Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2021

Open Access 01.12.2021 | Research

Direct and indirect costs and cost-driving factors in adults with tuberous sclerosis complex: a multicenter cohort study and a review of the literature

verfasst von: Johann Philipp Zöllner, Janina Grau, Felix Rosenow, Matthias Sauter, Markus Knuf, Gerhard Kurlemann, Thomas Mayer, Christoph Hertzberg, Astrid Bertsche, Ilka Immisch, Karl Martin Klein, Susanne Knake, Klaus Marquard, Sascha Meyer, Anna H. Noda, Felix von Podewils, Hannah Schäfer, Charlotte Thiels, Laurent M. Willems, Bianca Zukunft, Susanne Schubert-Bast, Adam Strzelczyk

Erschienen in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Ausgabe 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a monogenetic, multisystem disorder characterized by benign growths due to TSC1 or TSC2 mutations. This German multicenter study estimated the costs and related cost drivers associated with organ manifestations in adults with TSC.

Methods

A validated, three-month, retrospective questionnaire assessed the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, organ manifestations, direct, indirect, out-of-pocket (OOP), and nursing care-level costs among adult individuals with TSC throughout Germany from a societal perspective (costing year: 2019).

Results

We enrolled 192 adults with TSC (mean age: 33.4 ± 12.7 years; range: 18–78 years, 51.6% [n = 99] women). Reported TSC disease manifestations included skin (94.8%) and kidney and urinary tract (74%) disorders, epilepsy (72.9%), structural brain defects (67.2%), psychiatric disorders (50.5%), heart and circulatory system disorders (50.5%), and lymphangioleiomyomatosis (11.5%). TSC1 and TSC2 mutations were reported in 16.7% and 25% of respondents, respectively. Mean direct health care costs totaled EUR 6452 (median EUR 1920; 95% confidence interval [CI] EUR 5533–7422) per patient over three months. Medication costs represented the major direct cost category (77% of total direct costs; mean EUR 4953), and mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors represented the largest share (68%, EUR 4358). Mean antiseizure drug (ASD) costs were only EUR 415 (6%). Inpatient costs (8%, EUR 518) and outpatient treatment costs (7%; EUR 467) were important further direct cost components. The mean care grade allowance as an approximator of informal nursing care costs was EUR 929 (median EUR 0; 95% CI EUR 780–1083) over three months. Mean indirect costs totaled EUR 3174 (median EUR 0; 95% CI EUR 2503–3840) among working-age individuals (< 67 years in Germany). Multiple regression analyses revealed mTOR inhibitor use and persistent seizures as independent cost-driving factors for total direct costs. Older age and disability were independent cost-driving factors for total indirect costs, whereas epilepsy, psychiatric disease, and disability were independent cost-driving factors for nursing care costs.

Conclusions

This three-month study revealed substantial direct healthcare, indirect healthcare, and medication costs associated with TSC in Germany. This study highlights the spectrum of organ manifestations and their associated treatment needs in the German healthcare setting. Trial registration: DRKS, DRKS00016045. Registered 01 March 2019, http://​www.​drks.​de/​DRKS00016045.
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13023-021-01838-w.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Key points

  • This comprehensive study measured the direct and indirect costs of individuals with TSC and their caregivers
  • Mean total direct costs (healthcare and non-healthcare) were estimated at EUR 6452 over three months
  • Medication, particularly mTOR inhibitors, were major direct cost components, followed by hospitalization and outpatient treatment
  • Mean total indirect costs were estimated at EUR 3174 over three months; with an inability to work being the largest factor
  • Total cost is driven by the number of TSC manifestations and affected organ systems

Background

Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a rare multisystem, monogenetic disorder. The estimated incidence rate of definite or possible TSC in Germany is approximately 1:6760 to 1:13,520 live births [1]. The prevalence of TSC was generally underestimated until recently due to incomplete penetrance and the existence of considerable interindividual phenotypic variability among those affected by TSC [16]. In TSC, benign tumors manifest in multiple organ systems, and the clinical manifestations of TSC can vary throughout life, with tumors presenting in most organs, especially the skin, brain, and kidneys. Most individuals with TSC suffer from structural epilepsy due to the formation of cortical tubers or other cortical malformations [7]. The clinical picture for each individual may differ considerably and can range from very limited manifestations to severe impairments that require nursing assistance [4, 7]. Individuals are commonly diagnosed with TSC in response to the development of epileptic seizures, particularly the development of epileptic spasms at a young age, often within the first six months after birth [8]. Other common first findings include skin manifestations, and TSC can sometimes be suspected even before birth due to cardiac rhabdomyoma [7]. Neuropsychiatric problems, including intellectual disability, autism, sleep difficulties, and aggression are frequent in children with TSC, they have been associated with early seizure onset, epileptic spasms, and TSC2 gene mutations, among other factors [7]. During adolescence, renal manifestations, such as angiomyolipoma (AML) and subependymal giant cell astrocytoma (SEGA) can become burdensome [9]. Renal AML tends to grow during adulthood, necessitating life-long surveillance [10]. Pulmonary manifestations such as lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) almost exclusively affect adult women with TSC [11].
TSC is caused by a loss-of-function mutation in one of two tumor suppressor genes, TSC1 and TSC2 (ratio 1:3.4, as reported in [12]), which is inherited in an autosomal-dominant fashion. However, the majority of cases appear to occur due to de novo pathogenic variants. Genetic mosaicism and deep intronic mutations may also be causative, particularly among the 15% of cases for which definitive hereditary pathogenic variants cannot be identified, despite a definite clinical diagnosis of TSC [12]. A loss-of-function mutation in either TSC1 or TSC2 leads to the overactivation of the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway, which results in changes in cell growth, the promotion of cell proliferation, and the disruption of cellular energy homeostasis, ultimately promoting tumorigenesis [13]. Treatment with mTOR inhibitors can address this downstream deregulation as they prevent epileptogenesis and possibly the development of other organ manifestations [14].
The burden of illness associated with TSC is considerable and can vary according to the complex and multifaceted disease manifestations [1517]. Several studies published during the last two decades have examined the cost-of-illness (COI) and COI predictors in TSC. However, only a few have addressed both direct costs and related cost drivers, and no study has examined the indirect costs incurred by adult individuals with TSC. Furthermore, the majority of these studies evaluated individuals with TSC before the availability of mTOR inhibitors, such as everolimus, which are now used to treat various organ manifestations associated with TSC [4, 18].
Thus, the present study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of the direct and indirect costs and potential cost-driving factors associated with TSC by surveying a large, multicenter cohort of adults with TSC in Germany.

Methods

Patients and recruitment

The present study was designed as a cross-sectional, multicenter survey that enrolled individuals with TSC throughout Germany (Berlin, Bochum, Dresden [Radeberg], Frankfurt, Greifswald, Homburg, Kempten, Marburg, München, Münster [Lingen], Rostock, Stuttgart, and Wiesbaden) and through the German TSC patient advocacy group (Tuberöse Sklerose Deutschland e.V., Wiesbaden, Germany).

Survey methods

After receiving written informed consent from the patients or their legal guardians (if applicable), all individuals with TSC were deemed eligible for study inclusion. We based the diagnostic criteria for TSC on the latest recommendations established by the 2012 international TSC consensus conference [19]. We identified seven primary manifestation categories affected by TSC, including epilepsy, structural brain defects, psychiatric, heart/circulatory system disorders, kidney and urinary tract disorders, dermatological system manifestations, respiratory system manifestations, and other manifestations [16]. The seizure and epilepsy syndrome classifications were adapted to the latest definitions established by the International League against Epilepsy (ILAE) [20, 21]. This study received ethical approval and was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00016045; Universal Trial Number: U1111-1229-4714). We closely followed the STROBE guidelines (Strengthening The Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) [22].
We asked individuals with TSC to complete a retrospective questionnaire based on their experiences during the previous three months. The questionnaire was validated in earlier studies [2326] and we adapted it for use in individuals with TSC. The questionnaire included 36 questions relating to disease characteristics (e.g., genetics, affected organ systems, seizures, medications, and additional symptoms), healthcare resource use (e.g., healthcare visits, accidents, and emergency care), and social conditions. Paper questionnaires in German were sent to individuals with TSC between February and July 2019.

Costing methods

The aim of this study was to calculate the specific genuine costs associated with TSC, rather than those associated with conditions unrelated to TSC. Therefore, we asked individuals in detail whether the medications, services, and other resources that were consumed were associated with particular organ manifestations of TSC. We evaluated costs using a bottom-up approach from the perspective of the statutory health insurer (“Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung” [GKV]) and society as a whole. The cost categories that were included in the analysis were direct health service costs, patients’ out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses, care grade allowances as approximation of informal care costs, and indirect costs. We evaluated these costs according to the German recommendations for performing health economic evaluations [27].

Direct health care costs

We obtained information regarding the direct health service costs from the literature and from standard reference sources for Germany, which were estimated as previously described [23, 26]. Direct health costs included specifically inpatient stays, outpatient visits, medicines (antiseizure drugs [ASDs], mTOR inhibitors, other prescription drugs, over-the-counter drugs, and emergency medications), medical aids, healthcare professional visits, emergency transportation, diagnostic studies, specific diets, individuals’ copayments, rehabilitation costs, private transport costs and copayments for therapies. We based drug costs on the Drug Prescription Report of 2019 (“Arzneiverordnungs-Report”) [28], which is an index of available medicines and their average prices in Germany. We standardized the costs of inpatient and outpatient care, specialist care, therapies, and diagnostic studies according to the method described by Bock et al. [29] and physician fee scales (Einheitlicher Bewertungsmaßstab) [30]. Costs were inflated to 2019 levels using the consumer price index for Germany and were expressed in both annual and 3-month terms in 2019 Euro.

Out-of-pocket expenses

All OOP expenses (copayments) that were reported were considered to be accounted for when supply-side cost estimates were calculated based on resource utilization (ancillary treatments, medical aids, healthcare professionals, and emergency transportation), and these OOP expenses were therefore not included in the calculation of total direct costs. We reported OOP expenses explicitly and added them to the total direct healthcare costs when supply-side utilization estimates were not available (care and supervision, healing agents, and diets) or when expenditures existed beyond the formal healthcare setting (alternative and occupational therapies and equipment costs).

Care grade allowances as approximation of informal care costs

We calculated the average care grade allowances [31] under the assumption that nursing services were provided by family members. Care grade allowances are the basis on which the German statutory care insurance pays care allowances. Care grade allowances are determined by the grade of necessary patient care, distinguished by levels 1–5 on the “Pflegegrade” scale. We used care grade costs as an approximation of informal care costs, and we separately reported any additional care costs reported by the respondents. While care grade allowances do not fully reflect the extent of informal care costs, we used them as a compromise between the goal of capturing a large set of individuals and the feasibility of assessing extent of informal care on an individual level.

