4. Discussion
The present results have shown, for the first time in a contemporary U.S. population, the survival disadvantage among MS patients that has been reported from other countries (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
,
,
Grytten Torkildsen et al., 2008- Grytten Torkildsen N
- Lie SA
- Aarseth JH
- Nyland H
- Myhr KM.
Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: results from a 50-year follow-up in Western Norway.
,
Kingwell et al., 2012- Kingwell E
- van der Kop M
- Zhao Y
- Shirani A
- Zhu F
- Oger J
- et al.
Relative mortality and survival in multiple sclerosis: findings from British Columbia, Canada.
,
Ragonese et al., 2010- Ragonese P
- Aridon P
- Mazzola MA
- Callari G
- Palmeri B
- Famoso G
- et al.
Multiple sclerosis survival: a population-based study in Sicily.
). Based on commercial health insurance claims for patient identification and death records from national registries, we estimated that the median lifespan is 6 years shorter for MS patients compared to plan members who did not have MS and were matched to the patients for year of birth, sex, and geographic region. The shorter lifespan for MS patients was apparent in both female and male subjects, with a slightly larger difference in males.
Other findings include mortality rates that were approximately twice as high in MS patients as in comparators, both overall (899 vs. 446 per 100,000 person-years) and in subgroups defined according to sex and geography. The calculated SMRs also showed that mortality was greater among MS patients and lower among comparators than in the general U.S. population. The latter result suggests that, as anticipated, the commercially insured are in better health than the population as a whole.
While a number of previous studies have evaluated survival in MS patients, there are only a few that provided general population comparisons (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
,
,
Grytten Torkildsen et al., 2008- Grytten Torkildsen N
- Lie SA
- Aarseth JH
- Nyland H
- Myhr KM.
Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: results from a 50-year follow-up in Western Norway.
,
Kingwell et al., 2012- Kingwell E
- van der Kop M
- Zhao Y
- Shirani A
- Zhu F
- Oger J
- et al.
Relative mortality and survival in multiple sclerosis: findings from British Columbia, Canada.
,
Ragonese et al., 2010- Ragonese P
- Aridon P
- Mazzola MA
- Callari G
- Palmeri B
- Famoso G
- et al.
Multiple sclerosis survival: a population-based study in Sicily.
,
Sadovnick et al., 1992- Sadovnick AD
- Ebers GC
- Wilson RW
- Paty DW.
Life expectancy in patients attending multiple sclerosis clinics.
). The most recent, a study of a population-based cohort identified from clinics in British Columbia, also reported on median survival from birth (
Kingwell et al., 2012- Kingwell E
- van der Kop M
- Zhao Y
- Shirani A
- Zhu F
- Oger J
- et al.
Relative mortality and survival in multiple sclerosis: findings from British Columbia, Canada.
). There was an approximate 6-year deficit in lifespan compared to the general provincial population among both female (78.5 vs. 84.5 years) and male (74 vs. 80 years) patients identified between 1980 and 2004 and followed through 2007, a finding that closely parallels the present U.S. results. An earlier, considerably smaller clinic-based study from British Columbia and Ontario reported a similar 6–7 year deficit based on survival from onset of MS (
Sadovnick et al., 1992- Sadovnick AD
- Ebers GC
- Wilson RW
- Paty DW.
Life expectancy in patients attending multiple sclerosis clinics.
). Other reports were from Europe (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
,
,
Grytten Torkildsen et al., 2008- Grytten Torkildsen N
- Lie SA
- Aarseth JH
- Nyland H
- Myhr KM.
Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: results from a 50-year follow-up in Western Norway.
,
Ragonese et al., 2010- Ragonese P
- Aridon P
- Mazzola MA
- Callari G
- Palmeri B
- Famoso G
- et al.
Multiple sclerosis survival: a population-based study in Sicily.
