TY - JOUR
T1 - Multiple sclerosis relapse rates and healthcare costs of two versions of glatiramer acetate
AU - Greenberg, Benjamin
AU - Hall, Steven
AU - Grabner, Michael
AU - Balu, Sanjeev
AU - Zhang, Xian
AU - Kantor, Daniel
N1 - Funding Information:
BG: no relationship with Sandoz, Inc.; grant support from Chugai, Medimmune, Medday, Genentech, NMSS, NIH, PCORI, Transverse Myelitis Association, and Guthy Jackson Charitable Foundation; consulting fees from Alexion, Novartis, EMD Serono, and Celgene; serves on the board of the Transverse Myelitis Association. SH: employee of Sandoz, Inc. MG: employee of HealthCore, Inc., an independent research organization that received funding from Sandoz, Inc. for the conduct of this study. SB: was an employee of Sandoz, Inc. at the time the study was conducted; currently employee of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. XZ: was an employee of HealthCore at the time the study was conducted; currently an employee of University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. DK: has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Actelion, Bayer, Biogen, Celgene, EMD Serono, Genentech/Roche, Mylan, Novartis, Osmotica, Sandoz, and Sanofi-Genzyme; has also participated in multicenter clinical research trials with Actelion. Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, © 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2020/7/2
Y1 - 2020/7/2
N2 - Objective: To compare relapse rates and healthcare costs in MS patients treated with Glatopa 20 mg (generic glatiramer acetate) versus Copaxone 20 mg in a US managed care population. Methods: A retrospective claims study was conducted using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Patients with ≥1 Glatopa or Copaxone claim between 01 April 2015 (Glatopa) or 01 January 2013 (Copaxone) and 30 April 2018 were included. Patients with prior Copaxone 40 mg use or <1 year continuous health plan enrollment were excluded. Patients who switched from Glatopa to Copaxone were censored. Glatopa users were matched to Copaxone users, and outcomes measured at 6–12 months follow-up. Results: A total of 357 Glatopa and 2291 Copaxone patients qualified for inclusion; 158 per cohort were retained after matching. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced (mean age 49.9 years, 75% female, mean 3.8 Copaxone fills). At baseline, 8% of patients had ≥1 relapse with mean annualized relapse rates (ARR) of 0.18; at follow-up, the relapse rates were 8% versus 15% (Glatopa versus Copaxone; p =.05), and ARRs were 0.12 versus 0.30 (p =.05). 45% of Glatopa patients switched (back) to Copaxone 20/40 mg and were censored at that point. Mean (SD) all-cause medical and pharmacy costs were $51,507 ($28,494) versus $55,085 ($37,061; p =.50). Mean MS-related costs were $45,379 ($24,732) versus $47,949 ($32,615; p =.67), of which mean disease modifying therapy costs were $42,926 ($23,196) versus $44,932 ($28,554; p =.59). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: In this real-world study, MS patients treated with Glatopa experienced similar health outcomes and costs compared to those treated with Copaxone, with a trend towards lower relapse rates (borderline statistically significant) and cost savings (not statistically significant).
AB - Objective: To compare relapse rates and healthcare costs in MS patients treated with Glatopa 20 mg (generic glatiramer acetate) versus Copaxone 20 mg in a US managed care population. Methods: A retrospective claims study was conducted using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Patients with ≥1 Glatopa or Copaxone claim between 01 April 2015 (Glatopa) or 01 January 2013 (Copaxone) and 30 April 2018 were included. Patients with prior Copaxone 40 mg use or <1 year continuous health plan enrollment were excluded. Patients who switched from Glatopa to Copaxone were censored. Glatopa users were matched to Copaxone users, and outcomes measured at 6–12 months follow-up. Results: A total of 357 Glatopa and 2291 Copaxone patients qualified for inclusion; 158 per cohort were retained after matching. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced (mean age 49.9 years, 75% female, mean 3.8 Copaxone fills). At baseline, 8% of patients had ≥1 relapse with mean annualized relapse rates (ARR) of 0.18; at follow-up, the relapse rates were 8% versus 15% (Glatopa versus Copaxone; p =.05), and ARRs were 0.12 versus 0.30 (p =.05). 45% of Glatopa patients switched (back) to Copaxone 20/40 mg and were censored at that point. Mean (SD) all-cause medical and pharmacy costs were $51,507 ($28,494) versus $55,085 ($37,061; p =.50). Mean MS-related costs were $45,379 ($24,732) versus $47,949 ($32,615; p =.67), of which mean disease modifying therapy costs were $42,926 ($23,196) versus $44,932 ($28,554; p =.59). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: In this real-world study, MS patients treated with Glatopa experienced similar health outcomes and costs compared to those treated with Copaxone, with a trend towards lower relapse rates (borderline statistically significant) and cost savings (not statistically significant).
KW - MS relapse rates
KW - Multiple sclerosis
KW - claims analysis
KW - glatiramer acetate
KW - healthcare costs
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085560582&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85085560582&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/03007995.2020.1760808
DO - 10.1080/03007995.2020.1760808
M3 - Article
C2 - 32329362
AN - SCOPUS:85085560582
SN - 0300-7995
VL - 36
SP - 1167
EP - 1175
JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion
JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion
IS - 7
ER -