ObjectiveTo determine real-world trends in antidiabetic drug use, and persistence and adherence, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).DesignRetrospective evaluation of administrative claims data (2011–2015) using the Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) and Medical Data Vision (MDV) databases.SettingAnalysis of two administrative claims databases for Japanese patients with T2DM.ParticipantsAdults (aged ≥18 years) with an International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision code of T2DM and at least one antidiabetic drug prescription.Main outcome measuresTreatment patterns in untreated (UT) or previously treated (PT) patients receiving antidiabetic therapy; persistence with treatment at 12 months; adherence to treatment at 12 months.Results40 908 and 90 421 patients were included from the JMDC and MDV databases, respectively. The most frequently prescribed therapy at the index (first prescription) date was dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) in UT patients (JMDC: 44.0%, MDV: 54.8%) and combination therapy in PT patients (74.6%, 81.1%). Most common combinations were DPP-4i plus: biguanide (BG; 11.4%, 10.9%), sulfonylurea (SU; 8.4%, 11.0%) or BG+SU (7.8%, 9.1%). In UT or PT patients from either database whose index prescription was for any antidiabetic drug class(es) other than DPP-4i, the most frequent add-on or switch was to DPP-4i. 12-month persistence with index monotherapy was highest with DPP-4i and BG. Adherence was high (≥80%) for all monotherapy schedules, except insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist, and for the five most frequent two-drug and three-drug combinations. Persistence was greater in elderly UT patients and in those receiving ≤5 medications, but comparatively worse in UT patients with ≥3 index antidiabetic drug classes.ConclusionsThe findings indicate that DPP-4i is the most commonly used antidiabetic drug class in Japanese patients with T2DM, and persistence and adherence to this antidiabetic drug class are high.

PurposeThis study aimed to describe treatment patterns and estimate health care resource utilization and associated costs among Japanese women with dysmenorrhea, using a claims database.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis using health insurance data from the Japan Medical Data Center, assessing female patients aged 18–49 years with newly diagnosed primary or secondary dysmenorrhea. Treatment pattern analyses focused on hormonal medications, analgesics, hemostatic agents, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), and gynecological surgeries. Data were collected on health care resource utilization and costs associated with medications, imaging procedures, and inpatient and outpatient care in both patients and matched controls.ResultsThe analysis included 6,315 women with dysmenorrhea (3,441 primary; 2,874 secondary). The most commonly prescribed initial therapies were low-dose estrogen progestins (LEPs, 37.7%) and TCM (30.0%), with substantial differences between primary (LEPs: 27.4%, TCM: 38.8%) and secondary (LEPs: 50.2%, TCM: 19.5%) dysmenorrhea cohorts. Surgery was conducted in <5% of all patients. Both primary and secondary cohorts of dysmenorrhea had significantly higher mean total health care costs compared to controls within the 1-year period following diagnosis (Case-primary: 191,680 JPY [1,916 USD]; secondary: 246,488 JPY [2,465 USD], Control-primary: 83,615 JPY [836 USD]; secondary: 90,711 JPY [907 USD]) (p<0.0001). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, these costs were 2.2 and 2.9 times higher for primary and secondary dysmenorrhea cohorts, respectively, compared with matched controls, (both p<0.0001). The main driver of these excess costs was outpatient care, with eight additional physician visits per year among dysmenorrhea patients compared to controls (p<0.0001).ConclusionConsiderable heterogeneity in treatment patterns was observed, with relatively low utilization of LEPs in patients with primary dysmenorrhea and those treated by internal medicine physicians. Total annual health care costs were approximately 2–3 times higher in patients with dysmenorrhea compared to women without the condition.

Based on analysis of prescription patterns and type of treatment used for treating non-psychotic major depression, a majority of patients were not treated according to the recommended guidelines in Japan. Various patterns of prescription and use of polypharmacy were observed over time. The median duration of treatment was shorter than the recommendation (6 months) in the guidelines.

Most common prescriptions were moderate statins in UT patients and combination therapy in PT patients. The high discontinuation rate of HLD therapy in UT patients warrants further investigation and identification of methods to encourage and support long-term persistence.

Background: Dementia has become a growing health-care problem in the rapidly ageing Japanese population. This study assesses the impact of dementia on quality of life, economic burden, and productivity loss. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of dementia on the Quality of Life (QoL), economic burden, and productivity loss among families living with dementia. Methods: An online survey was conducted among families who lived with relatives with dementia. Demographic data and information about health condition and costs of long-term care and treatment were collected. Participants were asked to answer the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, Zarit Burden Interview (ZARIT-8), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI). Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess factors associated with burden by families living with dementia. Results: Six hundred and thirty-five participants completed the survey. Of these participants, 50.5% were primary caregivers. Overall, 78.7% of dementia patients suffered from Alzheimer, and 43.9% needed long-term care. Compared to non-primary caregivers, primary caregivers had lower health utility scores (0.896 vs 0.873; p = 0.02), higher burden of caregiving (ZARIT-8: 21.1 vs 24.5; p < 0.0001), and higher overall work impairment (40.2% vs 20.8%; p < 0.0001), absenteeism (15.3% vs 5.7%; p < 0.0001), and presenteeism-related impairment (33.2% vs 17.3%; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Families living with dementia caring for a person with dementia experience increased burden. Health policies related to dementia need to be considered not only for patients, but also for their families living with dementia to improve their QoL.