), and also focused on survival from onset rather than lifespan. These include an approximate 10-year deficit among patients in the Danish Multiple Sclerosis Registry who developed the disease between 1949 and 1996 and were followed through 1999, compared with age-matched general population survival (38 vs. 45 years among females, 28 vs. 38 years among males) (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
); an 8-year deficit in patients from a single county in Norway with disease onset from 1953 to 2003 followed through 2004 and compared with general population mortality statistics (43 vs. 51 years among females, 36 vs. 46 years among males) (
Grytten Torkildsen et al., 2008- Grytten Torkildsen N
- Lie SA
- Aarseth JH
- Nyland H
- Myhr KM.
Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: results from a 50-year follow-up in Western Norway.
); and an approximate 10-year deficit in patients identified in Sicily and followed through mid-2007 (onset dates were not provided) compared with a series of controls matched for birthdate, sex, and municipality (
Ragonese et al., 2010- Ragonese P
- Aridon P
- Mazzola MA
- Callari G
- Palmeri B
- Famoso G
- et al.
Multiple sclerosis survival: a population-based study in Sicily.
). An outlier to the other European studies was a report from Austria based on deaths attributed to MS from 1970 to 2001 compared with other causes in the population, which showed deficits of 15 years in the median age at death among females (60 vs. 75 years) and 11 years among males (57 vs. 68 years) (
). Although the European survival deficits are somewhat larger than what we have reported, those cohorts were generally older, and the disease onset for many patients was before the era of DMT treatment, which began in 1993 and may be associated with a beneficial effect on survival (
Goodin et al., 2012- Goodin DS
- Reder AT
- Ebers GC
- Cutter G
- Kremenchutzky M
- Oger J
- et al.
Survival in MS: a randomized cohort study 21 years after the start of the pivotal IFNbeta-1b trial.
).
A final comparison is provided by the North American Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) database, a voluntary national registry of MS patients in the U.S. that was initiated in 1993, with more than 36,000 participants (
Lo et al., 2005- Lo AC
- Hadjimichael O
- Vollmer TL.
Treatment patterns of multiple sclerosis patients: a comparison of veterans and non-veterans using the NARCOMS registry.
). In a recent analysis, the median survival in NARCOMS was 81.5 years (
Reshef et al., 2012Reshef S, Cutter G, Golub HL, Kaufman DW, Brueckner A. Mortality in multiple sclerosis in the United States (MIMS-US): a retrospective, cohort study of survival and mortality trends. Annual Meeting of American Academy of Neurology, New Orleans2012.
), similar to what we observed among MS patients in the present study. The overall survival curve was also generally similar.
SMRs have also been reported from numerous population-based case series, with an approximate range of 2–3 (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 1994- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Hyllested K.
Survival of patients with multiple sclerosis in Denmark: a nationwide, long-term epidemiologic survey.
,
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
,
Grytten Torkildsen et al., 2008- Grytten Torkildsen N
- Lie SA
- Aarseth JH
- Nyland H
- Myhr KM.
Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: results from a 50-year follow-up in Western Norway.
,
Hirst et al., 2008- Hirst C
- Swingler R
- Compston DA
- Ben-Shlomo Y
- Robertson NP.
Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: a prospective population-based study.
,
Kingwell et al., 2012- Kingwell E
- van der Kop M
- Zhao Y
- Shirani A
- Zhu F
- Oger J
- et al.
Relative mortality and survival in multiple sclerosis: findings from British Columbia, Canada.
,
Koch-Henriksen et al., 1998- Koch-Henriksen N
- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Stenager E.
Underlying cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis: results from the Danish Multiple Sclerosis Registry.
,
Reshef et al., 2012Reshef S, Cutter G, Golub HL, Kaufman DW, Brueckner A. Mortality in multiple sclerosis in the United States (MIMS-US): a retrospective, cohort study of survival and mortality trends. Annual Meeting of American Academy of Neurology, New Orleans2012.
,
Smestad et al., 2009- Smestad C
- Sandvik L
- Celius EG.
Excess mortality and cause of death in a cohort of Norwegian multiple sclerosis patients.
). While this study’s SMR for MS patients was lower (1.70), a more appropriate comparison is with the
ratio of SMRs from the MS patients to the comparators (whose SMR was 0.80), because the latter subjects were drawn from the same population as the patients in the present study. That ratio is 2.13, which is within the range of other reported estimates.
While there is no other readily available type of data in the U.S. for a large-scale evaluation of survival patterns in MS with matched comparators, insurance claims have not previously been used for this purpose, and potential validity issues must be considered. The diagnosis of MS was based on having either an ICD-9 code signifying MS and at least one prescription for a DMT, which we considered sufficiently specific to be an accurate indication that the patient truly had MS, or a minimum of two ICD-9 codes at least 30 days apart. A validation study on a sample of patients meeting the latter criteria confirmed the diagnosis for 73%. Since 64% of the patients had been treated with DMTs, this suggests that the maximum proportion of false positives in the complete study population would have been 10% of the total, which is not enough to have materially affected the results, and if anything would have led to underestimation of the mortality difference between MS patients and comparators.
Another potential limitation with the claims data is that patients were not identified at the time of diagnosis, but rather when they met the inclusion criteria during their enrollment in the insurance plan. The median age at the first code was 44 years, which is almost 15 years after mean disease onset (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
). While our approach excluded patients who died before they could be enrolled in the insurance plan, most MS deaths occur later in life (
Bronnum-Hansen et al., 2004- Bronnum-Hansen H
- Koch-Henriksen N
- Stenager E.
Trends in survival and cause of death in Danish patients with multiple sclerosis.
), and indeed the median survival in our data was 80 years. Thus, any bias introduced by this “immortal time” (
) that excluded early deaths would have been slight. Importantly, because they were matched to patients on the age at the first code, the comparators were subject to the same immortal time as the patients. While this alleviates concerns about biased
comparisons, the immortal time in both groups inevitably led to some overestimation of the respective lifespans, and the focus should thus remain on the difference between MS and comparators.
Nevertheless, the lack of information about the date of diagnosis or onset in the claims data means that survival could not be measured from either of these time-points. Instead, we compared survival from birth (lifespan) in patients and matched comparators. A similar measure was reported in the recent British Columbia study (
Kingwell et al., 2012- Kingwell E
- van der Kop M
- Zhao Y
- Shirani A
- Zhu F
- Oger J
- et al.
Relative mortality and survival in multiple sclerosis: findings from British Columbia, Canada.
), and it can be argued that, given the insidious onset of MS, lifespan is actually a more consistent and accurate parameter for comparative analysis.
It is common in the U.S. setting to change health insurance with changes in employment. Although coverage periods in the insurance plans were relatively short for both MS patients and comparators, this should have had a minimal effect on the survival analyses because plan membership was used only to identify subjects. Vital status was determined separately via the NDI and SSA DMF; these data sources are quite complete, with only a few deaths occurring outside the U.S. likely to have been missed. It is not clear that these would have been distributed differently in the comparison groups, and in any event, the numbers would have been too small to explain the large differences observed.
A limitation of our analyses is that information on type and severity of MS was not available in the claims data, and information on comorbidities was confined to claims from the relatively brief period of enrollment in the health care plan. An examination of survival according to type, severity, and general health state could provide valuable insight into the relationship of death to the underlying MS. Indeed, it might be anticipated that the claims data would underestimate the mortality from MS because severely disabled patients might lose commercial insurance (unless insured under a family member) or rely on government programs (e.g., Medicare or Medicaid). However, as MS is a progressive illness, these patients may still be initially captured in the insurance data base, which suffices for mortality ascertainment through the subsequent NDI and SSA DMF searches. While the key question of the impact of DMTs on survival still remains, we did not investigate this within the dataset we created. Such an exploration would have been difficult for at least two reasons: (1) the relatively incomplete treatment histories due to inclusion in the insurance plans for short durations; (2) the problem of confounding by indication, in which the type of treatment may vary according to severity of disease and survival prospects in ways that cannot be measured. While the more complete picture afforded by including severity and type of MS, comorbidities, and DMT treatment in the analyses would be desirable, the overall investigation of survival patterns that we conducted is valuable because it is the first time this has been explored with U.S. data. Differences in the characteristics of national populations and medical care systems could lead to different survival outcomes, and it is thus important to determine whether previously observed relationships also apply in this country.
