Original Research
Retrospective study of the costs of care during the first year of therapy with etanercept or infliximab among patients aged ≥65 years with rheumatoid arthritis

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(05)00090-1Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective:

The aim of this work was to retrospectively examine the costs of therapy with etanercept and infliximab, among patients aged ≥ 65 years with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), from a health-care system perspective.

Methods:

Data from 2 large, automated US health-care claims databases (Constella COMPASS and Ingenix LabRx) were pooled for the analyses. Each database is comprised of paid facility, professional service, and retail (ie, outpatient) pharmacy claims from participating health plans. Using the 2 databases, all RA patients aged ≥65 years were identified who began therapy with etanercept or infliximab between July 1, 1999 (Constella COMPASS), or January 1, 2001 (Ingenix LabRx), and December 31, 2002. Costs of RA-related care (including study drugs, selected medications, and outpatient encounters for RA) and non-RA-related care (all other medications and services) for patients in the 2 treatment groups were assessed, in US dollars, over a 1-year period after therapy initiation.

Results:

A total of 280 RA patients aged ≥ 65 years initiated therapy with etanercept (n = 99) or infliximab (n = 181) and met all other selection criteria. Etanercept patients were younger than infliximab patients (mean [SD] age, 70.5 [4.6] vs 71.8 [4.6] years; P = 0.04), were less likely to be enrolled in a managed care organization (76.7% vs 87.8%; P < 0.01), and had fewer pretreatment rheumatologist visits (mean [SD], 1.3 [2.3] vs 2.2 [3.8]; P = 0.04). Other characteristics, including pretreatment levels of other types of health-care utilization, were generally similar. Mean (95% CI) total cost of RA-related care was lower for etanercept patients in both databases ($12,159 [$10,795-$13,380] for etanercept vs $22,347 [$20,808-$23,912] for infliximab in one, and $14,297 [$12,238-$16,326] for etanercept vs $22,154 [$19,688-$24,703] for infliximab in the other), primarily due to lower costs of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy ($10,015 [$8754-$11,224] for etanercept vs $18,611 [$17,169-$20,023] for infliximab in one database; $11,917 [$10,128-$13,480] for etanercept vs $16,759 [$14,551-$19,062] for infliximab in the other). Mean (95% CI) costs of non-RA-related care were similar among etanercept and infliximab patients in both databases ($13,100 [$8956-$18,377] for etanercept vs $11,789 [$8326-$16,001] for infliximab in one, and $16,665 [$10,329-$25,690] for etanercept vs $13,959 [$10,216-$18,168] for infliximab in the other).

Conclusion:

These results suggest that costs of RA-related care during the first year of therapy may be lower among RA patients aged ≥65 years receiving etanercept versus infliximab, a difference attributable primarily to lower costs of drug acquisition.

References (18)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (31)

  • Economic Burden of Rheumatic Diseases

    2016, Kelley and Firestein's Textbook of Rheumatology: Volumes 1-2, Tenth Edition
  • Cost of biologics per treated patient across immune-mediated inflammatory disease indications in a pharmacy benefit management setting: A retrospective cohort study

    2014, Clinical Therapeutics
    Citation Excerpt :

    Other administrative claims analyses have reported that adalimumab and infliximab were associated with higher rates of dose escalation than was etanercept.10,11,16,17 Dose escalation is associated with higher treatment costs, leading to increased drug costs.10,11,16,17 Although claims-based studies provide information on drug utilization that takes into account varying dosages by disease, dosage changes, and the effects of varying compliance in clinical practice,14 the use of pharmacy benefits–management (PBM) data has several advantages.

  • Economic Burden of Rheumatic Diseases

    2012, Kelley's Textbook of Rheumatology: Volume 1-2, Ninth Edition
  • Association between extended-release niacin treatment and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Analysis of an administrative-claims database

    2011, Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental
    Citation Excerpt :

    These prescriptions encompass paid-facility, professional-service, and retail (ie, outpatient) pharmacy claims for the commercially insured, Medicaid, and Medicare populations. The Ingenix I3 database is representative of the US population. [14-16]. A retrospective database analysis was performed on patients at least 20 years old who were continuously enrolled for at least 36 months in the I3 database with a diagnosis of T2DM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision [ICD-9]) and who were on active treatments with AHAs.

  • Impact of etanercept on the costs of rheumatoid arthritis (RA): Results from a French observational study

    2008, Joint Bone Spine
    Citation Excerpt :

    In spite of factors limiting comparison between previous studies and the present study, one can underline that the annual average direct cost per patient estimated in two reviews published in 2000 were 5425$ [5] and 5720$ [6], and 4003€ in a French study on 1109 patients [7], that is close to the annual costs per patient obtained in our study for patients before treatment by etanercept (5142€). According to a 2005 retrospective American study concerning patients treated by etanercept, the annual average direct medical cost of treatment (hospitalization excluded) obtained from two bases of reimbursement is 12,159$ and 14,297$ [8]. In a 2003 study on 7527 patients, of whom 1880 patients under biotherapy during the last 6 months of the study, annual direct medical cost for patients under biotherapy was 19,016$ versus 6164$ for patients not receiving biotherapy [9]; and a valuation close to these annual direct medical costs is (19,616€) provided by a French study, from the point of view of the payer, on 28 patients, during 52 weeks [10].

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text