Real‐world onabotulinumtoxinA treatment patterns in patients with overactive bladder

Abstract

AbstractPurposeUtilization patterns of third‐line onabotulinumtoxinA for overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms—including discontinuation and use of other therapeutic options during or after treatment—are not well understood. This retrospective analysis of administrative claims was designed to characterize the unmet need for OAB treatment.Materials and MethodsA retrospective claims analysis of Optum's deidentified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database (2009–2021) was performed among patients with diagnosis of OAB newly starting onabotulinumtoxinA injection (2015–2017). Study measures were evaluated during an 18‐month pretreatment baseline and over a minimum of 36 months of follow‐up. These included number of injections, days between injections, other measures of onabotulinumtoxinA utilization, use of second‐line pharmacologic treatments, use of device and surgical treatment options, and complications.ResultsOf 2505 eligible patients, 535 (21.4%; 66.8 ± 13.3 y, 87.3% females) continued onabotulinumtoxinA throughout the study. The remaining 1970 (78.6%; 71.4 ± 11.6 y, 79.1% females) were considered discontinuers. Of continuers, 57% received ≥5 treatments. Of discontinuers, 84% received ≤2 treatments. Anticholinergics and β3‐adrenoceptor agonist medication use declined in all patients from baseline to follow‐up; however, the absolute reduction in the proportion with any medication fill was similar across continuers versus discontinuers (21% vs. 18%, p < 0.0001). Sacral neuromodulation was initiated by 15/535 (3%) of continuers and 137/1970 (7%) of discontinuers (p < 0.0001). No patients initiated percutaneous tibial neuromodulation.ConclusionsEarly discontinuation of onabotulinumtoxinA therapy for OAB is common and most discontinuers do not receive alternative treatments. Providers have the opportunity to educate OAB patients with un‐ or undertreated symptoms regarding alternative options.