Open AccessHealthcare use and costs among Medicare enrollees on pirfenidone versus nintedanib for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
Author(s) -
Mitra Corral,
Eunice Chang,
Michael S. Broder,
Sohum Gokhale,
Sheila R. Reddy
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of comparative effectiveness research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.567
H-Index - 23
eISSN - 2042-6313
pISSN - 2042-6305
DOI - 10.2217/cer-2020-0084
Subject(s) - pirfenidone , medicine , nintedanib , idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis , propensity score matching , emergency medicine , retrospective cohort study , cohort , lung
Aim: Compare healthcare utilization and costs between Medicare beneficiaries with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) receiving pirfenidone or nintedanib. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries (100% Research Identifiable Files) with IPF who initiated pirfenidone or nintedanib between 15 October 2014 and 31 December 2015. Inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity scores adjusted for baseline covariates. Outcomes: hospitalization and monthly costs. Results: Hazard and incidence rate ratios (95% CI) for all-cause (0.79 [0.68–0.91]; 0.69 [0.59–0.82]) and respiratory-related (0.80 [0.65–0.97]; 0.71 [0.57–0.90]) hospitalizations favored pirfenidone versus nintedanib. Monthly inpatient costs were lower for pirfenidone versus nintedanib patients; outpatient and pharmacy costs were similar. Conclusion: In patients with IPF, pirfenidone compared with nintedanib has a moderate but significant protective effect on hospitalization, corresponding to lower inpatient costs.