Real-World Direct Health Care Costs Associated with Psychotropic Polypharmacy Among Adults with Common Cancer Types in the United States.

backgroundPsychotropic polypharmacy is not uncommon among cancer patients and may contribute to the increased direct health care cost burden in this population.

objectiveTo estimate average direct health care costs in the year following cancer diagnosis among cancer patients receiving psychotropic polypharmacy compared with those without psychotropic polypharmacy, using a multivariable analysis framework.

methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted among patients aged 18 years and older diagnosed with the most commonly occurring cancers (breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal) in the United States during 2011-2012 using the deidentified Optum Clinformatics Data Mart commercial claims database. Psychotropic polypharmacy was defined as concurrent use of 2 or more psychotropic medications for at least 90 days. Direct health care costs in the year following cancer diagnosis were estimated as total medical payments made by the health plans and were derived from claims files. A generalized linear regression model with log-link function and gamma distribution was used to model average direct health care costs, controlling for baseline patient demographic and clinical covariates.

resultsAverage annual direct health care costs for cancer patients with psychotropic polypharmacy ($53,497; SD $72,590) were higher than those without psychotropic polypharmacy ($38,255; SD $59,844), with an unadjusted average cost difference of $15,242 (

conclusionsOverall health care costs were higher among cancer patients with psychotropic polypharmacy compared with those without psychotropic polypharmacy. Our findings support the need for future research to better understand the benefits and risks of psychotropic polypharmacy, given its potential to cause adverse health outcomes and avoidable health care utilization and costs for this vulnerable patient population. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) New Investigator Award mechanism, which was received by Vyas. Aroke was partially supported by the AACP grant for conducting data analysis of the study. Kogut is partially supported by Institutional Development Award Number U54GM115677 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health, which funds Advance Clinical and Translational Research (Advance-CTR). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health and the AACP. The authors report no conflicts of interest. An abstract of this study was presented as a poster at the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Annual Meeting on July 22, 2018, in Boston, MA.