Christina X Chen1, Judith R Baker2, Michael B Nichol3. 1. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Center for Inherited Blood Disorders, Orange, CA, USA. 3. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: mnichol@usc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine US societal burden of illness, including direct and indirect costs and annual bleed rate (ABR), for persons with hemophilia B (HB), a rare and debilitating genetic disorder, and to examine associations of hemophilia severity and treatment regimens with costs and ABR. METHODS: From 2009 to 2014, the Hemophilia Utilization Group Studies Part Vb collected prospective data from 10 US hemophilia treatment centers. Participants with HB completed initial surveys on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns. During the 2-year follow-up, participants reported bleeding episodes, work absenteeism, and caregiver time quarterly. These data were used to calculate ABR and indirect costs. Direct costs were calculated using 1-year clinical chart records and 2-year dispensing records. RESULTS: Of the 148 participants, 112 with complete medical records and one or more follow-up survey were included. Total mean annual per-person costs were $85,852 (median $20,160) for mild/moderate HB, $198,733 (median $147,891) for severe HB, and $140,240 (median $63,617) for all participants without inhibitors (P < 0.0001). Mean ABR for participants with severe HB on prophylaxis (5.5 ± 7.9 bleeds/y) was almost half that of those treated episodically. Clotting factor and indirect costs accounted for 85% and 9% of total costs, respectively. Compared with episodic treatment, prophylaxis use was associated with 2.5-fold higher clotting factor costs (P < 0.01), low but significantly more missed parental workdays (P < 0.0001) and clinician (P < 0.001) or nursing visits (P < 0.0001), less part-time employment and unemployment, and lower hospitalizations costs (P = 0.17) and ABR (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: HB is associated with high economic burden, primarily because of clotting factor costs. Nevertheless, prophylaxis treatment leads to clinical benefits and may reduce other nonfactor costs.
OBJECTIVES: To determine US societal burden of illness, including direct and indirect costs and annual bleed rate (ABR), for persons with hemophilia B (HB), a rare and debilitating genetic disorder, and to examine associations of hemophilia severity and treatment regimens with costs and ABR. METHODS: From 2009 to 2014, the Hemophilia Utilization Group Studies Part Vb collected prospective data from 10 US hemophilia treatment centers. Participants with HB completed initial surveys on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns. During the 2-year follow-up, participants reported bleeding episodes, work absenteeism, and caregiver time quarterly. These data were used to calculate ABR and indirect costs. Direct costs were calculated using 1-year clinical chart records and 2-year dispensing records. RESULTS: Of the 148 participants, 112 with complete medical records and one or more follow-up survey were included. Total mean annual per-person costs were $85,852 (median $20,160) for mild/moderate HB, $198,733 (median $147,891) for severe HB, and $140,240 (median $63,617) for all participants without inhibitors (P < 0.0001). Mean ABR for participants with severe HB on prophylaxis (5.5 ± 7.9 bleeds/y) was almost half that of those treated episodically. Clotting factor and indirect costs accounted for 85% and 9% of total costs, respectively. Compared with episodic treatment, prophylaxis use was associated with 2.5-fold higher clotting factor costs (P < 0.01), low but significantly more missed parental workdays (P < 0.0001) and clinician (P < 0.001) or nursing visits (P < 0.0001), less part-time employment and unemployment, and lower hospitalizations costs (P = 0.17) and ABR (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: HB is associated with high economic burden, primarily because of clotting factor costs. Nevertheless, prophylaxis treatment leads to clinical benefits and may reduce other nonfactor costs.
Authors: Randall Curtis; Marilyn Manco-Johnson; Barbara A Konkle; Roshni Kulkarni; Joanne Wu; Judith R Baker; Megan Ullman; Duc Quang Tran; Michael B Nichol Journal: J Blood Med Date: 2022-05-09
Authors: Rong Chen; Dmitry Gultyaev; Johanna Lister; Rong Han; Nan Hu; Jean Malacan; Alexander Solms; Parth Vashi; Jamie O'Hara; Shanlian Hu Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 4.612
Authors: Ana María Jiménez-Cebrián; Patricia Palomo-López; Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa Vallejo; Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias; Emmanuel Navarro-Flores; Marta San-Antolín; César Calvo-Lobo; Daniel López-López Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-07-04 Impact factor: 5.435
Authors: Oguz Top; Stella W L Milferstaedt; Nico van Gessel; Sebastian N W Hoernstein; Bugra Özdemir; Eva L Decker; Ralf Reski Journal: Commun Biol Date: 2021-08-12