Dr Carlson discloses consulting fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, and Genentech. Dr Barthold reports no disclosures.
尽管在治疗领域取得了最近的进展,但多发性骨髓瘤(MM)仍然无法治愈。有多种具有新型作用机制的治疗选择,但关于接受不同药物类别和组合治疗的 MM 患者的经济负担的证据有限,也缺乏在不同医疗保健环境下的相关描述。本研究旨在描述接受不同药物类别和组合(即双药类和三药类)治疗的 MM 患者的全因和 MM 相关医疗资源利用(HCRU)和成本,并描述这些 MM 患者在不同医疗保健环境下的经济负担。我们使用 IBM MarketScan 数据库进行了一项回顾性队列研究。该研究纳入了 2015 年 12 月 1 日至 2019 年 12 月 31 日期间被诊断为 MM 的成年患者(年龄≥18 岁)。研究样本包括双药类暴露(DCE)和三药类暴露(TCE)队列,根据他们最早暴露于不同免疫调节剂药物、蛋白酶体抑制剂或靶向单克隆抗体组合的情况进行分类。至少有 1 种后续治疗线的患者被纳入研究,且第 1 种后续治疗线的起始日期为索引日期。主要结局为随访期间的全因和 MM 相关 HCRU 和成本。成本按服务地点定义的 8 种护理环境进行分层。Kaplan-Meier 样本平均技术用于估计累积平均结局,同时考虑了不同的随访期。结果以每位患者每月(PPPM)报告。2015 年 12 月 1 日至 2019 年 12 月 31 日期间被诊断为 MM 的 1521 例患者,其中 1016 例(66.8%)为 DCE,505 例(33.2%)为 TCE。全因医疗总费用的平均值为 20338 美元/患者/月(PPPM),约 85%的全因费用与 MM 相关。全因和 MM 相关总成本主要由治疗 MM 的总药物成本和管理成本驱动。TCE 队列在所有类别中的 HCRU 均高于 DCE 队列,且费用更高。基于医院的门诊环境在随访期间的全因和 MM 相关费用最高:分别为 7302 美元/患者/月(95%CI=6801-7784)和 6695 美元/患者/月(95%CI=6239-6666)。研究结果表明,接受多种药物类别和组合治疗后的经济负担很大,尤其是在 TCE 队列和门诊环境中。这些发现突显了需要更有效的治疗方法来减轻 MM 患者的经济负担。需要对具有新型作用机制的最近批准的 MM 治疗方法的 HCRU 和成本进行进一步研究。在本研究进行时,杨博士是一名博士后研究员,该研究得到了 GSK 的支持。Boytsov 博士是 GSK 的全职员工。Carlson 博士报告了辉瑞、艾伯维和基因泰克的咨询费。Barthold 博士没有披露信息。