Persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilisation and costs for interferon Beta in multiple sclerosis: a population-based study in the Campania region (southern Italy).
Costs
Healthcare resource utilization
Interferon
Multiple sclerosis
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Aug 2020
26 Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
18
05
2020
accepted:
17
08
2020
entrez:
28
8
2020
pubmed:
28
8
2020
medline:
29
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To differentiate five formulations of Interferon Beta for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) in clinical practice, by analysing persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilisation and costs at population level. In this population-based study, we included individuals with MS living in the Campania Region of Italy from 2015 to 2017, on treatment with intramuscular Interferon Beta-1a (Avonex® = 618), subcutaneous pegylated Interferon Beta-1a (Plegridy® = 259), subcutaneous Interferon Beta-1a (Rebif® = 1220), and subcutaneous Interferon Beta-1b (Betaferon® = 348; and Extavia® = 69). We recorded healthcare resource utilisation from administrative databases (hospital discharges, drug prescriptions, MS-related outpatients), and derived costs from the Regional formulary. We classified hospital admissions into MS-related and non-MS-related. Persistence (time to switch to other disease modifying treatments (DMTs)), and adherence (medication possession ratio (MPR) = medication supply obtained/medication supply expected during follow-up period) were calculated. Patients treated with Rebif® were younger, when compared with other Interferon Beta formulations (p < 0.01). The probability of switching to other DMTs was 60% higher for Betaferon®, 90% higher for Extavia®, and 110% higher for Plegridy®, when compared with Rebif® (p < 0.01). Plegridy® presented with 7% higher adherence (p < 0.01), and Betaferon® with 3% lower adherence (p = 0.03), when compared with Rebif®. The probability of MS-related hospital admissions was 40% higher in Avonex® (p = 0.03), 400% higher in Betaferon® (p < 0.01), and 60% higher in Plegridy® (p = 0.04), resulting into higher non-DMT-related costs, when compared with Rebif®. Interferon Beta formulations presented with different prescription patterns, persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilisation and costs, with Rebif® being used in younger patients and with less MS-related hospital admissions.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To differentiate five formulations of Interferon Beta for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) in clinical practice, by analysing persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilisation and costs at population level.
METHODS
METHODS
In this population-based study, we included individuals with MS living in the Campania Region of Italy from 2015 to 2017, on treatment with intramuscular Interferon Beta-1a (Avonex® = 618), subcutaneous pegylated Interferon Beta-1a (Plegridy® = 259), subcutaneous Interferon Beta-1a (Rebif® = 1220), and subcutaneous Interferon Beta-1b (Betaferon® = 348; and Extavia® = 69). We recorded healthcare resource utilisation from administrative databases (hospital discharges, drug prescriptions, MS-related outpatients), and derived costs from the Regional formulary. We classified hospital admissions into MS-related and non-MS-related. Persistence (time to switch to other disease modifying treatments (DMTs)), and adherence (medication possession ratio (MPR) = medication supply obtained/medication supply expected during follow-up period) were calculated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Patients treated with Rebif® were younger, when compared with other Interferon Beta formulations (p < 0.01). The probability of switching to other DMTs was 60% higher for Betaferon®, 90% higher for Extavia®, and 110% higher for Plegridy®, when compared with Rebif® (p < 0.01). Plegridy® presented with 7% higher adherence (p < 0.01), and Betaferon® with 3% lower adherence (p = 0.03), when compared with Rebif®. The probability of MS-related hospital admissions was 40% higher in Avonex® (p = 0.03), 400% higher in Betaferon® (p < 0.01), and 60% higher in Plegridy® (p = 0.04), resulting into higher non-DMT-related costs, when compared with Rebif®.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
Interferon Beta formulations presented with different prescription patterns, persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilisation and costs, with Rebif® being used in younger patients and with less MS-related hospital admissions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32847587
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05664-x
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05664-x
pmc: PMC7448448
doi:
Substances chimiques
Interferon-beta
77238-31-4
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
797Subventions
Organisme : Merck KGaA
ID : 2019
Références
Thompson AJ, Baranzini SE, Geurts J, Hemmer B, Ciccarelli O. Multiple sclerosis. Lancet. 2018;391:1622–36.
pubmed: 29576504
Wallin MT, Culpepper WJ, Nichols E, Bhutta ZA, Gebrehiwot TT, Hay SI, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of multiple sclerosis 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:269–85.