Indirect costs

We calculated productivity losses due to TSC (days off, inability to work, reductions in working hours, or early retirement) using the human capital approach for patients of working age (i.e., below the age of 67). The mean annual gross wage of EUR 44,964 in 2019 [32] was used to calculate the productivity costs for each patient. For days taken off work, gross wages were calculated as EUR 215.14 per calendar day, and daily income was multiplied by total days off [24].

Grouping of questionnaire items

We collated some questionnaire items into groups when presenting the results. Specifically, the term “ancillary costs” includes physiotherapy, speech therapy, occupational therapy, acupuncture, hippotherapy and other ancillary costs. The term “healthcare professionals” includes neurologists, general practitioners (GPs), orthopedic surgeons, child psychiatrists, alternative medicine practitioners, homeopathy practitioners, dietitians and other specialists. The term “diagnostic studies” includes electroencephalography (EEG), blood tests, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) scans, X-rays and other diagnostic studies.
For a detailed overview of the costing sources used, please refer to the Addtional file 1: Supplementary material.

Statistical analysis

We conducted statistical analysis using IBM SPSS Statistics, version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). We summarized the variables of interest using the mean, median, and standard deviation (SD). For cost data, we calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI), using the bootstrap-corrected and accelerated (BCa) method with n = 2000 repetitions to estimate parameters robust to skewed distributions and outliers [33, 34]. Due to the small population of TSC and related statistical challenges [35, 36], we refrained from a power calculation or a predefined number of participants, and aimed to include all potential patients with TSC in Germany. We compared groups using adequate parametric and nonparametric tests after testing for the normality of distribution. The significance level was assumed at p < 0.05. We investigated the relationships between an individual’s clinical characteristics and TSC-related costs using multivariate linear regression using the BCa method with 2000 repetitions. Total direct, total indirect, and nursing care-level costs were regressed against a set of clinical variables, which we selected following univariate analysis and according to evidence presented by previous cost-of-illness studies examining TSC [16, 37, 38]. We tested all variables for interactions and collinearity. To identify independent predictors of costs, we performed standard multiple linear regression analysis using the bootstrapping technique and applied a Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.

Results

Demographic and clinical characteristics

One hundred and ninety-two adults with TSC completed the questionnaire. The mean participant age was 33.4 years (SD: 12.7 years; median: 31.0 years; range: 18.0–78.0 years), 51.6% (n = 99) were women. Among the respondents, TSC was diagnosed at a mean age of 10.4 years (SD: 14.9 years; median: 2.0 years; range: 0–66.0 years), and the first symptoms of TSC were noted at a mean age of 5.7 years (SD: 12.0 years; median: 0 years; range: 0–66.0 years). In three individuals (1.6%), a diagnosis of TSC was suspected before birth, based on ultrasound examinations. Pathogenic variants in TSC1 were reported by 32 individuals (16.7%), and pathogenic variants in TSC2 were reported by 48 individuals (25.0%, ratio 1:1.5). Three individuals (1.6%) suffered from a polycystic kidney disease with tuberous sclerosis (PKDTS) contiguous gene deletion syndrome.
Most individuals lived with others. Of those, 44 (22.9%) were married or in a relationship, and 84 (43.8%) lived with relatives. Less than half of individuals were either employed (n = 71, 37.0%) or participated in vocational training (n = 21, 10.9%). Further sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, including information on affected family members, are presented in Table 1. The majority of individuals suffered from a range of TSC organ manifestations. Disorders of the central nervous system were commonly reported, with 140 (72.9%) individuals reporting a diagnosis of epilepsy, 129 (67.2%) describing various structural brain disorders, and 97 (50.5%) indicating psychiatric disorders. Furthermore, 182 (94.8%) individuals reported skin manifestations, 142 (74%) described kidney and urinary tract disorders, and 97 (50.5%) indicated heart and circulatory system disorders. Additional details can be found in Table 2.
Table 1
Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of participants (n = 192)
 
All patients n = 192
Age in years1
33.4 ± 12.7
 
Range
 
18.0–78.0
Sex
% (n)
 Male
48.4 (93)
 Female
51.6 (99)
Age at first symptoms due to TSC1
5.7 ± 12.0
 
Range
 
0.0–66.0
Age at TSC diagnosis in years1
10.4 ± 14.9
 
Range
 
0.0–66.0
TSC diagnosis before birth by ultrasound
% (n)
 No
96.9 (186)
 Yes
1.6 (3)
Genetics
% (n)
 TSC1-gene
16.7 (32)
 TSC2-gene
25.0 (48)
 TSC2/PKD1 contiguous-gene
1.6 (3)
 No genetic test
30.7 (59)
 No genetic mutation
10.4 (20)
 Unknown
15.6 (30)
Affected family members by TSC
% (n)
 No
77.6 (149)
 Yes
18.8 (36)
  Mother affected (43.9 years)2
4.7 (9)
  Father affected (46.3 years)2
3.6 (7)
  Sibling affected (4.8 years)2
6.8 (13)
  Own children affected (3.0 years)2
8.9 (17)
   Number of own affected children
Mean
 
1.4
Marital status
% (n)
 Married/living in relationship
22.9 (44)
 Divorced
1.6 (3)
 Single, lives with relatives
43.8 (84)
 Single, lives alone
29.7 (57)
 Unknown/Other
2.1 (4)
School education
% (n)
  < 12 years
42.7 (82)
  > 12 years
20.8 (40)
 Still going to school
4.7 (9)
 No school graduation
30.2 (58)
 Not answered
1.6 (3)
Highest job qualification
% (n)
 Missing
42.2 (81)
 Skilled (manual)
23.4 (45)
 Office-based (nonmanual)
5.7 (11)
 University degree
9.9 (19)
 In training
8.3 (16)
 Unknown/Other
10.4 (20)
Employment situation
% (n)
 Employed
37.0 (71)
 Vocational training
10.9 (21)
 Unemployed
21.4 (41)
 Homemaker/parental leave
1.0 (2)
 Early retirement
9.9 (19)
 Old-age pension
1.0 (2)
 Unknown/Other
18.8 (36)
1Mean ± standard deviation
2Mean age at TSC diagnosis of affected family members
Table 2
Organ manifestations in individuals with TSC (n = 192)
 
%
n
Epilepsy
72.9
140
 Recurrent seizures
39.1
75
 Seizure free > 1 year or no seizures
60.9
117
Structural brain disorders
67.2
129
 Cortical tubers
49.0
94
 SEGA1
37.5
72
 Hydrocephalus
2.6
5
Psychiatric disorders
50.5
97
Heart and circulatory system
50.5
97
 Hypertension
26.6
51
 Rhabdomyomas
24.5
47
 Arrhythmia
8.3
16
Kidney and urinary tract
74.0
142
 Angiomyolipomas
59.4
114
 Cysts
42.2
81
 Chronic kidney dysfunction
12.5
24
 Renal cell carcinoma
2.6
5
Skin manifestations
94.8
182
 Angiofibromas
84.9
163
 Hypomelanotic macules
57.3
110
 Shagreen patches
48.4
93
 Ungal/periungal fibromas
10.9
21
 Skin tags
3.6
7
 Café au lait spots
2.6
5
Lymphangioleiomyomatosis
11.5
22
Other disorders
39.1
75
 Iris or retinal hamartomas/astrocytomas and other eye disorders
28.6
55
 Angiomyolipomas in other organ systems2
14.1
27
 Cysts in other organ systems2
13.0
25
1Subependymal giant cell astrocytoma
2Hormone system, Thyroid, Gastrointestinal, Liver, Spleen, Pancreas

Direct costs

Mean total direct costs were calculated at EUR 6452 (median EUR 1920; 95% CI EUR 5533–7422) per study participant for the 3-month study period, and details are presented in Table 3 and Fig. 1. Direct medical costs were primarily associated with the costs of drug treatments (76.8% of total direct costs; mean EUR 4953 per 3 months; median EUR 573; 95% CI EUR 4087–5876), and hospitalization (8.0% of total direct costs; mean EUR 518; median EUR 0; 95% CI EUR 312–750).
Table 3
Direct costs for the 3-month study period for the total patient group (n = 192; in 2019 Euro)
Cost components
Mean costs
SD1
Minimum
Median
Maximum
95% CI
% of total direct costs
Estimated annual direct costs2
Total direct costs
6452
7584
0
1920
29,182
5533; 7422
100
25,808
 Medication (n = 165)
4953
6854
0
573
28,224
4087; 5876
76.8
19,812
  mTOR inhibitors* (n = 71)
4358
6520
0
0
25,273
3448; 5342
67.5
17,432
  Antiseizure drugs (ASDs) (n = 123)
415
1962
0
104
26,538
239; 706
6.4
1660
  Other prescription drugs (n = 104)
132
385
0
8
2606
84; 186
2.0
528
  OTC drugs and supplements (n = 70)
41
100
0
0
700
29; 54
0.6
164
  Emergency medication/medication on demand (n = 42)
7
36
0
0
347
3; 13
0.1
28
 Hospitalization (n = 23)
518
1691
0
0
11,487
312; 750
8.0
2072
 Outpatient treatment (n = 157)
467
1156
0
194
15,097
352; 626
7.2
1868
 Diagnostics (n = 140)
155
242
0
44
1691
124; 192
2.4
620
 Ancillary therapies (n = 54)
125
307
0
0
2120
84; 174
1.9
500
 Auxillary material (n = 14)
49
253
0
0
2235
18; 87
0.8
196
 Rehabilitation (n = 2)
40
410
0
0
4983
0; 92
0.6
160
 Emergency service use (n = 9)
44
217
0
0
1800
19; 75
0.7
176
 Specific diets (n = 3)
9
97
0
0
1200
0; 23
0.1
36
 Transport costs (n = 25)
5
17
0
0
130
3; 7
0.1
20
 Co-payments for therapies (n = 17)
39
177
0
0
1400
19; 64
0.6
156
 Other co-payments (n = 45)
48
183
0
0
1700
27; 75
0.7
192
95% CI = 95% Confidence interval using the bootstrap bias corrected and accelerated method
1Standard deviation, 2Estimation based on the mean costs in three months multiplied by four
*Everolimus n = 69, Sirolimus n = 2, OTC = over-the-counter
The largest medication costs were those due to mTOR inhibitors (everolimus, n = 69; sirolimus, n = 2), with a mean of EUR 4358 per 3 months (67.5% of total direct costs; median EUR 0; 95% CI EUR 3448–5342). mTOR inhibitor costs were higher than those associated with ASDs, which were on average EUR 415 (6.4% of total direct costs; median EUR 104; 95% CI EUR 239–706). Individuals used on average 1.9 ASDs (SD: 0.8; median 2: range 1–4). The five most frequently prescribed ASDs were lamotrigine (n = 51; 26.6%), valproate (n = 46, 24.0%), oxcarbazepine (n = 32; 16.7%), levetiracetam (n = 25; 13.0%), and lacosamide (n = 12; 6.3%). Monotherapy with ASDs was prescribed to 24.0% (n = 46) of all participants, which was associated with significantly lower costs than polytherapy with two, three, or more ASDs (each p < 0.001). The detailed costs and daily dosages reported for different ASDs are listed in Table 4.
Table 4
Prescription patterns and costs of antiseizure drugs for the 3-month study period (in 2019 Euro)
Medication costs
n
Mean costs per 3 months
SD1
Minimum
Median
Maximum
95% CI
p-value2
All patients
192
€ 415
1962
€ 0
€ 104
€ 26,538
239; 706
 
