Literature DB >> 29166800

Comparison of all-cause costs and healthcare resource use among patients with newly-diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation newly treated with oral anticoagulants.

Adrienne M Gilligan1, Jessica Franchino-Elder2, Xue Song1, Cheng Wang2, Caroline Henriques1, Amy Sainski-Nguyen1, Kathleen Wilson1, David M Smith1, Stephen Sander2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Compare costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) among newly-diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients newly treated with dabigatran vs apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin.
METHODS: Newly-diagnosed adult NVAF patients initiating dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin (index event) between October 1, 2010-December 31, 2014 were identified using MarketScan claims data, and followed until medication discontinuation, switch, inpatient death, enrollment end, or study end (December 31, 2015). Dabigatran patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 separately with apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin patients. Per-patient-per-month (PPPM) all-cause cost, HCRU, and 30-day re-admissions were reported. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models.
RESULTS: Final cohorts, each matched with dabigatran patients, included 8,857 apixaban patients, 26,592 rivaroxaban patients, and 33,046 warfarin patients. Dabigatran patients had lower adjusted PPPM total healthcare, inpatient, and outpatient costs compared to rivaroxaban ($4,093 vs $4,636, $1,476 vs $1,862, and $2,016 vs $2,121, respectively, all p ≤ .001) and warfarin ($4,199 vs $4,872, $1,505 vs $1,851, and $2,049 vs $2,514, respectively, all p < .001). Adjusted costs were similar for dabigatran and apixaban. Dabigatran patients had significantly fewer hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy claims than rivaroxaban patients (0.06 vs 0.07, 4.84 vs 4.96 and 4.80 vs 4.93, respectively, all p < .020) and warfarin patients (0.06 vs 0.07, 4.77 vs 6.88, and 4.76 vs 5.89, respectively, all p < .001). Dabigatran patients had similar hospitalizations to apixaban, but higher outpatient visits (4.70 vs 4.31) and pharmacy claims (4.86 vs 4.61), both p < .001.
CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study found adjusted all-cause costs were lower for dabigatran compared to rivaroxaban and warfarin patients and similar to apixaban patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Non-valvular atrial fibrillation; comparative effectiveness; cost; oral anticoagulants; outcomes; utilization

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29166800     DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2017.1409425

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin        ISSN: 0300-7995            Impact factor:   2.580


  4 in total

1.  Apixaban versus other anticoagulants in patients with nonvalvular fibrillation: a comparison of all-cause and event-related costs in real-life setting in France.

Authors:  Manon Belhassen; Olivier Hanon; Philippe Gabriel Steg; Isabelle Mahé; Mélanie Née; Flore Jacoud; Faustine Dalon; François-Emery Cotté; Dominique Guitard-Dehoux; Claire Marant-Micallef; Eric Van Ganse; Nicolas Danchin
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2022-08-28

2.  Medicare part D prescribing for direct oral anticoagulants in the United States: Cost, use and the "rubber effect".

Authors:  Panayiotis D Ziakas; Irene S Kourbeti; Loukia S Poulou; Georgios S Vlachogeorgos; Eleftherios Mylonakis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use: A Practical Guide to Common Clinical Challenges.

Authors:  Ashley Chen; Eric Stecker; Bruce A Warden
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 5.501

4.  Clinical and Economic Burden of Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction Following a Worsening Heart Failure Event.

Authors:  Javed Butler; Laurence M Djatche; Baanie Sawhney; Sreya Chakladar; Lingfeng Yang; Joanne E Brady; Mei Yang
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.845

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.