De Angelis F, John N, Brownlee W. Disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis. BMJ. 2018;363:k4674.
pubmed: 30482751
Petruzzo M, Palladino R, Nardone A, Nozzolillo A, Servillo G, Orlando V, et al. The impact of diagnostic criteria and treatments on the 20-year costs for treating relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2020;38:101514.
pubmed: 31759185
Mendes D, Alves C, Batel-Marques F. Benefit – risk of therapies for relapsing – remitting multiple sclerosis : testing the number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB), number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) and the likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH): a systematic review and Meta- analysis. CNS Drugs. 2016;30:909–29.
pubmed: 27538416
Fogarty E, Schmitz S, Tubridy N, Walsh C, Barry M. Comparative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies for patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2016;9:23–30.
pubmed: 27645339
Einarson T, Bereza B, Machado M. Comparative effectiveness of interferons in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis of real-world studies. Curr Med Res Opin. 2017;33:579–93.
pubmed: 28027680
Mitsikostas DD, Goodin DS. Comparing the efficacy of disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2017;18:109–16.
pubmed: 29141791
Claflin SB, Tan B, Taylor BV. The long-term effects of disease modifying therapies on disability in people living with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;36:101374.
pubmed: 31450158
Moccia M, Palladino R, Carotenuto A, Saccà F, Russo CV, Lanzillo R, et al. A 8-year retrospective cohort study comparing interferon-β formulations for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018;19:50–4.
pubmed: 29128737
Trojano M, Tintore M, Montalban X, Hillert J, Kalincik T, Iaffaldano P, et al. Treatment decisions in multiple sclerosis - insights from real-world observational studies. Nat Rev Neurol. 2017;13:105–18.
pubmed: 28084327
Kalincik T, Butzkueven H. Observational data: understanding the real MS world. Mult Scler. 2016;22:1642–8.
pubmed: 27270498
Glaser A, Stahmann A, Meissner T, Flachenecker P, Horáková D, Zaratin P, et al. Multiple sclerosis registries in Europe - an updated mapping survey. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;27:171–8.
pubmed: 30384204
Torres EM, Fernández ÓF, Rueda PC, Ruiz-beato E, Pérez EE, Estrada RM, et al. Social value of a set of proposals for the ideal approach of multiple sclerosis within the Spanish National Health System : a social return on investment study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:84.
Moccia M, Brescia Morra V, Lanzillo R, Loperto I, Giordana R, Fumo M, et al. Multiple sclerosis in the Campania region (South Italy): algorithm validation and 2015-2017 prevalence. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:E3388.
pubmed: 32414017
Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA). Banca Dati Farmaci. 2020. https://www.farmaci.agenziafarmaco.gov.it/ . Accessed 8 May 2019.
European Medicine Agency (EMA). European public assessment reports. 2020. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines . Accessed 8 May 2019.
Moccia M, Tajani A, Acampora R, Signoriello E, Corbisiero G, Vercellone A, et al. Healthcare resource utilization and costs for multiple sclerosis management in the Campania region of Italy: comparison between Centre-based and local service healthcare delivery. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0222012.
pubmed: 31536513
pmcid: 6752775
Chou IJ, Kuo CF, Tanasescu R, Tench CR, Tiley CG, Constantinescu CS, et al. Comorbidity in multiple sclerosis: its temporal relationships with disease onset and dose effect on mortality. Eur J Neurol. 2020;27:105–12.
pubmed: 31309645
Charlson M, Pompei P, Ales K, MacKenzie C. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:373–83.
pubmed: 3558716
pmcid: 3558716
Evans C, Tam J, Kingwell E, Oger J, Tremlett H. Long-term persistence with the Immunomodulatory drugs for multiple sclerosis: a retrospective database study. Clin Ther. 2012;34:341–50.
pubmed: 22296946
Zhornitsky S, Greenfield J, Koch MW, Patten SB, Harris C, Wall W, et al. Long-term persistence with injectable therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: an 18-year observational cohort study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0123824.
pubmed: 25867095
pmcid: 4395027
Moccia M, Palladino R, Carotenuto A, Russo CCVCV, Triassi M, Lanzillo R, et al. Predictors of long-term interferon discontinuation in newly diagnosed relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2016;10:90–6.
pubmed: 27919507
Lanzillo R, Prosperini L, Gasperini C, Moccia M, Fantozzi R, Tortorella C, et al. A multicentRE observational analysiS of PErsistenCe to treatment in the new multiple sclerosis era: the RESPECT study. J Neurol. 2018;265:1174–83.
pubmed: 29549468
Lam WY, Fresco P. Medication adherence measures: an overview. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:217047.
pubmed: 26539470
pmcid: 4619779
Evans C, Marrie RA, Zhu F, Leung S, Lu X, Kingwell E, et al. Adherence to disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis and subsequent hospitalizations. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017;26:702–11.
pubmed: 28370875
Soggetto Aggregatore della Regione Campania (So.Re.Sa.). Anagrafica Farmaci. 2017. https://www.soresa.it/pa/Pagine/Anagrafe.aspx . Accessed 20 Apr 2020.