No ASDs (35.9%)
69
0
      
Monotherapy (24.0%)
46
€ 222
400
€ 15
€ 125
€ 2613
136; 354
 < 0.0013
2 ASDs (26.0%)
50
€ 327
317
€ 50
€ 238
€ 1405
250; 415
 < 0.0104
 ≥ 3 ASDs (14.1%)
27
€ 1965
4979
€ 144
€ 962
€ 26,538
826, 4016
 < 0.0015
Prescribed medication
n
Mean daily dose
SD1
Minimum
Median
Maximum
Mean costs per 3 months
SD1
Lamotrigine (26.6%)
51
362 mg
373 mg
50 mg
300 mg
2500 mg
€ 90
93
Valproate (24.0%)
46
1355 mg
465 mg
450 mg
1250 mg
2300 mg
€ 62
21
Oxcarbazepine (16.7%)
32
1617 mg
708 mg
150 mg
1800 mg
3600 mg
€ 226
99
Levetiracetam (13.0%)
25
2400 mg
1090 mg
750 mg
2250 mg
4500 mg
€ 161
73
Lacosamide (6.3%)
12
410 mg
283 mg
100 mg
350 mg
1200 mg
€ 894
616
Topiramate (3.6%)
7
225 mg
56 mg
150 mg
200 mg
300 mg
€ 149
37
Zonisamide (3.6%)
7
657 mg
450 mg
300 mg
500 mg
1600 mg
€ 1087
745
Carbamazepine (3.1%)
6
700 mg
490 mg
300 mg
500 mg
1600 mg
€ 35
24
Perampanel (3.1%)
6
5 mg
2 mg
2 mg
6 mg
8 mg
€ 308
120
Brivaracetam (2.6%)
5
220 mg
76 mg
150 mg
200 mg
350 mg
€ 508
175
Sulthiame (2.6%)
5
530 mg
470 mg
100 mg
450 mg
1250 mg
€ 320
284
Vigabatrine (2.6%)
5
2200 mg
758 mg
1000 mg
2500 mg
3000 mg
€ 397
137
Phenytoin (2.1%)
4
331 mg
85 mg
250 mg
313 mg
450 mg
€ 26
7
Primidone (2.1%)
4
750 mg
451 mg
375 mg
625 mg
1250 mg
€ 38
23
Phenobarbital (2.1%)
4
141 mg
106 mg
10 mg
163 mg
230 mg
€ 62
47
Rufinamid (1.6%)
3
1267 mg
702 mg
600 mg
1200 mg
2000 mg
€ 759
421
Clobazame (1.6%)
3
25 mg
13 mg
15 mg
20 mg
40 mg
€ 68
36
Gabapentin (1.6%)
3
967 mg
1250 mg
100 mg
400 mg
2400 mg
€ 78
101
Other ASDs* (5.7%)
11
       
1 Standard deviation, 95% CI = 95% Confidence interval using the bootstrap bias corrected and accelerated method
2Mann-Whitney-U-test; ASD = antiseizure drug; 3Monotherapy vs. ≥ 3 ASDs, 4Monotherapy vs. 2 ASDs, 52 ASDs vs ≥ 3 ASDs,
*(Cannabidiol n = 2, Clonazepam n = 2, Ethosuximide n = 2, Lorazepam n = 2, Mesuximide n = 1, Pregabalin n = 2)
In total, 23 (12.0%) individuals reported at least one TSC-related hospital admission during the 3-month study period. Overall, 29 admissions were reported, with a mean length of stay of 5.5 days (SD: 3.6; median: 5 days; range: 1–14 days). Epilepsy and seizures resulted in eight admissions, whereas six admissions were associated with diagnostic procedures, four admissions were due to pneumothorax, three were related to operations concerning AML in the kidneys and other organs. A further two admissions were due to adverse reactions to everolimus intake and two were associated with facial skin treatments. Four admissions had other TSC-related reasons.
Ancillary treatments, such as occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and speech therapy, were prescribed to 54 participants (28%), and were associated with an average cost of EUR 125 per 3 months, which comprised 1.9% of total direct costs (median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 84–174). In addition, families directly paid EUR 39 in therapy-related costs during the 3-month study period.

Care needs and care grade as approximators of informal care costs

Fifty percent (n = 97) of individuals were categorized as requiring care grade levels I to V, based on the “Pflegebedürftigkeit” scale: 2.6% as level I (‘low impairment of independence’); 9.9% as level II (‘significant need for care’); 11.5% as level III (‘heavy need for care’); 13.5% as level IV (‘most difficult to care for’); and 13% as level V (‘most difficult to care for and special demands regarding nursing care’). Two individuals did not meet the level I–V criteria but were still in need of care according to their caregivers, and 48.4% of individuals denied being in need of care. The mean approximate costs for nursing care were EUR 929 (median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 780–1083) over each 3-month period, or EUR 3716 annually, assuming that care is provided by family members. Patient’s caregivers reported that they had paid additional costs for care, with a mean of EUR 24 (median; EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 10–41). Furthermore, they paid for supervision, with a mean of EUR 48 (median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 22–79) per 3-month period. Further informal care costs that were neither reflected in the care grade allowance nor perceived by caregivers are inevitably not represented in our approximation of informal care costs. In total, 124 individuals (64.6%) had a handicapped ID, indicating a degree of disability between 70 and 100%.

Indirect (productivity) costs

The estimation of mean indirect costs was based only on questionnaire responses from patients of working age, younger than 67 years (n = 190). The mean total indirect costs were EUR 3174 (median: EUR 0; 95% CI: 2503–3840) over three months or EUR 12,696 annually. The main contributor to indirect costs (n = 30) was the inability to work due to intellectual disability, epilepsy, or kidney disorders (mean: EUR 1775; median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 1183–2367). Furthermore, 19 individuals were only able to work part-time, which was associated with a mean estimated cost of EUR 514 ± 1762 per 3 months (median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 283–792). Twenty-eight individuals reported missing days from work during the last three months due to TSC-related causes (mean: EUR 234; median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 115–382), and six individuals were unemployed (mean: EUR 355; median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 118–651). Five individuals reported retiring prematurely (mean: EUR 296; median: EUR 0; 95% CI: EUR 59–592). The details of indirect productivity costs can be found in Table 5 and Fig. 1. The mean duration of work absenteeism was 7.6 ± 10.7 days (range: 1–50 days) per 3 months.
Table 5
Indirect costs for individuals with TSC during the 3-month study period (in 2019 Euro)
Indirect costs components
n1
Mean costs
SD2
Minimum
Median
Maximum
95% CI
Estimated annual costs3
Total indirect costs (< 67 y)
86
3174
4703
0
0
11,241
2503; 3840
12,696
 Inability to work
30
1775
4110
0
0
11,241
1183; 2367
7100
 Reduction of working hours
19
514
1762
0
0
9695
283; 792
2056
 Unemployment
6
355
1971
0
0
11,241
118; 651
1420
 Early retirement
5
296
1804
0
0
11,241
59; 592
1184
 Days off
28
234
1050
0
0
10,750
115; 382
936
95% CI = 95% Confidence interval using the bootstrap bias corrected and accelerated method
1Patients of working age (n = 190), 2Standard deviation, 3Estimation based on the mean costs in three months multiplied by four

Cost drivers of direct, indirect, and approximated informal (nursing) care costs

To identify potential cost drivers, we performed univariate analyses for total direct, total indirect, and nursing care costs and a number of demographic and clinical characteristics. For details, please refer to Table 6. In the univariate analyses, younger age, the use of mTOR inhibitors, polytherapy with two or more ASDs, recurrent seizures, all TSC manifestation categories, the total number of TSC manifestations, and the level of disability were associated with higher direct costs. Lung manifestations (lymphangioleiomyomatosis), the total number of TSC manifestations, and disability were associated with higher indirect costs, whereas younger age, polytherapy with two or more ASDs, recurrent seizures, the TSC manifestations of epilepsy, structural brain disorders, psychiatric disorders, and skin manifestations, the total number of manifestations, and disability were associated with increased nursing care costs. Overall, total direct, indirect, and nursing costs increased with the number of affected organ systems (Table 6).
Table 6
Univariate and multivariate analysis of cost-driving factors for total direct, total indirect, and nursing care-level costs (3-month period; in 2019 Euro)
 
n
Total direct costs in €
Median
SD
p-value§
Total indirect costs in €**
Median
SD
p-value§
Nursing care level costs in €
Median
SD
p-value§
Gender
    
