G.M. Lenhart

The Clinical and Economic Benefits of Co-Testing Versus Primary HPV Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening: A Modeling Analysis.

Abstract Background: Consensus United States cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend use of combination Pap plus human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women aged 30 to 65 years. An HPV test was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2014 for primary cervical cancer screening in women age 25 years and older. Here, we present the results of clinical-economic comparisons of Pap plus HPV mRNA testing including genotyping for HPV 16/18 (co-testing) versus DNA-based primary HPV testing with HPV 16/18 genotyping and reflex cytology (HPV primary) for cervical cancer screening. Methods: A health state transition (Markov) model with 1-year cycling was developed using epidemiologic, clinical, and economic data from healthcare databases and published literature. A hypothetical cohort of one million women receiving triennial cervical cancer screening was simulated from ages 30 to 70 years. Screening strategies compared HPV primary to co-testing. Outcomes included total and incremental differences in costs, invasive cervical cancer (ICC) cases, ICC deaths, number of colposcopies, and quality-adjusted life years for cost-effectiveness calculations. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: In a simulation cohort of one million 30-year-old women modeled up to age 70 years, the model predicted that screening with HPV primary testing instead of co-testing could lead to as many as 2,141 more ICC cases and 2,041 more ICC deaths. In the simulation, co-testing demonstrated a greater number of lifetime quality-adjusted life years (22,334) and yielded

Healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with herpes zoster in the US

39.0 million in savings compared with HPV primary, thereby conferring greater effectiveness at lower cost. Conclusions: Model results demonstrate that co-testing has the potential to provide improved clinical and economic outcomes when compared with HPV primary. While actual cost and outcome data are evaluated, these findings are relevant to U.S. healthcare payers and womens health policy advocates seeking cost-effective cervical cancer screening technologies.

Cost effectiveness of endometrial ablation with the NovaSure ® system versus other global ablation modalities and hysterectomy for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding: US commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives

Abstract Objectives: To evaluate the economic burden of herpes zoster (HZ) on the US healthcare system among an immunocompetent population. Methods: Claims data from the MarketScan Research databases for 2008–2011 were extracted to determine the incremental healthcare resource utilization (RU) and direct medical costs associated with HZ. Immunocompetent HZ-patients were identified and directly matched 1:1 with immunocompetent non-HZ controls using demographic and clinical variables. Analysis was limited to claims 21 days prior to through the first year following HZ diagnosis. Cases with post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) were analyzed separately. Results: A total of 98,916 HZ-patients were matched to controls. HZ-patients had a mean age of 50.4 (SD = 18.8) years and 56.6% were females. HZ-cases had significantly higher RU (0.016 inpatient visits, 0.153 ER visits, 2.116 outpatient office visits, and 3.730 other outpatient services) compared to controls (p < 0.001). Differences increased substantially in the presence of PHN. Total mean incremental healthcare costs for HZ-cases were

Cost-Effectiveness of Global Endometrial Ablation vs. Hysterectomy for Treatment of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: US Commercial and Medicaid Payer Perspectives

1308 and quadrupled to

Comparison of direct and indirect costs of abnormal uterine bleeding treatment with global endometrial ablation and hysterectomy.

5463 in those with PHN (both p < 0.001). Overall, primary cost drivers were outpatient prescriptions and other outpatient services. For those with PHN, inpatient services also played a significant role. Limitations: This study was limited to only those individuals with US commercial health coverage or private Medicare supplemental coverage; therefore, results of this analysis may not be generalizable to HZ patients outside of the US, with other health insurance or without coverage. Conclusions: HZ presents a significant economic and resource burden on the US healthcare system among immunocompetent patients of nearly all ages, particularly when complicated by PHN.

Association Between Glucocorticoid Exposure and Healthcare Expenditures for Potential Glucocorticoid-related Adverse Events in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objectives Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) interferes with physical, emotional, and social well-being, impacting the quality of life of more than 10 million women in the USA. Hysterectomy, the most common surgical treatment of AUB, has significant morbidity, low mortality, long recovery, and high associated health care costs. Global endometrial ablation (GEA) provides a surgical alternative with reduced morbidity, cost, and recovery time. The NovaSure® system utilizes unique radiofrequency impedance-based GEA technology. This study evaluated cost effectiveness of AUB treatment with NovaSure ablation versus other GEA modalities and versus hysterectomy from the US commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives. Methods A health state transition (semi-Markov) model was developed using epidemiologic, clinical, and economic data from commercial and Medicaid claims database analyses, supplemented by published literature. Three hypothetical cohorts of women receiving AUB interventions were simulated over 1-, 3-, and 5-year horizons to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes for NovaSure, other GEA modalities, and hysterectomy. Results Model analyses show lower costs for NovaSure-treated patients than for those treated with other GEA modalities or hysterectomy over all time frames under commercial payer and Medicaid perspectives. By Year 3, cost savings versus other GEA were

Cost-effectiveness of edoxaban versus rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in the US

930 (commercial) and

Rate of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving metformin plus saxagliptin versus metformin plus sulfonylurea: a retrospective observational cohort study using administrative claims data

3,000 (Medicaid); cost savings versus hysterectomy were

Retrospective database analysis of clinical outcomes and costs for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding among women enrolled in US Medicaid programs.

6,500 (commercial) and

Impact of access restrictions on varenicline utilization

8,900 (Medicaid). Coinciding with a 43%–71% reduction in need for re-ablation, there were 69%–88% fewer intervention/reintervention complications for NovaSure-treated patients versus other GEA modalities, and 82%–91% fewer versus hysterectomy. Furthermore, NovaSure-treated patients had fewer days of work absence and short-term disability. Cost-effectiveness metrics showed NovaSure treatment as economically dominant over other GEA modalities in all circumstances. With few exceptions, similar results were shown for NovaSure treatment versus hysterectomy. Conclusion Model results demonstrate strong financial favorability for NovaSure ablation versus other GEA modalities and hysterectomy from commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives. Results will interest clinicians, health care payers, and self-insured employers striving for cost-effective AUB treatments.