Battaglia M, Kobelt G, Ponzio M, Berg J, Capsa D, Dalén J, et al. New insights into the burden and costs of multiple sclerosis in Europe: results for Italy. Mult Scler. 2017;23:104–16.
pubmed: 28643600
Kobelt G, Thompson A, Berg J, Gannedahl M, Eriksson J. New insights into the burden and costs of multiple sclerosis in Europe. Mult Scler. 2017;23:1123–36.
pubmed: 28273775
pmcid: 5476197
San-Juan-Rodriguez A, Good CB, Heyman RA, Parekh N, Shrank WH, Hernandez I. Trends in prices, market share, and spending on self-administered disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis in Medicare part D. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76:1386–90.
pubmed: 31449293
pmcid: 6714023
Marangi A, Farina G, Vicenzi V, Forlivesi S, Calabria F, Marchioretto F, et al. Changing therapeutic strategies and persistence to disease-modifying treatments in a population of multiple sclerosis patients from Veneto region, Italy. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2020;41:102004.
pubmed: 32078935
Ogino M, Okamoto S, Ohta H, Sakamoto M, Nakamura Y, Iwasaki K, et al. Prevalence, treatments and medical cost of multiple sclerosis in Japan based on analysis of a health insurance claims database. Clin Exp Neuroimmunol. 2017;8:318–26.
pubmed: 29242717
pmcid: 5724648
Saccà F, Lanzillo R, Signori A, Maniscalco GT, Signoriello E, Lo Fermo S, et al. Determinants of therapy switch in multiple sclerosis treatment-naïve patients: a real-life study. Mult Scler. 2019;25:1263–72.
pubmed: 30044207
McKay KA, Evans C, Fisk JD, Patten SB, Fiest K, Marrie RA, et al. Disease-modifying therapies and adherence in multiple sclerosis: comparing patient self-report with pharmacy records. Neuroepidemiology. 2017;48:124–30.
pubmed: 28683461
Melendez-Torres GJ, Auguste P, Armoiry X, Maheswaran H, Court R, Madan J, et al. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: Systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess (Rockv). 2017;21:1–352.
Moccia M, Palladino R, Lanzillo R, Triassi M, Brescia MV. Predictors of the 10-year direct costs for treating multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand. 2017;135:522–8.
pubmed: 27357245
Furneri G, Santoni L, Ricella C, Prosperini L. Cost-effectiveness analysis of escalating to natalizumab or switching among immunomodulators in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Italy. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:436.
pubmed: 31253138
pmcid: 6599237
Hansen K, Schüssel K, Kieble M, Werning J, Schulz M, Friis R, et al. Adherence to disease modifying drugs among patients with multiple sclerosis in Germany: a retrospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0133279.
pubmed: 26214805
pmcid: 4516264
Bartolomé-García E, Usarralde-Pérez Á, Sanmartín-Fenollera P, Pérez-Encinas M. Persistence and adherence to interferon and glatiramer acetate in patients with multiple sclerosis. Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2019;26:23–8.
pubmed: 31157091
Hamidi V, Couto E, Ringerike T, Klemp M. A multiple treatment comparison of eleven disease-modifying drugs used for multiple sclerosis. J Clin Med Res. 2018;10:88–105.
pubmed: 29317954
Moccia M, Palladino R, Russo C, Massarelli M, Nardone A, Triassi M, et al. How many injections did you miss last month? A simple question to predict interferon β-1a adherence in multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2015;12:1829–35.
pubmed: 26371561
Cohen BA, Coyle PK, Leist T, Oleen-Burkey MA, Schwartz M, Zwibel H. Therapy optimization in multiple sclerosis: a cohort study of therapy adherence and risk of relapse. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2015;4:75–82.
pubmed: 25787057
Bergvall N, Petrilla AA, Karkare SU, Lahoz R, Agashivala N, Pradhan A, et al. Persistence with and adherence to fingolimod compared with other disease-modifying therapies for the treatment of multiple sclerosis: a retrospective US claims database analysis. J Med Econ. 2014;17:696–707.
pubmed: 25019581
Fernández O, Agüera J, Izquierdo G, Millán-Pascual J, Ramió i Torrentà L, Oliva P, et al. Adherence to interferon β-1b treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis in Spain. PLoS One. 2012;7:1–7.
Moccia M, Palladino R, Lanzillo R, Carotenuto A, Russo CV, Triassi M, et al. Healthcare costs for treating relapsing multiple sclerosis and the risk of progression: a retrospective Italian cohort study from 2001 to 2015. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0169489.
pubmed: 28056103
pmcid: 5215923