0.321
   
0.088
   
0.082
 Male
93
6173
1527
8156
 
2796
0
4687
 
1079
948
1102
 
 Female
99
6714
2722
7036
 
3529
538
4714
 
788
0
1016
 
Age
    
0.012*
   
0.062*#
   
0.003*
 18–29 years
90
8067
3460
8419
 
2171
0
4117
 
1084
948
1081
 
 30–39 years
54
5849
1646
6700
 
3978
323
5081
 
1072
948
1072
 
 40 years and above
48
4102
1350
6154
 
4192
430
5011
 
477
0
911
 
Number of antiseizure drugs
    
 < 0.001
   
0.057
   
 < 0.001
  ≥ 2
77
9237
9743
8639
 
4054
430
5131
 
1461
1635
1004
 
 0—1
115
4587
1224
6155
 
2574
0
4308
 
573
0
955
 
mTOR inhibitors intake
    
 < 0.001#
   
0.510
   
0.250
 Yes
71
14,473
13,100
5641
 
3335
0
4729
 
1041
948
1085
 
 No
121
1746
712
3548
 
3077
0
4705
 
863
0
1053
 
Seizures
    
 < 0.001#
   
0.105
   
 < 0.001
 Recurrent seizures
75
9082
5440
8930
 
3859
323
5061
 
1530
1635
1055
 
 Seizure free > 1 year or no seizures
117
4729
1401
5997
 
2717
0
4412
 
535
0
875
 
Epilepsy
    
0.001
   
0.904
   
 < 0.001#
 Yes (72.9%)
140
7195
2184
8106
 
3284
0
4866
 
1249
1635
1072
 
 No (27.1%)
52
4451
1257
5545
 
2866
0
4242
 
68
0
288
 
Structural brain disorders
    
0.003
   
0.889
   
0.014
 Yes (67.2%)
129
7353
2343
8041
 
3106
0
4681
 
1059
948
1099
 
 No (32.8%)
63
4607
1307
6211
 
3318
0
4784
 
663
0
947
 
Psychiatric disorders
    
 < 0.001
   
0.260
   
 < 0.001#
 Yes (50.5%)
97
8034
2982
8083
 
3741
0
5110
 
1521
1635
1037
 
 No (49.5%)
95
4837
1199
6703
 
2583
0
4182
 
325
0
693
 
Heart and circulatory manifestations
    
 < 0.001
   
 0.558
   
 0.170
 Yes (50.5%)
97
8180
6568
7764
 
3229
0
4719
 
1032
948
1113
 
 No (49.5%)
95
4687
1307
7007
 
3118
0
4710
 
823
0
1010
 
Kidney and urinary tract manifestations
    
 < 0.001
   
 0.248
   
 0.317
 Yes (74.0%)
142
7311
3357
7419
 
3381
0
4768
 
973
474
1078
 
 No (26.0%)
50
4013
614
7591
 
2594
0
4511
 
805
0
1030
 
Skin manifestations
    
0.009
   
0.296
   
0.004
 Yes (94.8%)
182
6704
2112
7669
 
3207
0
4702
 
980
948
1072
 
 No (5.2%)
10
1873
380
3666
 
2498
0
4957
 
0
0
0
 
Lung manifestation
    
0.030
   
0.014
   
0.139
 Yes (11.5%)
22
8894
7646
7928
 
5249
2588
5220
 
598
0
912
 
 No (88.5%)
170
6136
1667
7505
 
2902
0
4578
 
972
0
1079
 
Other disorders
    
0.013
   
0.116
   
0.959
 Yes (39.1%)
75
7856
7315
7352
 
3711
430
4982
 
938
0
1070
 
 No (60.9%)
117
5552
1460
7625
 
2823
0
4499
 
923
0
1067
 
Total Disorders
    
 < 0.001*
   
0.031*
   
 < 0.001*
 1–3 Manifestations (27.1%)
52
2652
331
5369
 
1982
0
3890
 
361
0
786
 
 4 Manifestations (20.3%)
39
6488
1980
7796
 
2676
0
4299
 
652
0
922
 
 5 Manifestations (19.8%)
38
6353
1739
7158
 
4816
1075
5345
 
1212
1292
1065
 
 6 Manifestations (19.8%)
38
8080
6861
8022
 
3169
215
4770
 
1193
948
1070
 
 7–8 Manifestations (13.0%)
25
11,977
15,151
7402
 
3844
0
5176
 
1709
2184
1083
 
Level of disability
    
 < 0.001
   
0.001#
   
 < 0.001#
 None or ≤ 60%
68
4395
496
6823
 
1483
0
3085
 
110
0
470
 
 70–100%
124
7580
2641
7768
 
4074
323
5158
 
1378
1635
1034
 
§Mann–Whitney-U-test; *Kruskal–Wallis-test; **for indirect costs only indivuals of woking age (n = 190) were considered; SD = standard deviation; #significant predictor in multivariate analysis
Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that the use of mTOR inhibitors independently predicted a 3-month direct cost increase of 12,069 Euro (BCa-corrected B 12,068.85, BCa-corrected standard error [SE] B 836.28, β 0.770, p < 0.001), and persistent seizures predicted a 3-month direct cost increase of 2113 Euro (B 2113.29, SE B 651.13, β 0.137, p < 0.001). Applying a Bonferroni correction for twelve comparisons, the threshold for the p-value was set at 0.00417, and the mTOR inhibitor use and persistent seizures were able to explain 71% (R2, F (12, 179) = 37.09, F sig.) of the total direct cost variance. Older age and disability were independent cost-driving factors for total indirect costs, with disability predicting a 3-month indirect cost increase of 2131 Euro (B 2131.48, SE B 693.90, β 0.216, p = 0.004) and older age of 1220 Euro per 3 months (B 1220.05, SE B 391.20, β 0.212, p = 0.003). The significant factors together explained 13% of the indirect cost variance (corrected p < 0.0125; R2 = 13%, F (5, 184) = 5.67, F sig.). Epilepsy, psychiatric diseases, and disability were independent cost drivers for approximate informal (nursing) care costs, with relatively similar cost-driving effects. Disability predicted a 3-month nursing-cost increase of 622 Euro (B 622.02, SE B 160.86, β 0.280, p < 0.001), psychiatric diseases of 599 Euro (B 599.45, SE B 149.67, β 0.282, p < 0.001), and epilepsy of 528 Euro (B 528.27, SE B 138.67, β 0.221, p = 0.001). Together, these significant variables (corrected p < 0.00625) were able to explain 51% of the 3-month nursing care cost variance (R2 = 51%, F (9, 182) = 20.98, F sig.).

Discussion

This detailed, multicenter, COI study is based on a large sample of 192 adult individuals with TSC within a single healthcare system and contributes important new information about the direct and indirect costs and related cost drivers associated with TSC in Europe. To enable comparisons with other COI studies, we aimed to capture the most comprehensive set of cost items related to epilepsy and other TSC organ manifestations [4, 39]. Previous studies have reported direct cost estimates for individuals with TSC in Europe [15, 16, 40, 41], North America [9, 11, 37, 38, 4244], and Asia [45], but none of these previous studies have provided indirect cost estimates for adults affected by TSC or examined the cost drivers of indirect and nursing care costs [4].
Our study highlights the substantial direct costs incurred by individuals with TSC. Medication was the largest single component of direct costs and associated with an estimated annual direct cost of EUR 25,808. The highest medication costs were due to mTOR inhibitors (annual costs of EUR 17,432), which were used by 37% (71/192) of the individuals in this study. mTOR inhibitor use was identified as an independent cost-driver in the multivariate analysis. This finding is somewhat expected, given the currently high price of mTOR inhibitors. Everolimus, the mTOR inhibitor overwhelmingly used by individuals in this study, was first given conditional marketing authorization as an orphan drug by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2011 for TSC-associated SEGA and in 2012 for TSC-associated renal AML [46], followed by an extension of indication to epilepsy refractory to ASD in 2017. Due to the time point of this study, the long-term cost-effectiveness of this currently costly drug remains to be evaluated [47]. The possibility of avoiding potentially costly TSC consequences, such as resection surgery for SEGA or epilepsy, cerebral shunt placement, and AML-associated renal bleeding following everolimus may balance favorably against the unwanted treatment effects of mTOR inhibitors, and everolimus may emerge as a cost-effective treatment option. The costs associated with the use of mTOR inhibitors will also likely decrease in the future due to the availability of generic formulations.
Interestingly, gender differences were not associated with differences in TSC-related costs. Women with TSC are known to be more likely to develop AML, and AML in women tends to be larger and require more interventions [10]. Women are also almost exclusively affected by pulmonary manifestations of TSC, which have been demonstrated to incur high direct costs [11, 15]. The findings in the present study may be due to the relative rarity of severe LAM complications, which typically occur only with increasing age. However, we did record four hospital admissions among our cohort for pneumothorax, a known complication of LAM, within the short evaluation period of three months. An alternative explanation is that the salient contributions of mTOR inhibitor therapy to overall costs, which exceeded inpatient treatment costs, may have masked gender differences in our cohort. Young adults (18–29 years) with TSC incurred higher costs than older individuals did, which is likely associated with the performance of a larger proportion of diagnostic procedures and the increasing use of mTOR inhibitors among younger patients.
In adults, renal manifestations of TSC are more common than in children. The most common types of renal manifestations, including AML and renal cysts, tend to appear first during adolescence and grow during adulthood. In our study, a similar proportion of individuals reported AML as in the TOSCA cohort [10], and renal manifestations were a significant factor for direct costs in the univariate analysis. Interestingly, in the multivariate analysis, only recurring seizures remained an independent clinical cost driver, and no single other TSC manifestation category was identified as an independent cost driver, which may be due to the higher direct costs associated with recurrent seizures compared with all of the other seven clinical categories, which were all associated with similar direct costs. This finding supports the known severe burden of illness of ongoing epilepsy in TSC, particularly because a relevant share of individuals experience pharmacorefractory epilepsy [48]. The high direct costs are in line with those reported for other rare developmental and epileptic encephalopathies like Dravet syndrome [49] or Lennox-Gastaut-syndrome [50]. This finding further highlights the need for ongoing identification of epilepsy surgical candidates among those with TSC and epilepsy, new emerging therapies such like the MR-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy might help to increase the suitability of patients for a surgical treatment [51]. Generally, the results of this study indicate that the management of TSC might result in high direct costs that exceed the costs incurred by all-cause epilepsy patients [26]. Our multivariate analysis model was able to account for 71% of the total variance in directs costs, suggesting that mTOR inhibitor use together with recurring seizures can explain a relevant share of the direct cost components among TSC patients in Germany. Similar to results reported for the United Kingdom [15], direct costs increased with the number of TSC manifestations. Although this finding was expected due to the complexity of TSC, which necessitates surveillance and treatment for most manifestations, this finding further demonstrated the need for systemic causal treatment and integrated, streamlined care, such as by specialized TSC centers.
Cannabidiol (CBD) is a new treatment option for drug-resistant seizures associated with TSC, it has recently been approved by the United States Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and the EMA. CBD has shown promising results in a randomized-controlled study published recently [52]. Since our study preceded the approval of CBD for TSC in the European Union, only two patients were treated with CBD in our cohort and the influence of CBD on the direct cost is negligible in our results.
Most cost categories were heavily skewed due to the clinical heterogeneity among adult individuals with TSC. While a few patients required significant health care resources, many were only mildly affected. In our study, the ratio of patients diagnosed with TSC1 vs. TSC2 mutations was slightly higher than anticipated from past study findings [12, 53]. Because individuals with TSC2 mutations tend to be more severely affected, especially by neuropsychiatric manifestations and epilepsy, an even higher COI can be presumed among populations with higher shares of TSC2 mutations. However, we caution that a large proportion of the patients in this study did not report any genetic test results.
To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the indirect costs of TSC. Nearly half of individuals (86/192, 46%) who participated in this study reported productivity losses. Adult individuals with TSC in our study incurred substantial indirect annual costs, equal to EUR 12,696 per year, with the largest share due to the inability to work (EUR 7100). Approximately two-thirds (132/192, 67%) of individuals in our study were able to work without impairment (excluding extra days off due to TSC). The indirect costs reported in our study are broadly similar to those reported for other rare neurological diseases, such as spinal muscular atrophy [54] or Becker’s muscular dystrophy [55], but were substantially higher than those reported among individuals with all-cause epilepsy [24]. Unlike direct costs, only a few clinical or demographic categories were associated with increased indirect costs on univariate analysis. We identified both the manifestation burden and the level of disability as associated with increased indirect costs. LAM also emerged as a variable significantly associated with higher indirect costs, indicating that while rare overall, LAM may play an outsize role in affected individuals due to its associated severe impairments.
Incomplete participation due to part-time work, unemployment, and early retirement was common even among those who were able to participate in the primary work market. Additionally, TSC impairs participation in education, as demonstrated by the high proportion of individuals that did not report any job qualifications (42.2%) and that did not graduate from school (30.2%). In addition, half of patients required care on the care grade allowance scale. Most clinical variables were not independently associated with higher approximated informal (nursing) care costs in the multivariate analysis, e.g. heart manifestations (which was primarily arterial hypertension among this adult cohort), renal manifestations, and lung manifestations. These types of clinical manifestations are typically intermittent, as with AML bleeding, or mostly do not necessitate nursing care, such as renal or pulmonary insufficiency. In contrast, epilepsy, neuropsychiatric manifestations, and disability were independent cost drivers that frequently required nursing care. We must caution that our approach of assessing informal care costs from allowances according to care grades necessarily misses all intangible informal costs that were not perceived by the caregiver as further costs and thus not specifically reported. This includes e.g. losses of caregiver productivity due to providing informal (= not by a health professional) care. True informal care costs are thus most likely higher than in our approximation.

