Impact Of Dupilumab Treatment On Healthcare Resource Utilization in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis in a Colombian Health Insurance Provider: An Observational Real-World Practice Study
Author(s)
Jhon E. Bolaños, MD, MSc1, Carlos Bello, MSc1, Luz Eugenia Perez Jaramillo, MD, MSc1, Farley Gonzalez, MD, MSc1, Sergio Londono, MPH2, YURI MARCELA TORRES, MSc2, Alejandra Toro, MD3.
1Seguros SURA Colombia, Medellin, Colombia, 2Sanofi Aventis, Bogota, Colombia, 3Seguros SURA Colombia, Medellín, Colombia.
1Seguros SURA Colombia, Medellin, Colombia, 2Sanofi Aventis, Bogota, Colombia, 3Seguros SURA Colombia, Medellín, Colombia.
OBJECTIVES: To quantify the impact of dupilumab treatment on healthcare resource utilization in patients with atopic dermatitis.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving patients with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab, affiliated with a colombian health insurance provider between 2018 and 2023. Data were collected from electronic medical records, including clinical and sociodemographic variables, as well as healthcare resource utilization: outpatient visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Two periods were analyzed: 52 weeks before and 52 weeks after treatment initiation. Changes in resource utilization were evaluated using McNemar’s test, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: A total of 547 patients were included, of whom 51.9% were male, with a median age of 23 years (IQR:16-33). The most common comorbidities were allergic rhinitis (38.9%) and asthma (19.2%). No cases of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis were identified. Following dupilumab initiation, the proportion of patients with emergency visits decreased from 2.56% to 1.28% (p=0.108). Among patients who had emergency visits during the baseline period, only 7.14% repeated the visit (p=0.0003). Hospitalizations decreased from 5.67% to 0.91% (p<0.0001), and only 9.68% of patients hospitalized initially required a subsequent hospitalization (p<0.0001). General medicine consultations decreased from 23.6% to 12.6% (p<0.0001), with only 21.7% maintaining consultations during follow-up (p<0.0001). Notably, specialist consultations (dermatology and/or allergology) increased slightly from 77.7% to 81.5% (p=0.054). Among patients with specialist follow-up at baseline, 89.7% continued this during the follow-up period (p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab treatment was associated with a significant reduction in hospitalizations, general and medicine consultations, and a numeric reduction in emergency visits, suggesting clinical and economic benefits in real-world practice. The slight increase in specialist consultations may reflect more structured post-treatment follow-up. These findings support the potential clinical and economic value of dupilumab in routine clinical care settings.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving patients with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab, affiliated with a colombian health insurance provider between 2018 and 2023. Data were collected from electronic medical records, including clinical and sociodemographic variables, as well as healthcare resource utilization: outpatient visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Two periods were analyzed: 52 weeks before and 52 weeks after treatment initiation. Changes in resource utilization were evaluated using McNemar’s test, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: A total of 547 patients were included, of whom 51.9% were male, with a median age of 23 years (IQR:16-33). The most common comorbidities were allergic rhinitis (38.9%) and asthma (19.2%). No cases of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis were identified. Following dupilumab initiation, the proportion of patients with emergency visits decreased from 2.56% to 1.28% (p=0.108). Among patients who had emergency visits during the baseline period, only 7.14% repeated the visit (p=0.0003). Hospitalizations decreased from 5.67% to 0.91% (p<0.0001), and only 9.68% of patients hospitalized initially required a subsequent hospitalization (p<0.0001). General medicine consultations decreased from 23.6% to 12.6% (p<0.0001), with only 21.7% maintaining consultations during follow-up (p<0.0001). Notably, specialist consultations (dermatology and/or allergology) increased slightly from 77.7% to 81.5% (p=0.054). Among patients with specialist follow-up at baseline, 89.7% continued this during the follow-up period (p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab treatment was associated with a significant reduction in hospitalizations, general and medicine consultations, and a numeric reduction in emergency visits, suggesting clinical and economic benefits in real-world practice. The slight increase in specialist consultations may reflect more structured post-treatment follow-up. These findings support the potential clinical and economic value of dupilumab in routine clinical care settings.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
EE530
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Epidemiology & Public Health, Study Approaches
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies, Work & Home Productivity - Indirect Costs
Disease
Biologics & Biosimilars, No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas