Prevalence, Burden, and Pharmacoeconomics of Dry Eye Disease

Supplements and Featured Publications, Management and Pharmacoeconomics of Dry Eye Disease: The Role of Cyclosporine, Volume 14, Issue 3 Suppl

Data from a large US managed care database suggest that the prevalence of clinically diagnosed dry eye disease (DED) is 0.4% to 0.5% overall, and is highest among women and the elderly. The burden of DED to the patient can be substantial, impacting visual function, daily activities, social and physical functioning, workplace productivity, and quality of life (QOL). Preliminary analysis suggests that DED also has a considerable economic impact in terms of both direct and indirect costs. A number of therapies have been shown to improve DED signs and symptoms, but few clinical trials have addressed QOL and economic issues. Limited data suggest that topical cyclosporine has the potential to reduce physician visits and use of other medications, including artificial tears; however, further research is needed to clarify its impact on both the direct and indirect costs of DED.

(Am J Manag Care. 2008;14:S102-S106)

Prevalence of DED

see Table

Dry eye disease (DED) prevalences ranging from <0.1% to as high as 33% have been reported ().1-9 This wide variation among studies is, at least in part, the result of different DED definitions and study populations.10 For example, because many people with DED symptoms may self-treat rather than seek medical care, estimated prevalence may depend on whether the data came from general population surveys or physician assessments. Among patients diagnosed by physicians, estimated prevalence may vary depending on the diagnostic criteria used and the clinicians&#8217; subjective assessments.8

The highest reported prevalence of 33% came from a population- based study using a self-diagnosis questionnaire. Of the subjects with self-reported DED, only 11% had sought medical care for their symptoms.4

The lowest reported prevalence of <0.1% was derived from interviews with a sample of consultant ophthalmologists (ie, ophthalmologists with a special interest in DED). Therefore, this estimate excludes patients seen by general ophthalmologists and primary care physicians, as well as those not seeking medical care.8

Claims data from a large US managed care database (reflecting only individuals who seek medical care and are diagnosed with DED) suggest that the prevalence of clinically diagnosed DED is 0.4% to 0.5% overall, and is highest among women and the elderly.6

A similar estimate was obtained from the Dry Eye Management Outcomes Simulation (DEMOS). In this study, data from multiple sources were used in a Markov model to estimate medical costs and outcomes of DED. The DED prevalence in a typical managed care population was estimated at approximately 1%. Of these cases, about 60% are mild in severity, 30% moderate, and 10% severe. Of individuals with mild DED, only about 20% seek medical care, compared with 50% of those with moderate disease and 100% of those with severe disease.11 This suggests that approximately 0.37% of individuals in a typical managed care population seek medical care for and are diagnosed with DED.

The largest cross-sectional survey studies, the Women&#8217;s Health Study (WHS) and the Physicians&#8217; Health Study (PHS), included only older age groups, and defined DED as either a clinical diagnosis or self-reported severe symptoms. The age-adjusted prevalences among women and men age >50 years in the United States were 7.8% and 4.34%, respectively. This translates to a total of approximately 4.9 million Americans age >50 years with DED.7,9

Burden of DED

A number of therapies have been shown to improve the signs and symptoms of DED, as discussed by Lemp in an accompanying article in this supplement. 24 Although it seems likely that these therapies would also improve QOL and productivity and reduce overall healthcare utilization, few clinical studies have included QOL and economic data.

Using Markov modeling with data from multiple sources, it has been estimated that a new, more effective DED treatment could reduce nondrug direct medical costs by as much as 30%, primarily by reducing physician visits and the need for punctal plugs.11

Although most DED treatments are palliative rather than disease-modifying, topical cyclosporine addresses the underlying inflammatory process in DED. Limited data suggest that topical cyclosporine has the potential to decrease the economic burden of DED. For example:

&#8226; In phase 3 trials, cyclosporine decreased the need for artificial tears.25 Because DED patients may require artificial tears multiple times per day&#8212;and, in severe cases, even multiple times per hour&#8212;a reduction in their use can potentially have a substantial impact on QOL and productivity, as well as artificial tear costs.

&#8226; A survey study enrolling 14,927 DED patients examined the patients&#8217; experiences with cyclosporine in a real-world setting. Patients were asked to complete the survey at baseline, 30 days, and 60 days after initiating cyclosporine. Fifty-three percent of patients completed the first and third surveys (the second survey was optional). Among the 5884 patients (39%) who completed all 3 surveys, cyclosporine significantly reduced symptom severity and activity impairment compared with baseline. These reductions were observed at both the 30- and 60-day follow-ups. Patient- reported artificial tear use was also reduced (no statistical analysis given).27 The reasons for the high noncompletion rate were not reported.

DED prevalences ranging from <0.1% to as high as 33% have been reported. This wide variation is, at least in part, the result of different study populations and DED definitions. Claims data from a large US managed care database suggest that the prevalence of clinically diagnosed DED is 0.4% to 0.5% overall, and is highest among women and the elderly.