Comparison with earlier studies

The direct costs identified in our study are broadly comparable to those reported by other recent studies (see Table 7 for a comparison of costs). However, costs in our cohort were both higher than the annual direct costs reported by studies from the UK (GBP 4227–5054 per year) [15, 16, 41] and lower than the costs reported by two studies from the US (USD 8543–85,397 per year) [37, 38]. The direct costs associated with ASD were lower in our study than those reported in previous studies, despite the specific drugs that were reported being similar [44]. This finding likely reflects lower medication costs in Germany due to price negotiations between statutory health insurers and drug manufacturers in recent years [56]. Importantly, this finding of lower costs was not true for mTOR inhibitors, which incurred higher costs than were reported by another study from the US [44]. The costs associated with hospitalizations and outpatient treatment were lower in our study than in earlier studies. Interestingly, ancillary therapies represented a smaller share of total direct costs than were reported in another study that explicitly reported this variable [43], which is likely due to differences in the reimbursement policies between varying healthcare systems. In general, direct comparisons to studies from different settings or countries are difficult because due to differing definitions, policies, measurements and other factors. To date, only one other study has analyzed productivity losses in adults with TSC [43]. Interestingly, although this study was performed in a different country, activity impairment was similar, with approximately one-third of adult individuals with TSC reporting not fully participating in the work market.
Table 7
Studies on direct and indirect costs among adults with TSC
 
Zöllner et al. current study
Betts et al. [44]
Chu et al. [45]
Skalicky et al. [43]
Song et al. [37]
Shepherd et al.[16]*
Kingswood et al. [15]*
Kingswood et al. [41]*
Wilson et al. [42]
Sun et al. [38]
Vekeman et al. [40]
Kristof et al. [11]
Study design
Multicenter, p
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, p
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, r
Multicenter, r
Monocenter, r
Multicenter, r
Costing year
2019
2019
2017
2012
2013
2014
2014
2014
n.r
2010
2012
2011
Country (city)
Germany
US
Hong Kong
US
US
UK
UK
UK
US
US
Netherlands(Utrecht)
Canada(Quebec)
Group
All TSC
TSC and epilepsy
All TSC
All TSC
TSC and AML
TSC and epilepsy
All TSC
TSC and kidneys
All TSC
TSC and SEGA surgery
TSC and kidneys
All TSC (especially LAM)
Number of patients
192
2028
284
430
487
209
286
79
5655
47
369
1004
Study population
A
C & A
C & A
A
A
C & A
C & A
C & A
C & A
C & A
C & A
A
Patients with epilepsy
72.9%
100%
71.3%
n.r
n.r
100%
n.r
n. r
41.2%
91%
n.r
7.8%#
Age in years (median)
18.0–78.0 (31.0)
Mean 25.3
0.45–89.9 (27.2)
19.0–83.0 (36.5)
Mean 36.9
Mean 26.8
Mean 31.5
Mean 38.3
Mean 22.3
Mean 11.6
Mean 42.8 7
Mean 39.5
Patients with AED intake
64.1%
89.5%
n. r
n.r
n.r
88%
42.7%
68.4%
n.r
n.r
n.r
18.3%
Patients with mTOR-inhibitor intake
37.0%
10%
16.5%
n.r
8%
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
13.4% 3
 
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Median PPPY
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Median
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Mean PPPY
Total direct costs
EUR 6452
n.r
n.r
n.r
USD 32,858–48,499 4
GBP 4778 5
GBP 4227 5
GBP 5054 5
n.r
USD 8543–85,397 6
EUR 1275–31,916 8
n.r
Medication
EUR 4953
USD 18,836
n.r
USD 7200 1, 3
USD 3103–4770 4
no specific amount
GBP 595 5 (only primary care)
GBP 869 5 (only primary care)
n.r
USD 1300–2338 6
EUR 429–1508 8
n.r
 AED
EUR 415
USD 12,866
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
 mTOR inhibitors
EUR 4358
USD 4028
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Hospitalization
EUR 518
USD 2106
USD 5819 1
USD 2650 2, 3
USD 15,390–11,787 4
no specific amount
GBP 2181 5
GBP 2350 5
USD 14,807
USD 3770–71,562 6
n.r
n.r
Ancillary therapies
EUR 125
n.r
n.r
USD 8160 2, 3
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Outpatient treatment
EUR 467
USD 13,455
USD 1414 1
USD 500 2
USD 13,639–31,158 4
no specific amount
GBP 645 5
GBP 690 5
n.r
USD 3473–11,497 6
n.r
CAD 513
ER visists
n.r
USD 1535
USD 116 1
USD 500 2
USD 725–785 4
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
 
Mean PPPY
Total indirect costs
EUR 3174
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Inability to work
EUR 1775
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Part time work
EUR 514
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Unemployment
EUR 355
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Early retirement
EUR 296
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
Days off
EUR 234
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
n.r
p = prospective; r = retrospective; C = Children; A = Adults; n.r. = not reported; PPPY = per person/per year; *same study cohort; #referring to epilepsy as discharge diagnosis
110% of actual expenses, government subsidized more than 90%; 2 "out-of-pocket" direct spending; 3 calculated
4The first amount is from commercial cohort, the second one from medicaid cohort
5Calculated for one year, original cost figure given for a 3 year period, excluding GP administartion encounters
6From SEGA pre-surgery to post-surgery period; 7 calculated across all CKD stages
8The first amount is from CKD stage 1, the second one from CKD stage 5, overall mean PPPY costs for AML: EUR 1451–3243
In terms of the use of healthcare resources, our results appear to be in line with other COI studies, particularly hospitalization frequency and the use of ASDs [9, 11, 15, 16, 37, 42, 44, 45]. Most studies could not evaluate mTOR inhibitor use because the periods of data inclusion preceded their authorization. In our study, more patients (37%) used mTOR inhibitors than in three other recent studies (8–16.5%) [37, 44, 45].
A particular contribution of this study is the collection of data regarding the indirect costs and the nursing requirements, which were measured by the care grade allowances. Nursing-associated costs were identified as an important cost component, associated with annual expenditures of EUR 3716, reinforcing the importance of different organ manifestations and seizure-related costs, as were reported by Skalicky et al. [43].

Limitations

The limitations associated with the questionnaire used in this study include the potential for recall bias regarding three-month-old events, which might result in incomplete and underestimated costs. Furthermore, although the sample consisted of individuals recruited from a variety of sources (multiple clinics and centers across Germany and through the patient advocacy group), we do not know whether the included sample is representative of individuals with TSC in Germany owing to the rarity of TSC. Only two individuals older than 67 years of age were included in this study, which may indicate the limited access to specialized care among this vulnerable group. In addition, the analysis of cost drivers should be interpreted with caution given the limited sample size. However, the significance that the number of organ manifestations had on COI in the current study suggests some common ground with earlier studies, which also identified the number of organ manifestations as cost driver [16]. In addition, the skewness identified in the cost calculations should be noted, as disparities were noted between the mean and median costs. A limitation is the incomplete capturing of informal care costs, as we based these only on allowances paid to the individual for support of caregivers, and services that were paid out-of-pocket by the patients or caregivers. Further intangible and likely substantial informal care costs such as work productivity loss of caregivers is explicitly exempt from our analysis. Another limitation of the study was due to the calculation of indirect costs using the human capital approach. The study was performed in 2019 in a situation of nearly full employment in the general population before the onset of the Corona virus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, however indirect costs may not exactly reflect the burden on society and may be overestimated [57]. However, due to the limitations of the friction cost approach [58], we retained the human capital approach, which is in accordance with the German and international recommendations for performing health economic evaluations [5961]. The major strength of the study remains its large sample size of 192 individuals and caregivers, which is significant given the rarity of TSC, and the timing of this analysis after mTOR inhibitors were licensed for the treatment of various disease manifestations.

Conclusions

Expenditures among individuals with TSC are high and are driven by the number and severity of disease manifestations. More effective delivery of existing disease-modifying treatments and the development of new therapies may have the potential to substantially reduce the high clinical and economic burden of TSC for patients and our health system. Productivity losses represent a major source of costs, which should be addressed through improved sociomedical support and therapeutic interventions. Efforts should focus on reducing absenteeism from work and providing integrated, centralized care for individuals with TSC.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all of the individuals with TSC who contributed to this survey and the German patient advocacy group Tuberöse Sklerose Deutschland e.V. for their help with participant recruitment.

