Use of Drug Claims Data and a Medication Risk Score to Assess the Impact of CYP2D6 Drug Interactions among Opioid Users on Healthcare Costs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) activity is highly variable due to several factors, including genetic polymorphisms and drug-drug-gene interactions. Hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine, and tramadol the most commonly prescribed CYP2D6-activated opioids for pain. However, the co-administration of CYP2D6 interacting drugs can modulate CYP2D6-medicated activation of these opioids, affecting drug analgesia, effectiveness, and safety, and can impact healthcare costs. A retrospective, observational cohort analysis was performed in a large (n = 50,843) adult population. This study used drug claims data to derive medication risk scores and matching propensity scores to estimate the effects of opioid use and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) on medical expenditures. 4088 individuals were identified as opioid users; 95% of those were prescribed CYP2D6-activated opioids. Among those, 15% were identified as being at risk for DDIs. Opioid users had a significant increase in yearly medical expenditure compared to non-opioid users ($2457 vs. $1210). In matched individuals, average healthcare expenditures were higher for opioid users with DDIs compared to those without DDIs ($7841 vs. $5625). The derived medication risk score was higher in CYP2D6 opioid users with interacting drug(s) compared to no DDI (15 vs. 12). Higher costs associated with CYP2D6 opioid use under DDI conditions suggest inadequate CYP2D6 opioid prescribing practices. Efforts to improve chronic opioid use in adults should reduce interacting drug combinations, especially among patients using CYP2D6 activated opioids.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".