Economic Outcomes Related to Persistence and Dosing of Celecoxib in Patients with Osteoarthritis (OA) Using a Retrospective Claims Database Analysis
Authors Johnson C, Stephens J, Walker C, Cappelleri JC, Shelbaya A
Received 21 December 2018
Accepted for publication 22 November 2019
Published 21 January 2020 Volume 2020:12 Pages 57—67
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Professor Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo
Courtney Johnson,1 Jennifer Stephens,1 Christopher Walker,2 Joseph C Cappelleri,3 Ahmed Shelbaya4
1Pharmerit International, Real World Evidence and Data Analytics, Bethesda, MD, USA; 2Pfizer Ltd., Global Medical Affairs, Tadworth, Surrey, England; 3Pfizer Inc., Statistics, Groton, CT, USA; 4Pfizer Inc., Health Economics and Outcomes Research, New York, NY, USA
Correspondence: Jennifer Stephens
Pharmerit International, 4350 East West Highway, Suite 1100, Bethesda, MD, USA
Tel +1 240-821-1290
Objective: This study describes treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with persistence, switching, and dosing of branded celecoxib in osteoarthritis (OA) patients.
Methods: This retrospective claims database analysis used MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (MarketScan) data from 2009 to 2013. Included patients were adult (≥ 18 years), incident celecoxib users with ≥ 1 OA claim. The treatment switch analysis analyzed outcomes in patients persistent on celecoxib versus switched to a generic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). The dosing analysis stratified patients as under-dose (< 200 mg per day) and standard dose (≥ 200 mg per day). HCRU, costs, and treatment duration were compared in persistent versus switched and standard dose versus under-dose patients using descriptive, multivariate logistic regression, and Kaplan–Meier analysis.
Results: A total of 65,530 patients met the inclusion criteria. During follow-up, 83% discontinued celecoxib without switching, 10% were persistent, and 5% switched to a generic NSAID. Ninety percent received a standard dose of celecoxib. Switched (versus persistent) patients had significantly higher all-cause hospital admissions, length of stay, emergency room (ER) visits, and office visits per person year (PPY), all P < 0.001; and under-dosed (versus standard dose) patients had significantly higher hospital admissions (P< 0.001), length of stay (P< 0.001), and ER visits (P= 0.021) PPY. Persistent versus switched patients had lower mean total all-cause costs PPY ($20,378 vs $23,949, P< 0.001). Standard dose versus under-dose patients had lower mean total all-cause costs ($23,680 vs $26,955 PPY, P< 0.001), and not statistically significant higher mean total OA-related costs ($5698 vs $5524 PPY, P=0.441).
Conclusion: Patients that switched from branded celecoxib to a generic NSAID or received an under-dose of branded celecoxib had higher average overall HCRU and costs. OA-related inpatient and outpatient cost savings may offset the higher drug cost of celecoxib for persistent patients.
Keywords: generic, healthcare resource use, Celebrex, NSAIDS, switching, discontinuation
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]