1 / 16

Rapid Penetration of COX 2 Inhibitors in Non-Steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug Market:

Rapid Penetration of COX 2 Inhibitors in Non-Steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug Market: an Implication to Hospital Cost Containment Policy. Supon Limwattananon, MPHM, PhD * Chulaporn Limwattananon, MPharm, MSc, PhD * Supasit Pannarunothai, MD, PhD **

lan
Télécharger la présentation

Rapid Penetration of COX 2 Inhibitors in Non-Steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug Market:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Rapid Penetration of COX2 Inhibitors in Non-Steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug Market: an Implication to Hospital Cost Containment Policy Supon Limwattananon, MPHM, PhD * Chulaporn Limwattananon, MPharm, MSc, PhD * Supasit Pannarunothai, MD, PhD ** * Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Khon Kaen University ** Center for Health Equity Monitoring, Naresuan University - Thailand

  2. Cyclo-Oxygenase-2 (COX2) Inhibitors • In Thailand, • Celecoxib and Rofecoxib have been available since 1999, • each by a sole pharmaceutical company • “single-source product” • Report from MOPH-provincial hospitals(N =41*, Year 2002), • Spending for COX2 inhibitors • Total acquisition costs 42.9 million Baht • Share of top 50 high cost drugs 6.2% • Ranking • Celecoxib 1st (in secondary care hospitals*) • 3rd(in tertiary care hospitals*)

  3. Objectives 1.To examine variations in hospital NSAID expenditures as related to the use of COX2 inhibitors 2. To assess patterns of drug channeling for COX2 inhibitors

  4. Study Population • Settings: 18 provincial hospitals in 4 regions of Thailand • (secondary and tertiary acute care settings) • Sample: 1,558,633 prescriptions for oral NSAID solid forms • rendered to ambulatory patients in 4 health insurance schemes • Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme-CSMBS • Social Security Scheme-SSS • Low-Income Card & Universal Health Care • Coverage-LIC/UCschemes • Rest of the population-ROP • Time periods: Fiscal years 2000-2002

  5. Study Design & Analysis • Retrospective, secondary analysis of electronic databases • of hospital drug use • Statistical analysis * • For drug expenditures: a generalized linear model (GLM) • For propensity of drug use: logistic regression analysis • Control for the underlying differences in drug use patterns due to • patient demographics (age groups and sex) • years of drug use (and interaction with health insurance schemes) • hospital settings • (proxy for variations in prescribing practicestyles)

  6. Utilization and Expenditures All Types of NSAIDs Prescriptions Daily dosesThai Baht Year 2000484,452 4,944,28523,205,944 Year 2001549,366 5,658,36234,257,243 Annual growth from Year 2000 (13.4%) (14.4%)(47.6%) Year 2002538,517 5,260,40437,991,221 Annual growth from Year 2000 (11.2%) (6.4%)(63.7%)

  7. Daily Doses by Types of NSAID Days 5.2% 8.2% 10.0% 0.7% COX2 inhibitors Other NSAID-NED Meloxicam Other NSAID-ED

  8. Expenditures by types of NSAID Baht COX2 inhibitors 33.9% 52.1% 46.5% 6.5% Other NSAID-NED Meloxicam Other NSAID-ED

  9. Factors Affecting NSAID Expenditures per Capita(Competing Models) Model with interaction terms Main effect model Coefficienta P value Coefficienta P value COX2 inhibitors 2.486 < 0.001 2.488 < 0.001 Age 36 – 49 years b 0.368 < 0.001 0.370 < 0.001 Age 50+ years b 0.798 < 0.001 0.805 < 0.001 Male - 0.158 < 0.001 - 0.158 < 0.001 CSMBS c 0.864 < 0.001 0.847 < 0.001 LIC/UC c - 0.001 0.954 - 0.053 < 0.001 ROP c - 0.022 0.188 - 0.084 < 0.001 Year 2001 d - 0.035 0.065 0.038 < 0.001 Year 2002 d 0.186 < 0.001 0.025 0.002 CSMBS x Year 2001 0.083 0.002 CSMBS x Year 2002 - 0.093 < 0.001 LIC/UC x Year 2001 0.123 < 0.001 LIC/UC x Year 2002 - 0.205 < 0.001 ROP x Year2001 0.070 0.002 ROP x Year2002 - 0.249 < 0.001 a Based on generalized linear model (GLM) using log link, gamma distribution , adjusted for hospital indicators b Age of 18-35 years as the reference category c SSS as the reference category d Year 2000 as the reference category

