OBJECTIVE: To compare the healthcare expenditure associated with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based immunosuppression in contrast to conventional therapy in patients with lupus nephritis. METHODS: Our retrospective single-center study compared the major healthcare costs during the first 24 months of treatment incurred by immunosuppressive medications, hospitalization, and complications in patients with severe lupus nephritis who had been treated with prednisolone and either MMF or sequential cyclophosphamide induction followed by azathioprine maintenance (CTX-AZA). RESULTS: Forty-four patients were studied (22 in each group). Baseline demographic and clinical measures, and remission rates after treatment, were similar between the 2 groups. Immunosuppressive drug cost was 13.6-fold higher in the MMF group (US$4168.3+/-1176.5 per patient, compared with $285.0+/-70.6 in the CTX-AZA group, mean difference $3883.2+/-251.3; p<0.001). MMF treatment was associated with a lower incidence of infections (12.0 episodes/1000 patient-months, compared with 32.4 in the CTX-AZA group; p=0.035). Combined cost of hospitalization and treatment of infections was 82.5% lower in the MMF group (mean difference -2208.7+/-1700.6; p=0.120). Overall treatment expenditure on immunosuppressive drugs, hospitalization, and treatment of infections was 1.57-fold higher in the MMF group (mean US $4635.9 compared with $2961.5 in the CTX-AZA group; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: While the cost of MMF treatment for severe lupus nephritis is much higher compared with CTX-AZA, the increased drug cost is partially offset by savings from the reduced incidence of complications.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the healthcare expenditure associated with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based immunosuppression in contrast to conventional therapy in patients with lupus nephritis. METHODS: Our retrospective single-center study compared the major healthcare costs during the first 24 months of treatment incurred by immunosuppressive medications, hospitalization, and complications in patients with severe lupus nephritis who had been treated with prednisolone and either MMF or sequential cyclophosphamide induction followed by azathioprine maintenance (CTX-AZA). RESULTS: Forty-four patients were studied (22 in each group). Baseline demographic and clinical measures, and remission rates after treatment, were similar between the 2 groups. Immunosuppressive drug cost was 13.6-fold higher in the MMF group (US$4168.3+/-1176.5 per patient, compared with $285.0+/-70.6 in the CTX-AZA group, mean difference $3883.2+/-251.3; p<0.001). MMF treatment was associated with a lower incidence of infections (12.0 episodes/1000 patient-months, compared with 32.4 in the CTX-AZA group; p=0.035). Combined cost of hospitalization and treatment of infections was 82.5% lower in the MMF group (mean difference -2208.7+/-1700.6; p=0.120). Overall treatment expenditure on immunosuppressive drugs, hospitalization, and treatment of infections was 1.57-fold higher in the MMF group (mean US $4635.9 compared with $2961.5 in the CTX-AZA group; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: While the cost of MMF treatment for severe lupus nephritis is much higher compared with CTX-AZA, the increased drug cost is partially offset by savings from the reduced incidence of complications.