The burden of DED to the patient is not trivial. Studies suggest that DED can have a considerable impact on visual function, daily activities, social and physical functioning, workplace productivity, and QOL. Furthermore, several surveys found that treatment often did not provide adequate symptom relief or prevent disease progression.

Preliminary analysis suggests that the economic impact of DED is also substantial, in terms of both direct medical costs (eg, for medications and physician visits) and indirect costs (eg, lost work time and impaired productivity).

A number of therapies have been shown to improve DED symptoms. Although it seems likely that these therapies would also improve QOL and productivity and reduce overall healthcare utilization, few clinical studies have included QOL and economic data. It has been estimated that a new, more effective DED treatment could reduce nondrug direct medical costs by as much as 30%. Unlike most DED treatments, which are palliative, topical cyclosporine addresses the underlying inflammatory process in DED. Limited data suggest that cyclosporine has the potential to decrease the economic burden of DED by reducing physician visits and use of other medications, including artificial tears. Further research is needed to determine the extent to which the acquisition cost of cyclosporine is offset by decreases in other direct medical costs, and to ascertain the impact of cyclosporine on the indirect costs of DED.

Author Affiliations: From Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.

Funding Sources: The research and manuscript were funded by Allergan, Inc.

Author Disclosures: The author reports receiving research funding from Allergan; being a consultant for Allergan and Bausch & Lomb; being on speaker’s bureaus for Alcon, Allergan, and Bausch & Lomb; and receiving honoraria from Alcon, Allergan, and Bausch & Lomb.

Authorship Information: Concept and design, acquisition of data, drafting of the manuscript, and critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content.

Address Correspondence to: Stephen C. Pflugfelder, MD, Baylor College of Medicine, 6565 Fannin, NC-205, Houston, TX 77030. E-mail: stevenp@bcm.tcm.edu.

1. Bjerrum KB. Keratoconjunctivitis sicca and primary Sjögren’s syndrome in a Danish population aged 30-60 years. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1997;75:281-286.

3. McCarty CA, Bansal AK, Livingston PM, Stanislavsky YL, Taylor HR. The epidemiology of dry eye in Melbourne, Australia. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:1114-1119.

5. Moss SE, Klein R, Klein BE. Prevalence of and risk factors for dry eye syndrome. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:1264-1268.

7. Schaumberg DA, Sullivan DA, Buring JE, Dana MR. Prevalence of dry eye syndrome among US women. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136:318-326.

9. Miljanovic BM, Dana R, Sullivan D, Schaumberg DA. Prevalence and risk factors for dry eye syndrome among older men in the United States. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:E-abstract 4293. Presented at Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO); May 6-10, 2007; Ft Lauderdale, FL. http://www.abstractsonline.com/viewer/viewAbstract.asp?CKey={9B2DE643-3790-40FC-9D94-AF67F9514949}&MKey={0AEC998A-0BCA-41AF-A530-43715608C824}&AKey={C7EBB51B-512B-49A6-B4F2-0ADB01DC195B}&SKey={9D47C30C-E9E3-41A8-8F84-63E075B5D1EB}. Accessed February 21, 2008.

11. Lee JT,Teale CW. Development of an economic model to assess costs and outcomes associated with dry eye disease. Pharmacotherapy. 2000;20:356. Presented at the 2000 Spring Practice and Research Forum of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy; April 2-5, 2000; Monterey, CA.

13. Hirsch JD, Kozma CM, Wojcik AR, Reis B. Economic and quality-of-life impact of dry eye symptoms: a Sjögren’s syndrome patient survey. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:S65. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO); May 10-15, 1998; Ft Lauderdale, FL.

15. Kozma CM, Hirsch JD, Wojcik AR. Economic and quality of life impact of dry eye symptoms. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:S928. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO); April 30-May 5, 2000; Ft Lauderdale, FL.

17. Buchholz P, Steeds CS, Stern LS, et al. Utility assessment to measure the impact of dry eye disease. Ocul Surf. 2006;4:155-161.

19. Hirsch JD. Considerations in the pharmacoeconomics of dry eye. Manag Care. 2003;12:33-38.

21. Smeeding JE, McLaughlin T,Yazdani C,Walt JG. Dryeye related increases in health care and utilization and expenditures. Presented at the Sixth Annual Meeting of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research; May 20-23,

22. Nelson JD, Helms H, Fiscella R, Southwell Y, Hirsch JD. A new look at dry eye disease and its treatment. Adv Ther. 2000;17:84-93.

24. Lemp MA. Management of dry eye disease. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14:S88-S101.

26. Cross WD, Lay LF Jr,Walt JG, Kozma CM. Clinical and economic implications of topical cyclosporin A for the treatment of dry eye. Manag Care Interface. 2002;15: 44-49.

28. Chiang TH,Walt JG, McMahon JP Jr, Mansfield JE Jr, Simonyi S. Real-world utilization patterns of cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% within managed care. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;14:e240-e245.