Objectives To assess the cost-effectiveness of erenumab 140 mg ("erenumab") for the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine and chronic migraine. Study design A hybrid Monte Carlo patient simulation and Markov cohort model was constructed to compare erenumab to no preventive treatment or onabotulinumtoxinA among adult ( ≥ 18 years) patients with episodic migraine and chronic migraine who failed prior preventive therapy from the US societal and payer perspectives. Methods Patients entered the model one at a time and were assigned to a post-treatment monthly migraine day category based on baseline monthly migraine days and treatment effect. Using monthly cycles, patients were followed for 2 years and accumulated costs and utilities associated with their post-treatment monthly migraine days. The primary outcome included the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio presented as cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Results With an annual drug price of erenumab of $6900, treatment with erenumab in the societal perspective ranges from a dominant strategy versus no preventive treatment among chronic migraine patients to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $122,167 versus no preventive treatment among episodic migraine patients. When excluding indirect costs (i.e. payer perspective), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are cost-effective among chronic migraine patients ($23,079 and $65,720 versus no preventive treatment and onabotulinumtoxinA, respectively), but not among episodic migraine patients ($180,012 versus no preventive treatment). Model results were sensitive to changes in monthly migraine days, health utilities, and treatment costs. Conclusion The use of erenumab may be a cost-effective approach to preventing monthly migraine days among patients with chronic migraine versus onabotulinumtoxinA and no preventive treatment in the societal and payer perspectives, but is less likely to offer good value for money for those with episodic migraine, unless lost productivity costs are considered.

BackgroundLimited data exist on the economic implications of stroke among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This study assesses the impact of AF on healthcare costs associated with ischemic stroke (IS), hemorrhagic stroke (HS), or transient ischemic attack (TIA).Methods and ResultsA retrospective analysis of MarketScan claims data (2005‐2011) for AF patients ≥18 years old with ≥1 inpatient claim for stroke, or ≥1 ED or inpatient claim for TIA as identified by ICD‐9‐CM codes who had ≥12 months continuous enrollment prior to initial stroke. Initial event‐ and stroke‐related costs 12 months post‐index were compared among patients with AF and without AF. Adjusted costs were estimated, controlling for demographics, comorbidities, anticoagulant use, and baseline resource use. Data from 23 807 AF patients and 136 649 patients without AF were analyzed. Unadjusted mean cost of the index event was $20 933 for IS, $59 054 for HS, $8616 for TIA hospitalization, and $3395 for TIA ED visit. After controlling for potential confounders, adjusted mean incremental costs (index plus 12‐month post‐index) for AF patients were higher than those for non‐AF patients by: $4726, $7824, and $1890 for index IS, HS, TIA (identified by hospitalization), respectively, and $1700 for TIA (identified by ED) (all P<0.01). In multivariate regression analysis, AF was associated with a 20% (IS), 13% (HS), and 18% (TIA) increase in total stroke‐related costs.ConclusionStroke‐related care for IS, HS, and TIA is costly, especially among individuals with AF. Reducing the risk of AF‐related stroke is important from both clinical and economic standpoints.

Our study results suggest that the attributable incidence and costs of treatment-related complications associated with chemotherapy in ASCCHN are substantial. The emergence of safer treatments may have the advantage of alleviating this cost burden.

BackgroundTo assess the prevalence of menopausal symptoms among women prescribed hormone therapy (HT) using electronic medical record data from a regional healthcare organization.MethodsRetrospective data from the Reliant Medical Group from 1/1/2006-12/31/2011 were assessed for 102 randomly-selected patients. Study eligibility criteria included: females aged 45 to 65; prescribed oral or transdermal HT; no history of breast cancer, venous thromboembolism, stroke, gynecological cancer, or hysterectomy; continuously enrolled in the health plan for 1 year before and after the first observed HT prescription. Prevalence of menopause-related symptoms was analyzed descriptively at both the patient and visit levels.ResultsMean age of patients was 54 years. The most common menopausal symptoms were: hot flushes (40 %), night sweats (17 %), insomnia (16 %), vaginal dryness (13 %), mood disorders (12 %), and weight gain (12 %). Among the 102 patients, 163 individual visits listing menopausal symptoms were identified, of which hot flushes (71 visits) were the most common symptom identified.ConclusionOur findings provide recent data on the types of menopausal symptoms experienced by mid-life women prescribed HT. Electronic medical records may be a rich source of data for future studies of menopausal symptoms in this population.

Background: The financial strain of type 1 diabetes on the United States health care system, patients, and employers underscores the importance of developing novel treatments for the disease. This study estimated the lifetime economic burden attributable to type 1 diabetes in the United States. Methods: A patient-level, Markov state/transition simulation model was developed to compare cumulative societal costs among patients with and without type 1 diabetes. For each patient type, 1 prevalent and 10 incident cohorts were constructed and followed annually over a lifetime horizon. The 1 prevalent cohort with type 1 diabetes entered in the first year of the model and at the current age of each patient, whereas the 10 incident cohorts entered in each of 10 subsequent years and at the age of diagnosis of each patient. Patients were assigned age-specific annual medical expenditures and lost wages. Model outputs included the total cumulative medical and lost productivity costs attributable to type 1 diabetes, defined as the difference in costs between patients with and without type 1 diabetes. Results: The model consisted of 1,630,317 patients with type 1 diabetes and an equal number of patients without type 1 diabetes. The difference in lifetime costs was $813 billion (95% confidence interval: $682-$1037 billion), representing a high burden of illness compared with patients without type 1 diabetes. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness in model results. Conclusions: Our findings suggest significant investment in research and development of novel treatments for type 1 diabetes is justified, given the high burden of illness associated with the disease.