Article

Derivation and preliminary validation of an administrative claims-based algorithm for the effectiveness of medications for rheumatoid arthritis

Department of Medicine, University of Alabama, 510 20th Street South, FOT 805D, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
Arthritis research & therapy (Impact Factor: 4.12). 09/2011; 13(5):R155. DOI: 10.1186/ar3471
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Administrative claims data have not commonly been used to study the clinical effectiveness of medications for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) because of the lack of a validated algorithm for this outcome. We created and tested a claims-based algorithm to serve as a proxy for the clinical effectiveness of RA medications.
We linked Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical and pharmacy claims for RA patients participating in the longitudinal Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) RA registry (VARA). Among individuals for whom treatment with a new biologic agent or nonbiologic disease-modifying agent in rheumatic disease (DMARD) was being initiated and with registry follow-up at 1 year, VARA and administrative data were used to create a gold standard for the claims-based effectiveness algorithm. The gold standard outcome was low disease activity (LDA) (Disease Activity Score using 28 joint counts (DAS28) ≤ 3.2) or improvement in DAS28 by > 1.2 units at 12 ± 2 months, with high adherence to therapy. The claims-based effectiveness algorithm incorporated biologic dose escalation or switching, addition of new disease-modifying agents, increase in oral glucocorticoid use and dose as well as parenteral glucocorticoid injections.
Among 1,397 patients, we identified 305 eligible biologic or DMARD treatment episodes in 269 unique individuals. The patients were primarily men (94%) with a mean (± SD) age of 62 ± 10 years. At 1 year, 27% of treatment episodes achieved the effectiveness gold standard. The performance characteristics of the effectiveness algorithm were as follows: positive predictive value, 76% (95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 71% to 81%); negative predictive value, 90% (95% CI = 88% to 92%); sensitivity, 72% (95% CI = 67% to 77%); and specificity, 91% (95% CI = 89% to 93%).
Administrative claims data may be useful in evaluating the effectiveness of medications for RA. Further validation of this effectiveness algorithm will be useful in assessing its generalizability and performance in other populations.

0 Followers
 · 
238 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The aim of this analysis was to implement a claims-based algorithm to estimate biologic cost per effectively treated patient for biologics approved for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: This retrospective analysis included commercially insured adults (aged 18-63 years) with RA in a commercial database, who initiated biologic treatment with abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab between 2007 and 2010. The algorithm defined effectiveness as having all of the following: high adherence, no biologic dose increase, no biologic switching, no new nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, no increased or new oral glucocorticoid use, and no more than 1 glucocorticoid injection. For each biologic, cost per effectively treated patient was defined as total drug and administration costs (from allowed amounts on claims), divided by the number of patients categorized as effectively treated. Findings: Of 15,351 patients, 12,018 (78.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 49.7 (9.6) years. The algorithm categorized treatment as effective in the first year for 30% (1899/6374) of etanercept, 30% (1396/4661) of adalimumab, 20% (560/2765) of infliximab, 27% (361/1338) of abatacept, and 29% (62/213) of golimumab treated patients. The 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined by the algorithm, was nominally lower for subcutaneously injected biologics than for infused biologics. The 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined by the algorithm, was lowest for etanercept ($49,952), followed by golimumab ($50,189), adalimumab ($52,858), abatacept ($71,866), and infliximab ($104,333). Implications: Algorithm-defined effectiveness was similar for biologics other than infliximab. The 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined by the algorithm, was nominally lower for subcutaneously injected biologics than for infused biologics.
    Clinical Therapeutics 07/2014; 36(7). DOI:10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.05.062 · 2.59 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objectives: To estimate biologic cost per effectively treated patient with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using a claims-based algorithm for effectiveness. Methods: Patients with RA aged 18 to 63 years in the IMS PharMetrics(™) Plus database were categorized as effectively treated if they met all six criteria: (1) a medication possession ratio ≥ 80% (subcutaneous) or at least as many infusions as specified in US labeling (intravenous); (2) no biologic dose increase; (3) no biologic switch; (4) no new nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug; (5) no new or increased oral glucocorticoid; and (6) ≤ 1 glucocorticoid injection. Biologic cost per effectively treated patient was defined as total cost of the index biologic (drug plus intravenous administration) divided by the number of patients categorized by the algorithm as effectively treated. Similar methods were used for the index biologic in the second year and for a second biologic after a switch. Results: Rates that the index biologic was categorized as effective in the first year were 31.0% etanercept (2,243/7,247), 28.6% adalimumab (1,426/4,991), 28.6% abatacept (332/1,160), 27.2% golimumab (71/261), and 20.2% infliximab (474/2,352). Mean biologic cost per effectively treated patient, per the algorithm, was $50,141 etanercept, $53,386 golimumab, $56,942 adalimumab, $73,516 abatacept, and $114,089 infliximab. Biologic cost per effectively treated patient, using this algorithm, was lower for patients who continued the index biologic in the second year and higher after switching. Conclusions: When a claims-based algorithm was applied to a large commercial claims database, etanercept was categorized as the most effective and had the lowest estimated 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient. This proxy for effectiveness from claims databases was validated against a clinical effectiveness scale, but analyses of the second year or the year after a biologic switch were not included in the validation. Costs of other medications were not included in cost calculations.
    Journal of Medical Economics 04/2014; DOI:10.3111/13696998.2014.914031
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective. Limited evidence exists comparing the persistence, effectiveness, and costs of biologic therapi es for rheumatoid arthritis in clinical practice. Comparative effectiveness studies are needed to understand real-world experience with these agents. We evaluated treatment patterns, costs, and effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) agents in patients enrolled in the Veterans Affairs Rheumatoid Arthritis (VARA) registry. Methods. Observational data from the VARA registry and linked administrative databases were analyzed. Longitudinal data from VARA patients initiating adalimumab (ADA), etanercept (ETN), or infliximab (IFX) from 2003 (the date all agents were available within the Veteran Affairs) to 2010 were analyzed. Outcomes included Disease Activity Score using 28 joints (DAS28), treatment persistence, dose escalation, and direct costs of drugs and drug administration. Results. For 563 eligible patients, baseline DAS28, DAS28 improvements, and persistence on initial treatment were similar across agents. Fewer patients receiving ETN (n = 5/290; 2%) underwent dose escalation than did patients taking ADA (n = 32/204; 16%) or IFX (n = 44/69; 64%). Annual costs for first course of TNFi therapy were lower for injectable ADA ($13,100 US) and ETN ($13,500 US) than for intravenously administered IFX ($16,900 US). Conclusion. Despite similar persistence and clinical disease activity for these TNFi agents, rates of dose escalation were highest with ADA and IFX. Higher overall costs were noted for IFX without increases in effectiveness.
    The Journal of Rheumatology 08/2014; 41(10). DOI:10.3899/jrheum.140164 · 3.17 Impact Factor