Health-care costs and utilization related to long- or short-acting antiepileptic monotherapy use

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare health-care utilization and costs in patients treated with long-acting (LA) vs. short-acting (SA) antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of claims from the OptumInsight™ database. Our analysis was restricted to adults diagnosed with epilepsy and who used AED monotherapy. Patients were excluded if they used >1 type of AED, had <9months of treatment, or had a treatment gap of >60days. Antiepileptic drugs were classified as LA or SA based on published data and expert opinion. Medical and pharmacy claims were used to estimate health-care utilization and costs, and baseline group differences were adjusted using multivariate analyses. RESULTS: There were 4058 (49.6%) LA AED users and 4122 (50.4%) SA AED users. Medication possession ratios (MPRs) were not significantly different between LA AED users and SA AED users (P=0.125). Long-acting AED users had lower mean overall health-care costs ($9757 vs. $12,689), lower epilepsy-related costs ($3539 vs. $5279), and lower rate of overall (8.8% vs. 10.9%) and epilepsy-related hospitalizations (5.7% vs. 7.6%) compared with SA AED users (all P<0.01). After adjusting for demographics and clinical characteristics, mean overall costs were lower by $686 and the mean epilepsy-related costs were lower by $894 in LA AED users. CONCLUSION: Although MPRs were similar in LA AED and SA AED groups, patients treated with LA monotherapy had a lower economic burden compared with those treated with SA monotherapy, indicating that using AEDs with extended duration of action is associated with decreased health-care use and lower health-care costs.