Declarations

This study received ethics approval by the Goethe-University Frankfurt (reference 324/18), and all participants provided informed consent.
Not applicable.

Competing interests

JPZ reports speakers’ honoraria and travel grants from EISAI and Desitin Arzneimittel. FR reports personal fees from Arvelle Therapeutics, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals companies, Novartis, Medtronic, Sandoz, Shire, and UCB, and grants from the Detlev-Wrobel-Fonds for Epilepsy Research, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the LOEWE Programme of the State of Hesse, and the European Union. MS reports personal fees from Novartis and GW Pharmaceuticals companies. GK reports personal fees from Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals companies, UCB, Novartis, Takeda, and Zogenix. TM reports personal fees and grants from Arvelle Therapeutics, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals companies, UCB, and Zogenix. AB reports personal fees from Desitin Arzneimittel GmbH, Eisai GmbH, Eisai GmbH, Shire GmbH, UCB Pharma GmbH, and ViroPharma GmbH. KMK reports personal fees from UCB Pharma, Novartis Pharma AG, Eisai, and GW Pharmaceuticals, grants from the federal state Hessen through the LOEWE program, and from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. SM reports grants from Novartis, UCB, Shire, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and Epilepsiestiftung Dr. Wolf. FvP reports personal fees and grants from Bial, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceutical companies, Arvelle Therapeutics, and UCB Pharma. SS-B reports personal fees from Eisai, Desitin Pharma, GW Pharmaceuticals companies, LivaNova, UCB, and Zogenix. AS reports personal fees and grants from Arvelle Therapeutics, Desitin Arzneimittel, Eisai, GW Pharmaceuticals companies, LivaNova, Marinus Pharma, Medtronic, UCB, and Zogenix. None of the other authors reported any related conflicts of interest.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Ebrahimi-Fakhari D, Mann LL, Poryo M, Graf N, von Kries R, Heinrich B, Ebrahimi-Fakhari D, Flotats-Bastardas M, Gortner L, Zemlin M, et al. Incidence of tuberous sclerosis and age at first diagnosis: new data and emerging trends from a national, prospective surveillance study. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13(1):117.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Ebrahimi-Fakhari D, Mann LL, Poryo M, Graf N, von Kries R, Heinrich B, Ebrahimi-Fakhari D, Flotats-Bastardas M, Gortner L, Zemlin M, et al. Incidence of tuberous sclerosis and age at first diagnosis: new data and emerging trends from a national, prospective surveillance study. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13(1):117.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Hong CH, Darling TN, Lee CH. Prevalence of tuberous sclerosis complex in Taiwan: a national population-based study. Neuroepidemiology. 2009;33(4):335–41.PubMedCrossRef Hong CH, Darling TN, Lee CH. Prevalence of tuberous sclerosis complex in Taiwan: a national population-based study. Neuroepidemiology. 2009;33(4):335–41.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Shepherd CW, Beard CM, Gomez MR, Kurland LT, Whisnant JP. Tuberous sclerosis complex in Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1950–1989. Arch Neurol. 1991;48(4):400–1.PubMedCrossRef Shepherd CW, Beard CM, Gomez MR, Kurland LT, Whisnant JP. Tuberous sclerosis complex in Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1950–1989. Arch Neurol. 1991;48(4):400–1.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Zöllner JP, Franz DN, Hertzberg C, Nabbout R, Rosenow F, Sauter M, Schubert-Bast S, Wiemer-Kruel A, Strzelczyk A. A systematic review on the burden of illness in individuals with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020;15(1):23. Zöllner JP, Franz DN, Hertzberg C, Nabbout R, Rosenow F, Sauter M, Schubert-Bast S, Wiemer-Kruel A, Strzelczyk A. A systematic review on the burden of illness in individuals with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020;15(1):23.
5.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Callaghan FJ, Shiell AW, Osborne JP, Martyn CN. Prevalence of tuberous sclerosis estimated by capture-recapture analysis. Lancet. 1998;351(9114):1490.PubMedCrossRef O’Callaghan FJ, Shiell AW, Osborne JP, Martyn CN. Prevalence of tuberous sclerosis estimated by capture-recapture analysis. Lancet. 1998;351(9114):1490.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Hong CH, Tu HP, Lin JR, Lee CH. An estimation of the incidence of tuberous sclerosis complex in a nationwide retrospective cohort study (1997–2010). Br J Dermatol. 2016;174(6):1282–9.PubMedCrossRef Hong CH, Tu HP, Lin JR, Lee CH. An estimation of the incidence of tuberous sclerosis complex in a nationwide retrospective cohort study (1997–2010). Br J Dermatol. 2016;174(6):1282–9.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Curatolo P, Moavero R, de Vries PJ. Neurological and neuropsychiatric aspects of tuberous sclerosis complex. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(7):733–45.PubMedCrossRef Curatolo P, Moavero R, de Vries PJ. Neurological and neuropsychiatric aspects of tuberous sclerosis complex. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(7):733–45.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Chu-Shore CJ, Major P, Camposano S, Muzykewicz D, Thiele EA. The natural history of epilepsy in tuberous sclerosis complex. Epilepsia. 2010;51(7):1236–41.PubMedCrossRef Chu-Shore CJ, Major P, Camposano S, Muzykewicz D, Thiele EA. The natural history of epilepsy in tuberous sclerosis complex. Epilepsia. 2010;51(7):1236–41.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Skalicky AM, Rentz AM, Liu Z, Wheless JW, Pelletier CL, Dunn DW, Frost MD, Nakagawa J, Magestro M, Prestifilippo J, et al. The burden of subependymal giant cell astrocytomas associated with tuberous sclerosis complex: results of a patient and caregiver survey. J Child Neurol. 2015;30(5):563–9.PubMedCrossRef Skalicky AM, Rentz AM, Liu Z, Wheless JW, Pelletier CL, Dunn DW, Frost MD, Nakagawa J, Magestro M, Prestifilippo J, et al. The burden of subependymal giant cell astrocytomas associated with tuberous sclerosis complex: results of a patient and caregiver survey. J Child Neurol. 2015;30(5):563–9.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Kingswood JC, Belousova E, Benedik MP, Carter T, Cottin V, Curatolo P, Dahlin M, D’Amato L, Beaure d’Augeres G, de Vries PJ, et al. Renal manifestations of tuberous sclerosis complex: key findings from the final analysis of the TOSCA study focussing mainly on renal angiomyolipomas. Front Neurol. 2020;11:972.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Kingswood JC, Belousova E, Benedik MP, Carter T, Cottin V, Curatolo P, Dahlin M, D’Amato L, Beaure d’Augeres G, de Vries PJ, et al. Renal manifestations of tuberous sclerosis complex: key findings from the final analysis of the TOSCA study focussing mainly on renal angiomyolipomas. Front Neurol. 2020;11:972.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Kristof AS, Zhi Li P, Major P, Landry JS. Lymphangioleiomyomatosis and tuberous sclerosis complex in Quebec: prevalence and health-care utilization. Chest. 2015;148(2):444–9.PubMedCrossRef Kristof AS, Zhi Li P, Major P, Landry JS. Lymphangioleiomyomatosis and tuberous sclerosis complex in Quebec: prevalence and health-care utilization. Chest. 2015;148(2):444–9.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Sancak O, Nellist M, Goedbloed M, Elfferich P, Wouters C, Maat-Kievit A, Zonnenberg B, Verhoef S, Halley D, van den Ouweland A. Mutational analysis of the TSC1 and TSC2 genes in a diagnostic setting: genotype–phenotype correlations and comparison of diagnostic DNA techniques in Tuberous Sclerosis Complex. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005;13(6):731–41.PubMedCrossRef Sancak O, Nellist M, Goedbloed M, Elfferich P, Wouters C, Maat-Kievit A, Zonnenberg B, Verhoef S, Halley D, van den Ouweland A. Mutational analysis of the TSC1 and TSC2 genes in a diagnostic setting: genotype–phenotype correlations and comparison of diagnostic DNA techniques in Tuberous Sclerosis Complex. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005;13(6):731–41.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Rosset C, Netto CBO, Ashton-Prolla P. TSC1 and TSC2 gene mutations and their implications for treatment in Tuberous Sclerosis Complex: a review. Genet Mol Biol. 2017;40(1):69–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Rosset C, Netto CBO, Ashton-Prolla P. TSC1 and TSC2 gene mutations and their implications for treatment in Tuberous Sclerosis Complex: a review. Genet Mol Biol. 2017;40(1):69–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Schubert-Bast S, Rosenow F, Klein KM, Reif PS, Kieslich M, Strzelczyk A. The role of mTOR inhibitors in preventing epileptogenesis in patients with TSC: current evidence and future perspectives. Epilepsy Behav. 2019;91:94–8.PubMedCrossRef Schubert-Bast S, Rosenow F, Klein KM, Reif PS, Kieslich M, Strzelczyk A. The role of mTOR inhibitors in preventing epileptogenesis in patients with TSC: current evidence and future perspectives. Epilepsy Behav. 2019;91:94–8.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Kingswood JC, Crawford P, Johnson SR, Sampson JR, Shepherd C, Demuth D, Erhard C, Nasuti P, Patel K, Myland M, et al. The economic burden of tuberous sclerosis complex in the UK: a retrospective cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. J Med Econ. 2016;19(11):1087–98.PubMedCrossRef Kingswood JC, Crawford P, Johnson SR, Sampson JR, Shepherd C, Demuth D, Erhard C, Nasuti P, Patel K, Myland M, et al. The economic burden of tuberous sclerosis complex in the UK: a retrospective cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. J Med Econ. 2016;19(11):1087–98.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Shepherd C, Koepp M, Myland M, Patel K, Miglio C, Siva V, Gray E, Neary M. Understanding the health economic burden of patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) with epilepsy: a retrospective cohort study in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). BMJ Open. 2017;7(10):e015236.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Shepherd C, Koepp M, Myland M, Patel K, Miglio C, Siva V, Gray E, Neary M. Understanding the health economic burden of patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) with epilepsy: a retrospective cohort study in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). BMJ Open. 2017;7(10):e015236.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Jansen AC, Vanclooster S, de Vries PJ, Fladrowski C, Beaure d’Augeres G, Carter T, Belousova E, Benedik MP, Cottin V, Curatolo P, et al. Burden of illness and quality of life in tuberous sclerosis complex: findings from the TOSCA Study. Front Neurol. 2020;11:904.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Jansen AC, Vanclooster S, de Vries PJ, Fladrowski C, Beaure d’Augeres G, Carter T, Belousova E, Benedik MP, Cottin V, Curatolo P, et al. Burden of illness and quality of life in tuberous sclerosis complex: findings from the TOSCA Study. Front Neurol. 2020;11:904.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Henske EP, Jozwiak S, Kingswood JC, Sampson JR, Thiele EA. Tuberous sclerosis complex. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16035.PubMedCrossRef Henske EP, Jozwiak S, Kingswood JC, Sampson JR, Thiele EA. Tuberous sclerosis complex. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16035.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Northrup H, Krueger DA. International tuberous sclerosis complex consensus G: tuberous sclerosis complex diagnostic criteria update: recommendations of the 2012 international tuberous sclerosis complex consensus conference. Pediatr Neurol. 2013;49(4):243–54. Northrup H, Krueger DA. International tuberous sclerosis complex consensus G: tuberous sclerosis complex diagnostic criteria update: recommendations of the 2012 international tuberous sclerosis complex consensus conference. Pediatr Neurol. 2013;49(4):243–54.
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Fisher RS, Cross JH, French JA, Higurashi N, Hirsch E, Jansen FE, Lagae L, Moshe SL, Peltola J, Roulet Perez E, et al. Operational classification of seizure types by the international league against epilepsy: position paper of the ILAE commission for classification and terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58(4):522–30.CrossRefPubMed Fisher RS, Cross JH, French JA, Higurashi N, Hirsch E, Jansen FE, Lagae L, Moshe SL, Peltola J, Roulet Perez E, et al. Operational classification of seizure types by the international league against epilepsy: position paper of the ILAE commission for classification and terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58(4):522–30.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Scheffer IE, Berkovic S, Capovilla G, Connolly MB, French J, Guilhoto L, Hirsch E, Jain S, Mathern GW, Moshe SL, et al. ILAE classification of the epilepsies: position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58(4):512–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Scheffer IE, Berkovic S, Capovilla G, Connolly MB, French J, Guilhoto L, Hirsch E, Jain S, Mathern GW, Moshe SL, et al. ILAE classification of the epilepsies: position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58(4):512–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Initiative S. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007;4(10):e296.CrossRef von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Initiative S. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007;4(10):e296.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Riechmann J, Strzelczyk A, Reese JP, Boor R, Stephani U, Langner C, Neubauer BA, Oberman B, Philippi H, Rochel M, et al. Costs of epilepsy and cost-driving factors in children, adolescents, and their caregivers in Germany. Epilepsia. 2015;56(9):1388–97.PubMedCrossRef Riechmann J, Strzelczyk A, Reese JP, Boor R, Stephani U, Langner C, Neubauer BA, Oberman B, Philippi H, Rochel M, et al. Costs of epilepsy and cost-driving factors in children, adolescents, and their caregivers in Germany. Epilepsia. 2015;56(9):1388–97.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Strzelczyk A, Nickolay T, Bauer S, Haag A, Knake S, Oertel WH, Reif PS, Rosenow F, Reese JP, Dodel R, et al. Evaluation of health-care utilization among adult patients with epilepsy in Germany. Epilepsy Behav. 2012;23(4):451–7.PubMedCrossRef Strzelczyk A, Nickolay T, Bauer S, Haag A, Knake S, Oertel WH, Reif PS, Rosenow F, Reese JP, Dodel R, et al. Evaluation of health-care utilization among adult patients with epilepsy in Germany. Epilepsy Behav. 2012;23(4):451–7.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Strzelczyk A, Schubert-Bast S, Bast T, Bettendorf U, Fiedler B, Hamer HM, Herting A, Kalski M, Kay L, Kieslich M, et al. A multicenter, matched case-control analysis comparing burden-of-illness in Dravet syndrome to refractory epilepsy and seizure remission in patients and caregivers in Germany. Epilepsia. 2019;60(8):1697–710.PubMedCrossRef Strzelczyk A, Schubert-Bast S, Bast T, Bettendorf U, Fiedler B, Hamer HM, Herting A, Kalski M, Kay L, Kieslich M, et al. A multicenter, matched case-control analysis comparing burden-of-illness in Dravet syndrome to refractory epilepsy and seizure remission in patients and caregivers in Germany. Epilepsia. 2019;60(8):1697–710.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Willems LM, Richter S, Watermann N, Bauer S, Klein KM, Reese JP, Schoffski O, Hamer HM, Knake S, Rosenow F, et al. Trends in resource utilization and prescription of anticonvulsants for patients with active epilepsy in Germany from 2003 to 2013—a ten-year overview. Epilepsy Behav. 2018;83:28–35.PubMedCrossRef Willems LM, Richter S, Watermann N, Bauer S, Klein KM, Reese JP, Schoffski O, Hamer HM, Knake S, Rosenow F, et al. Trends in resource utilization and prescription of anticonvulsants for patients with active epilepsy in Germany from 2003 to 2013—a ten-year overview. Epilepsy Behav. 2018;83:28–35.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Graf von der Schulenburg JM, Greiner W, Jost F, Klusen N, Kubin M, Leidl R, Mittendorf T, Rebscher H, Schoeffski O, Vauth C, et al. German recommendations on health economic evaluation: third and updated version of the Hanover Consensus. Value Health. 2008;11(4):539–44.PubMedCrossRef Graf von der Schulenburg JM, Greiner W, Jost F, Klusen N, Kubin M, Leidl R, Mittendorf T, Rebscher H, Schoeffski O, Vauth C, et al. German recommendations on health economic evaluation: third and updated version of the Hanover Consensus. Value Health. 2008;11(4):539–44.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Schwabe U, Paffrath D, Ludwig W-D, Klauber J. Arzneiverordnungs-Report. Berlin: Springer; 2019. Schwabe U, Paffrath D, Ludwig W-D, Klauber J. Arzneiverordnungs-Report. Berlin: Springer; 2019.
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Bock JO, Brettschneider C, Seidl H, Bowles D, Holle R, Greiner W, Konig HH. Calculation of standardised unit costs from a societal perspective for health economic evaluation. Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)). 2015;77(1):53–61. Bock JO, Brettschneider C, Seidl H, Bowles D, Holle R, Greiner W, Konig HH. Calculation of standardised unit costs from a societal perspective for health economic evaluation. Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)). 2015;77(1):53–61.
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Bayat A, Hjalgrim H, Moller RS. The incidence of SCN1A-related Dravet syndrome in Denmark is 1:22,000: a population-based study from 2004 to 2009. Epilepsia. 2015;56(4):e36-39.PubMedCrossRef Bayat A, Hjalgrim H, Moller RS. The incidence of SCN1A-related Dravet syndrome in Denmark is 1:22,000: a population-based study from 2004 to 2009. Epilepsia. 2015;56(4):e36-39.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Dravet C, Oguni H. Dravet syndrome (severe myoclonic epilepsy in infancy). Handb Clin Neurol. 2013;111:627–33.PubMedCrossRef Dravet C, Oguni H. Dravet syndrome (severe myoclonic epilepsy in infancy). Handb Clin Neurol. 2013;111:627–33.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Forsgren L, Nystrom L. An incident case-referent study of epileptic seizures in adults. Epilepsy Res. 1990;6(1):66–81.PubMedCrossRef Forsgren L, Nystrom L. An incident case-referent study of epileptic seizures in adults. Epilepsy Res. 1990;6(1):66–81.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Stat Med. 2000;19(23):3219–36.PubMedCrossRef Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Stat Med. 2000;19(23):3219–36.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Desgagne A, Castilloux AM, Angers JF, LeLorier J. The use of the bootstrap statistical method for the pharmacoeconomic cost analysis of skewed data. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998;13(5 Pt 1):487–97.PubMedCrossRef Desgagne A, Castilloux AM, Angers JF, LeLorier J. The use of the bootstrap statistical method for the pharmacoeconomic cost analysis of skewed data. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998;13(5 Pt 1):487–97.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Friede T, Posch M, Zohar S, Alberti C, Benda N, Comets E, Day S, Dmitrienko A, Graf A, Gunhan BK, et al. Recent advances in methodology for clinical trials in small populations: the InSPiRe project. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13(1):186.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Friede T, Posch M, Zohar S, Alberti C, Benda N, Comets E, Day S, Dmitrienko A, Graf A, Gunhan BK, et al. Recent advances in methodology for clinical trials in small populations: the InSPiRe project. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13(1):186.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Gaasterland CMW, van der Weide MCJ, du Prie-Olthof MJ, Donk M, Kaatee MM, Kaczmarek R, Lavery C, Leeson-Beevers K, O’Neill N, Timmis O, et al. The patient’s view on rare disease trial design—A qualitative study. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Gaasterland CMW, van der Weide MCJ, du Prie-Olthof MJ, Donk M, Kaatee MM, Kaczmarek R, Lavery C, Leeson-Beevers K, O’Neill N, Timmis O, et al. The patient’s view on rare disease trial design—A qualitative study. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Song X, Liu Z, Cappell K, Gregory C, Said Q, Prestifilippo J, Charles H, Hulbert J, Bissler J. Healthcare utilization and costs in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex-related renal angiomyolipoma. J Med Econ. 2017;20(4):388–94.PubMedCrossRef Song X, Liu Z, Cappell K, Gregory C, Said Q, Prestifilippo J, Charles H, Hulbert J, Bissler J. Healthcare utilization and costs in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex-related renal angiomyolipoma. J Med Econ. 2017;20(4):388–94.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Sun P, Liu Z, Krueger D, Kohrman M. Direct medical costs for patients with tuberous sclerosis complex and surgical resection of subependymal giant cell astrocytoma: A US national cohort study. J Med Econ. 2015;18(5):349–56.PubMedCrossRef Sun P, Liu Z, Krueger D, Kohrman M. Direct medical costs for patients with tuberous sclerosis complex and surgical resection of subependymal giant cell astrocytoma: A US national cohort study. J Med Econ. 2015;18(5):349–56.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Strzelczyk A, Reese JP, Dodel R, Hamer HM. Cost of epilepsy: A systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(6):463–76.PubMedCrossRef Strzelczyk A, Reese JP, Dodel R, Hamer HM. Cost of epilepsy: A systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(6):463–76.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Vekeman F, Magestro M, Karner P, Duh MS, Nichols T, van Waalwijk van Doorn-Khosrovani SB, Zonnenberg BA. Kidney involvement in tuberous sclerosis complex: The impact on healthcare resource use and costs. J Med Econ. 2015;18(12):1060–70.PubMedCrossRef Vekeman F, Magestro M, Karner P, Duh MS, Nichols T, van Waalwijk van Doorn-Khosrovani SB, Zonnenberg BA. Kidney involvement in tuberous sclerosis complex: The impact on healthcare resource use and costs. J Med Econ. 2015;18(12):1060–70.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Kingswood JC, Nasuti P, Patel K, Myland M, Siva V, Gray E. The economic burden of tuberous sclerosis complex in UK patients with renal manifestations: A retrospective cohort study in the clinical practice research datalink (CPRD). J Med Econ. 2016;19(12):1116–26.PubMedCrossRef Kingswood JC, Nasuti P, Patel K, Myland M, Siva V, Gray E. The economic burden of tuberous sclerosis complex in UK patients with renal manifestations: A retrospective cohort study in the clinical practice research datalink (CPRD). J Med Econ. 2016;19(12):1116–26.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilson TA, Rodgers S, Tanweer O, Agarwal P, Lieber BA, Agarwal N, McDowell M, Devinsky O, Weiner H, Harter DH. Tuberous sclerosis health care utilization based on the national inpatient sample database: A review of 5655 hospitalizations. World Neurosurg. 2016;91:97–105.PubMedCrossRef Wilson TA, Rodgers S, Tanweer O, Agarwal P, Lieber BA, Agarwal N, McDowell M, Devinsky O, Weiner H, Harter DH. Tuberous sclerosis health care utilization based on the national inpatient sample database: A review of 5655 hospitalizations. World Neurosurg. 2016;91:97–105.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Skalicky AM, Rentz AM, Liu Z, Said Q, Nakagawa JA, Frost MD, Wheless JW, Dunn DW. Economic burden, work, and school productivity in individuals with tuberous sclerosis and their families. J Med Econ. 2018;21(10):953–9.PubMedCrossRef Skalicky AM, Rentz AM, Liu Z, Said Q, Nakagawa JA, Frost MD, Wheless JW, Dunn DW. Economic burden, work, and school productivity in individuals with tuberous sclerosis and their families. J Med Econ. 2018;21(10):953–9.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Betts KA, Stockl KM, Yin L, Hollenack K, Wang MJ, Yang X. Economic burden associated with tuberous sclerosis complex in patients with epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav. 2020;112:107494.PubMedCrossRef Betts KA, Stockl KM, Yin L, Hollenack K, Wang MJ, Yang X. Economic burden associated with tuberous sclerosis complex in patients with epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav. 2020;112:107494.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Chu WC, Chiang LL, Chan DC, Wong WH, Chan GC. Prevalence, mortality and healthcare economic burden of tuberous sclerosis in Hong Kong: A population-based retrospective cohort study (1995–2018). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020;15(1):264.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Chu WC, Chiang LL, Chan DC, Wong WH, Chan GC. Prevalence, mortality and healthcare economic burden of tuberous sclerosis in Hong Kong: A population-based retrospective cohort study (1995–2018). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020;15(1):264.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Zurück zum Zitat European Medicines Agency: Votubia—Summary of Opinion (Post Authorisation) In. London, UK: European Medicines Agency; 2012. European Medicines Agency: Votubia—Summary of Opinion (Post Authorisation) In. London, UK: European Medicines Agency; 2012.
47.
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Strzelczyk A, Griebel C, Lux W, Rosenow F, Reese JP. The Burden of severely drug-refractory epilepsy: A comparative longitudinal evaluation of mortality, morbidity, resource use, and cost using German health insurance data. Front Neurol. 2017;8:712.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Strzelczyk A, Griebel C, Lux W, Rosenow F, Reese JP. The Burden of severely drug-refractory epilepsy: A comparative longitudinal evaluation of mortality, morbidity, resource use, and cost using German health insurance data. Front Neurol. 2017;8:712.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Strzelczyk A, Kalski M, Bast T, Wiemer-Kruel A, Bettendorf U, Kay L, Kieslich M, Kluger G, Kurlemann G, Mayer T, et al. Burden-of-illness and cost-driving factors in Dravet syndrome patients and carers: A prospective, multicenter study from Germany. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2019;23(3):392–403. Strzelczyk A, Kalski M, Bast T, Wiemer-Kruel A, Bettendorf U, Kay L, Kieslich M, Kluger G, Kurlemann G, Mayer T, et al. Burden-of-illness and cost-driving factors in Dravet syndrome patients and carers: A prospective, multicenter study from Germany. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2019;23(3):392–403.
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Strzelczyk A, Schubert-Bast S, Simon A, Wyatt G, Holland R, Rosenow F. Epidemiology, healthcare resource use, and mortality in patients with probable Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: A population-based study on German health insurance data. Epilepsy Behav. 2021;115:107647.PubMedCrossRef Strzelczyk A, Schubert-Bast S, Simon A, Wyatt G, Holland R, Rosenow F. Epidemiology, healthcare resource use, and mortality in patients with probable Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: A population-based study on German health insurance data. Epilepsy Behav. 2021;115:107647.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Zurück zum Zitat Kohlhase K, Zöllner JP, Tandon N, Strzelczyk A, Rosenow F. Comparison of minimally invasive and traditional surgical approaches for refractory mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of outcomes. Epilepsia. 2021;62 (4):831-845. Kohlhase K, Zöllner JP, Tandon N, Strzelczyk A, Rosenow F. Comparison of minimally invasive and traditional surgical approaches for refractory mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of outcomes. Epilepsia. 2021;62 (4):831-845.
52.
Zurück zum Zitat Thiele EA, Bebin EM, Bhathal H, Jansen FE, Kotulska K, Lawson JA, O'Callaghan FJ, Wong M, Sahebkar F, Checketts D. et al. Add-On cannabidiol treatment for drug-resistant seizures in tuberous sclerosis complex: A placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2021;78(3):1–9. Thiele EA, Bebin EM, Bhathal H, Jansen FE, Kotulska K, Lawson JA, O'Callaghan FJ, Wong M, Sahebkar F, Checketts D. et al. Add-On cannabidiol treatment for drug-resistant seizures in tuberous sclerosis complex: A placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2021;78(3):1–9.
53.
Zurück zum Zitat Józwiak J, Sontowska I, Ploski R. Frequency of TSC1 and TSC2 mutations in American, British, Polish and Taiwanese populations. Mol Med Rep. 2013;8(3):909–13. Józwiak J, Sontowska I, Ploski R. Frequency of TSC1 and TSC2 mutations in American, British, Polish and Taiwanese populations. Mol Med Rep. 2013;8(3):909–13.
54.
Zurück zum Zitat Klug C, Schreiber-Katz O, Thiele S, Schorling E, Zowe J, Reilich P, Walter MC, Nagels KH. Disease burden of spinal muscular atrophy in Germany. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2016;11(1):58.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Klug C, Schreiber-Katz O, Thiele S, Schorling E, Zowe J, Reilich P, Walter MC, Nagels KH. Disease burden of spinal muscular atrophy in Germany. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2016;11(1):58.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
55.
Zurück zum Zitat Schreiber-Katz O, Klug C, Thiele S, Schorling E, Zowe J, Reilich P, Nagels KH, Walter MC. Comparative cost of illness analysis and assessment of health care burden of Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies in Germany. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014;9:210.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Schreiber-Katz O, Klug C, Thiele S, Schorling E, Zowe J, Reilich P, Nagels KH, Walter MC. Comparative cost of illness analysis and assessment of health care burden of Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies in Germany. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014;9:210.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
56.
Zurück zum Zitat Willems LM, Hamer HM, Knake S, Rosenow F, Reese JP, Strzelczyk A. General trends in prices and prescription patterns of anticonvulsants in Germany between 2000 and 2017: Analysis of national and Cohort-based data. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2019;17(5):707–22.PubMedCrossRef Willems LM, Hamer HM, Knake S, Rosenow F, Reese JP, Strzelczyk A. General trends in prices and prescription patterns of anticonvulsants in Germany between 2000 and 2017: Analysis of national and Cohort-based data. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2019;17(5):707–22.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Zurück zum Zitat Begley CE, Annegers JF, Lairson DR, Reynolds TF. Methodological issues in estimating the cost of epilepsy. Epilepsy Res. 1999;33(1):39–55.PubMedCrossRef Begley CE, Annegers JF, Lairson DR, Reynolds TF. Methodological issues in estimating the cost of epilepsy. Epilepsy Res. 1999;33(1):39–55.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Zurück zum Zitat Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF, van Ineveld BM, van Roijen L. The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of disease. J Health Econ. 1995;14(2):171–89.PubMedCrossRef Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF, van Ineveld BM, van Roijen L. The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of disease. J Health Econ. 1995;14(2):171–89.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Zurück zum Zitat Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care: (IQWiG)—Technical Document on Cost Estimation 09.10.2008. Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care: (IQWiG)—Technical Document on Cost Estimation 09.10.2008.
60.
Zurück zum Zitat Schöffski O, v.d. Schulenburg J: Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluationen, 3. vollständig überarbeitete Auflage, Berlin: Springer; 2007. Schöffski O, v.d. Schulenburg J: Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluationen, 3. vollständig überarbeitete Auflage, Berlin: Springer; 2007.
61.
Zurück zum Zitat v.d. Schulenburg JM, Greiner W, Jost F, Klusen N, Kubin M, Leidl R, Mittendorf T, Rebscher H, Schoeffski O, Vauth C, et al. German recommendations on health economic evaluation: third and updated version of the Hanover Consensus. Value Health 2008;11(4):539–544. v.d. Schulenburg JM, Greiner W, Jost F, Klusen N, Kubin M, Leidl R, Mittendorf T, Rebscher H, Schoeffski O, Vauth C, et al. German recommendations on health economic evaluation: third and updated version of the Hanover Consensus. Value Health 2008;11(4):539–544.
Metadaten
Titel
Direct and indirect costs and cost-driving factors in adults with tuberous sclerosis complex: a multicenter cohort study and a review of the literature
verfasst von
Johann Philipp Zöllner
Janina Grau
Felix Rosenow
Matthias Sauter
Markus Knuf
Gerhard Kurlemann
Thomas Mayer
Christoph Hertzberg
Astrid Bertsche
Ilka Immisch
Karl Martin Klein
Susanne Knake
Klaus Marquard
Sascha Meyer
Anna H. Noda
Felix von Podewils
Hannah Schäfer
Charlotte Thiels
Laurent M. Willems
Bianca Zukunft
Susanne Schubert-Bast
Adam Strzelczyk
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2021
Verlag
BioMed Central
Erschienen in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Ausgabe 1/2021
Elektronische ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-021-01838-w

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2021

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2021 Zur Ausgabe