Abstract
Introduction Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is a common comorbidity among patients with chronic kidney disease. Iron deficiency occurs in 15% to 48% of non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (ND-CKD) patients with anemia. Parenteral iron therapy is often required in ND-CKD patients with IDA who cannot tolerate or are nonresponsive to oral iron. Available IV iron treatments vary in the amount of iron dose per administration, the number of infusions required to achieve complete iron repletion and drug acquisition cost. The objective of this study was to compare healthcare costs between ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) and low dose IV iron (LDI) for the treatment of IDA in ND-CKD patients.
Methods Medical and pharmacy claims from IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus data were analyzed. Adult patients who received first (index) dose of FCM or LDI (i.e., iron sucrose, iron dextran, sodium ferric gluconate complex in sucrose) from 2017 to 2019 were included. Eligible patients were required to be continuously eligible 6 months before (baseline) and 12 months after index IV iron infusion and had medical claims associated with diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (ICD-10: N18.1 to N18.5) and IDA (ICD-10: D50.x) anytime during the 18-month study observation period. In addition, eligible FCM patients were required to receive a second dose of FCM within 21 days of index date. Patients who had claims associated with end stage renal disease (ICD-10: N18.5 and N18.6) or dialysis (HCPCS CPT code: 90935-90999) and patients who had received other IV iron products in the 6-month baseline period were excluded.
Unadjusted mean number of IV iron infusions, outpatient visits and hospital admissions in the 6 months before and 12 months following index IV iron dose were summarized on a per-patient-per-month basis. Post-index monthly inpatient, outpatient, and total healthcare costs for FCM and LDI were compared using generalized linear model with gamma log-link adjusting for pre-index monthly cost, age, gender, year of index treatment and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Sensitivity analyses comparing FCM versus iron sucrose were performed.
Results Data from 3,727 FCM patients [mean (SD) age= 67.9 (13.8) years, 61% females, CCI (SD)=1.9 (2.5)] and 5,068 LDI patients [mean (SD) age=64.8 (15.0) years, 60% females, CCI (SD)=1.6 (2.4)] were analyzed. Within the LDI cohort, 3,489 patients received index iron sucrose treatment [mean (SD) age=64.6 (15.1) years, 60% females, CCI (SD)=1.5(2.4)].
Mean (SD) number of IV iron infusions was 0.24 (0.26) for FCM, 0.43 (0.52) for LDI and 0.46 (0.52) for iron sucrose during the post-index period. During the post-index period, FCM has a smaller increase in the number of outpatient visits (mean change from baseline=0.13) than LDI (mean change from baseline=0.64) and iron sucrose (mean change from baseline=0.70). The number of hospital admissions in the post-index period were numerically lower for FCM (mean change from baseline=-0.05) but numerically higher for LDI (mean change from baseline=0.04) and iron sucrose (mean change from baseline=0.05).
Mean total health care cost increased during the 12-month period after IV iron treatment compared to baseline in all treatment groups. After adjusting for pre-index cost and other covariates, FCM treatment was associated with significantly lower post-index inpatient costs [adjusted cost ratio (ACR)= 0.73, p<0.0001], ER costs (ACR=0.76, p<0.0001), outpatient costs (ACR=0.73, p<0.0001) and total costs (including IV iron) (ACR = 0.81, p<0.0001) than LDI. Similar results were observed in the comparisons between FCM and iron sucrose.
Conclusion Higher drug acquisition cost of FCM compared to LDI was primarily offset by lower inpatient and outpatient costs during the 12 months after FCM treatment for IDA in ND-CKD patients than LDI, resulting in significantly lower overall total health care cost for FCM compared to LDI.
Disclosures
Wang:Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Current Employment. Kwong:Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Current Employment. Wang:Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Current Employment. Boccia:Genmab: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Regeneron: Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.
