MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396798879 · doi:10.1007/s40801-024-00425-2

Treatment Patterns, Acute Healthcare Resource Use, and Costs of Patients with Treatment-Resistant Depression Completing Induction Phase of Esketamine in the United States

2024· article· en· W4396798879 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDrugs - Real World Outcomes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsDepression (economics)Treatment-resistant depressionHealth careKetamineMedicinePhase (matter)PsychiatryPsychologyIntensive care medicineAnxietyPolitical scienceEconomicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to understand treatment patterns, acute healthcare use, and cost patterns among adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) who completed induction treatment with esketamine nasal spray in the United States (US). Per label, induction is defined as administration twice a week for 4 weeks, after which maintenance is started on a weekly basis for 4 weeks, and thereafter, patients are treated weekly or bimonthly. METHODS: Data Mart Database (January 2016-June 2022). Before the index date, patients had evidence of TRD and ≥ 12 months of continuous insurance eligibility (baseline period). Patients with eight or more esketamine treatment sessions were included in the main cohort. A subgroup included patients with one or more baseline mental health (MH)-related inpatient (IP) admission or emergency department (ED) visit (i.e., prior acute healthcare users). Treatment patterns were described during the follow-up period (index date until earliest of end of insurance eligibility or data); acute healthcare (i.e., IP and ED) resource use and costs (2021 US dollars) were reported during the baseline and follow-up periods. RESULTS: Of the 322 patients in the main cohort, 111 comprised the subgroup of prior acute healthcare users. During the follow-up period, mean time from index date to eighth esketamine session was 73.2 days in the main cohort and 78.8 days in the subgroup (per label, 28 days). Further, 75.2% of the main cohort and 73.9% of the subgroup completed four or more esketamine maintenance sessions following induction. In the main cohort, mean all-cause acute healthcare costs per patient per month (PPPM) decreased from baseline ($837) to follow-up ($770). Similar reductions were observed for mean MH-related acute healthcare costs PPPM (baseline $648, follow-up $577). In the subgroup, mean all-cause acute healthcare costs PPPM also decreased (baseline $2323, follow-up $1423), driven by mean MH-related acute healthcare costs PPPM (baseline $1880, follow-up $1139). Mean all-cause acute healthcare use per ten patients per month remained largely stable from baseline to follow-up in the main cohort (IP days: baseline 2.24, follow-up 2.13; ED visits: baseline 1.33, follow-up 1.45) and decreased in the subgroup (IP days: baseline 6.38, follow-up 4.56; ED visits: baseline 2.58, follow-up 2.41). Trends in mean MH-related acute healthcare use were similar. CONCLUSION: Patients generally required more time than label recommendation to complete esketamine induction treatment, and most went on to have 12 or more esketamine sessions. Completion of induction treatment correlated with reductions in mean all-cause and MH-related acute healthcare costs. Larger reductions were seen in the subgroup of prior acute healthcare users.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it