  10. Effects on Difference in NSAID Expenditure % difference a 95% CI COX2 inhibitors 1,101.2% 1,056.5 to 1,147.6% vs. other NSAID Age 36-49 years 44.5% 42.3 to 46.7% vs. 18-35 years Age 50+ years 122.0% 118.5 to 125.6% vs. 18-35 years Male -14.6% - 15.7 to -13.5% vs. Female a % difference due to an indicator variable = exp(Coefficient) - 1

  11. Effects on Difference in NSAID Expenditure (Trends for Each Scheme) % difference a LIC/UC SSS ROP CSMBS Year 2001 vs. 9.2% -3.4% 3.5% 4.9% Year 2000 Year 2002 vs. -1.9% 20.4% -6.1% 9.7% Year 2000 a % difference due to an indicator variable = exp(Coefficient) - 1 Based on GLM with interaction of schemes and years

  12. Effects on Difference in NSAID Expenditure (Comparison between Schemes for Each Year) % difference a Year 2000 Year 2001 Year 2002 CSMBS vs. SSS 137.2% 157.7% 116.1% ROP vs. SSS -2.2% 4.9% -23.7% LIC/UC vs. SSS -0.1% 13.0% -18.6% a % difference due to an indicator variable = exp(Coefficient) - 1 Based on GLM with interaction of schemes and years

  13. Propensity to Receive COX2 Inhibitors(Competing Models) Model with interaction terms Main effect model Coefficienta P value Coefficienta P value Age 36 – 49 years b 0.619 < 0.001 0.617 < 0.001 Age 50+ years b 1.267 < 0.001 1.270 < 0.001 Male - 0.302 < 0.001 - 0.301 < 0.001 CSMBS c 2.279 < 0.001 2.434 < 0.001 LIC/UC c - 0.845 < 0.001 - 0.585 < 0.001 ROP c - 0.407 < 0.001 0.178 < 0.001 Year 2001 d 1.105 < 0.001 1.200 < 0.001 Year 2002 d 1.145 < 0.001 1.512 < 0.001 CSMBS x Year 2001 - 0.009 0.936 CSMBS x Year 2002 0.303 0.003 LIC/UC x Year 2001 0.367 0.009 LIC/UC x Year 2002 0.285 0.038 ROP x Year2001 0.461 < 0.001 ROP x Year2002 0.853 < 0.001 a Based on logistic regression analysis, adjusted for hospital indicators b Age of 18-35 years as the reference category c SSS as the reference category d Year 2000 as the reference category

  14. Odds Ratio of Receiving COX2 Inhibitors(Comparison between Schemes for Each Year) Odds Ratio a Year 2000 Year 2001 Year 2002 CSMBS vs. LIC/UC 22.74 15.62 23.14 CSMBS vs. SSS 9.77 9.68 13.22 ROP vs. LIC/UC 1.55 1.70 2.73 LIC/UC vs. SSS 0.43 0.62 0.57 a Based on logistic regression model with interaction of schemes and years

  15. Odds of Receiving COX2 Inhibitors CSMBS Odds* (in log scale) SSS ROP LIC/UC * Odds = exp(constant+bAge+bGender+bScheme+bYear+bSchemexYear+bHosp)

  16. Conclusion • Growth in NSAID expenditures was largely driven by • rapid penetration of the expensive COX2 inhibitors. • The prime target for the patent-protected, single-source drugs • was patients covered by fee-for-service scheme like CSMBS. • To contain hospital drug costs, a generic substitution for • COX2 inhibitors is unfeasible due to market exclusivity nature. • Therapeutic substitution with the multi-source NSAID is • a viable alternative in curbing the expenditure growth.

More Related