US health care utilization and costs in adult patients with atopic dermatitis by disease severity

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have reported the economic burden of atopic dermatitis (AD) in adults, updates are needed using more current data and measure of disease severity. OBJECTIVE: To describe the health care resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs in US adults diagnosed with AD overall and by disease severity. METHODS: This real-world retrospective study identified adults aged at least 18 years who received a clinical diagnosis of AD in a dermatology electronic medical record (EMR) database between 2016 and 2018 (first record = index date), which was linked to an administrative claims database. Patients were required to have an AD diagnostic code and at least 6 months of continuous enrollment in medical and pharmacy benefits before and after the index date. Baseline severity was assessed using the Physician Global Assessment score closest to the index date. Inpatient and outpatient services, visits to specialists and its seasonality, treatment use, and associated annual direct health care costs were reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Annual all-cause direct health care costs were $10,474 per patient per year and primarily driven by outpatient visits and pharmacy use. Compared with patients with clear to mild disease, more AD patients with severe disease had at least 1 dermatology (73.0% vs 58.5%) and allergy/immunology office visit (16.0% vs 5.5%) and AD-related medications (90.0% vs 64.3%). All-cause total annual costs in patients with severe disease ($23,242) were significantly higher than in patients with clear to mild disease ($8,936; P = 0.0002). Little seasonal variation in dermatology office visits was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Significant economic burden primarily driven by outpatient and pharmacy utilization was observed in AD patients, which increased with disease severity. DISCLOSURES: This work was sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company. Gorritz and Wade are employees of IQVIA, which was contracted by Eli Lilly and Company to conduct this study and develop the manuscript. Wang was employed by IQVIA at the time of this study. Malatestinic and Goldblum are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company. Boytsov was an employee of Eli Lilly at the time of this research.