Because MS patients from the claims data are all commercially insured, they are not representative of the full U.S. adult population – approximately 68% of U.S. adults under age 65 have private health insurance (
Adams et al., 2009Adams PF, Heyman KM, Vickerie JL. Summary health statistics for the U.S. population: National Health Interview Survey, 2008. National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Health Stat. 2009;10.
). The restriction of patients to this population has relevance not only for extrapolation of our results, but also for the choice of comparison group for survival patterns. The comparators were subjects without MS, but from the same database (i.e., the same health plans), who were matched to the MS patients on relevant characteristics. There would have been a similar exclusion of early deaths as in the patients; furthermore, the follow-up period for discerning mortality was set to be the same in patients and their matched comparators, thereby avoiding immortal time bias in the comparisons. The comparators also provide an anchor point for considering how the commercially insured population may differ from the general population in terms of mortality. As expected, the SMR for comparators was below 1.0, indicating that this population is somewhat healthier. These patterns, along with the similarity of the lifespan difference between patients and comparators in the claims data and the British Columbia study (
Kingwell et al., 2012- Kingwell E
- van der Kop M
- Zhao Y
- Shirani A
- Zhu F
- Oger J
- et al.
Relative mortality and survival in multiple sclerosis: findings from British Columbia, Canada.
), provide some face validity for the present results, and more generally for the use of claims data in mortality studies.
Funding and Competing interests
This project was sponsored by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. Other than comments that the authors were not obligated to accept, the sponsor had no role in the conduct of the project, including the final wording of the manuscript and decision to publish, beyond the contributions of the authors who are identified as employees below.
David Kaufman has received personal compensation for activities with Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, McNeil Consumer Healthcare, and UCB as a consultant. Dr. Kaufman has received research support from McNeil Consumer HealthCare, CSL Behring, Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Incyte Corporation, and Sanofi-Aventis.
Shoshana Reshef is a salaried employee of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.
Howard Golub has received personal compensation for activities with Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Ameritox, MedicaMetrix, MoMelan, and Genova Diagnostics as a consultant.
Mark Peucker has received personal compensation for activities with Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals as a consultant.
Michael Corwin has received personal compensation for activities with Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Ameritox, and Genova Diagnostics as a consultant. Dr. Corwin has received personal compensation for participation as a Medical Monitor and on Data and Safety Monitoring Committees for Edimer Pharmaceuticals, SynapDx, BioDelivery Sciences International, Stratatech, KV Pharmaceuticals, and Meridian Medical Technologies.
Douglas Goodin has participated (or is currently participating) in several industry-sponsored clinical trials in multiple sclerosis; the sponsoring pharmaceutical companies for these trials have included (or do include) Ares-Serono, Merck Serono, Novartis, Berlex Laboratories, Bayer Schering HealthCare, Biogen Idec, Schering AG and Teva Neuroscience. He has also lectured at both medical conferences and in public on various aspects of the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of multiple sclerosis, and in many cases these talks have been sponsored directly or indirectly by one or another of the above listed companies. He has served as a temporary ad hoc consultant to several of these organizations on several occasions.
Volker Knappertz was a salaried employee of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.
Dirk Pleimes is a salaried employee of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.
Gary Cutter has received personal compensation for participation on Data and Safety Monitoring Committees for Antisense Therapeutics Limited, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayhill Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, BioMS Pharmaceuticals, Daichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, Genmab Biopharmaceuticals, Medivation, Peptimmune, PTC Therapeutics, Teva, Vivus, NHLBI, NINDS, and NMSS. He also received consulting and speaking fees and served on advisory boards for Alexion, Accentia, Barofold, CibaVision, Biogen Idec, Novartis, Consortium of MS Centers (grant), Klein-Buendel Incorporated, Enzo Pharmaceuticals, Somnus Pharmaceuticals, and Teva Pharmaceuticals.