Skip to main content
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Open access
Research Article
8 July 2025

Healthcare utilization and costs among patients with acromegaly in the United States

Authors: Tiffany P Quock https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4861-4285 [email protected], Eunice Chang https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0177-6153, Ashis K Das https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7110-9463, Amanda Speller https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8789-1384, Marian H Tarbox https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0818-5113, Melinda L Rossi https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5958-4946, Stacy K Rattana https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3567-0862, Ingrid E Paulson https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3591-7293, and Michael S Broder https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2049-5536Author Info & Affiliations
Volume 14, Number 9
https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2025-0069
PDFFormats

Abstract

Aim: Recent evidence regarding the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs of acromegaly is limited. Materials & methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional administrative claims analysis (IQVIA Pharmetrics Plus®) identified patients (≥18 years) with acromegaly between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2022. HCRU and costs over 1 year were compared in patients with acromegaly and matched patients without acromegaly (age, sex, insurance type, year). Among patients with acromegaly, annual total healthcare costs of comorbidities and procedures consistent with high-risk comorbidities were reported. Costs were adjusted to 2023 USD. Results: Among 2289 patients with acromegaly and 2289 matched patients without acromegaly, mean age was 49.8 years and 51.6% were female. Patients with acromegaly had a significantly (p < 0.001) higher comorbidity burden than patients without acromegaly. A significantly (p < 0.001) greater proportion of patients with acromegaly versus patients without acromegaly had inpatient hospitalizations (20.1 vs 4.9%) and emergency department visits (23.9 vs 15.7%). Total mean healthcare costs were also significantly higher for patients with acromegaly than patients without acromegaly ($51,888 vs $10,601). The majority of acromegaly-related healthcare costs ($30,985) were attributable to acromegaly therapy ($25,895). Hypertension (42.8%) was the most common high-risk comorbidity associated with acromegaly. The costliest high-risk comorbidity was congestive heart failure, with a mean cost difference of $38,123 (p < 0.05) between patients with acromegaly with and without hypertension. Conclusion: Patients with acromegaly had higher HCRU and costs than matched patients without acromegaly, and the presence of acromegaly with high-risk comorbidities was associated with a substantial HCRU and cost burden. This high burden of illness may be alleviated with better disease control.

Plain language summary: Healthcare burden & costs in acromegaly

What is this article about?

Acromegaly is a rare hormonal disease that leads to poor health outcomes without effective treatment. This study examined healthcare use and cost among patients with and without acromegaly, along with acromegaly-specific services and costs.

What were the results?

In this retrospective cohort study, patients with acromegaly used more healthcare services than those without acromegaly. Twenty percent of patients with acromegaly were hospitalized during the 1-year study period compared with 5% of patients without acromegaly. Average total healthcare costs were almost fivefold higher for patients with acromegaly compared with those without acromegaly ($51,888 vs $10,601). Among patients with acromegaly, those with associated medical conditions and surgeries had the highest healthcare costs.

What do the results mean?

Acromegaly – and acromegaly with high-risk comorbidities – was associated with a substantial healthcare burden, indicating that an unmet need remains for affected patients.

Supplementary Material

File (supplementary materials.docx)

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest
1.
Holdaway IM, Rajasoorya C. Epidemiology of acromegaly. Pituitary 2(1), 29–41 (1999).
PubMed
Google Scholar
2.
Carmichael JD, Broder MS, Cherepanov D et al. The association between biochemical control and cardiovascular risk factors in acromegaly. BMC Endocr. Disord. 17(1), (2017).
Google Scholar
• This prospective cohort study of a single-center acromegaly registry investigated the comorbidity burden among patients with acromegaly and highlighted the challenge of achieving disease control for those with uncontrolled disease.
3.
Colao A, Ferone D, Marzullo P, Lombardi G. Systemic complications of acromegaly: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and management. Endocr. Rev. 25(1), 102–152 (2004).
PubMed
Google Scholar
4.
Carroll PV, Joshi MN. Acromegaly. In: Endotext. Feingold KR, Ahmed SF, Anawalt Bet al. et al. (Eds)., MDText.com, Inc, MA, USA (2000).
Google Scholar
5.
Orme SM, McNally RJ, Cartwright RA, Belchetz PE. Mortality and cancer incidence in acromegaly: a retrospective cohort study. United Kingdom Acromegaly Study Group. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 83(8), 2730–2734 (1998).
PubMed
Google Scholar
6.
Chanson P, Salenave S. Acromegaly. Orphanet. J. Rare Dis. 3(1), 17 (2008).
PubMed
Google Scholar
7.
Chanson P, Salenave S, Kamenicky P, Cazabat L, Young J. Acromegaly. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 23(5), 555–574 (2009).
PubMed
Google Scholar
8.
Melmed S. Acromegaly. N. Engl. J. Med. 355(24), 2558–2573 (2006).
PubMed
Google Scholar
9.
Melmed S, Bronstein MD, Chanson P et al. A consensus statement on acromegaly therapeutic outcomes. Nature Rev. Endocrinol. 14(9), 552–561 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• In this consensus statement, experts reviewed current literature on acromegaly treatments and patient outcomes. They highlighted variable response rates to somatostatin receptor ligands, cabergoline and pegvisomant, along with high rates of cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, metabolic complications among patients with acromegaly.
10.
Ezzat S, Serri O, Chik CL et al. Canadian consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acromegaly. Clin. Invest. Med. 29(1), 29–39 (2006).
PubMed
Google Scholar
11.
Carmichael JD, Bonert VS, Nuño M, Ly D, Melmed S. Acromegaly clinical trial methodology impact on reported biochemical efficacy rates of somatostatin receptor ligand treatments: a meta-analysis. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 99(5), 1825–1833 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
12.
Colao A, Auriemma RS, Pivonello R, Kasuki L, Gadelha MR. Interpreting biochemical control response rates with first-generation somatostatin analogues in acromegaly. Pituitary 19(3), 235–247 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
13.
Giustina A, Chanson P, Kleinberg D et al. Expert consensus document: a consensus on the medical treatment of acromegaly. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 10(4), 243–248 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
14.
Fleseriu M, Barkan A, Brue T et al. Treatment patterns, adherence, persistence, and health care resource utilization in acromegaly: a real-world analysis. J. Endocrine Soc. 7(10), bvad104 (2023).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective study used data from a large US commercial claims database to investigate health care utilization, disease burden and treatment patterns among acromegaly patients. The authors found higher healthcare utilization rates among patients with comorbidities, which may have been due to an increased disease burden.
15.
Daniel CP, Wagner MJ, Borne GE et al. Acromegaly: pathophysiological considerations and treatment options including the evolving role of oral somatostatin analogs. Pathophysiology 30(3), 377–388 (2023).
PubMed
Google Scholar
16.
Ribeiro-Oliveira A, Brook RA, Munoz KA et al. Burden of acromegaly in the United States: increased health services utilization, location of care, and costs of care. J. Med. Econ. 24(1), 432–439 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective study used administrative claims data from a US employer database and reported higher healthcare utilization rates and healthcare costs among patients with acromegaly compared with matched controls.
17.
Placzek H, Xu Y, Mu Y, Begelman SM, Fisher M. Clinical and economic burden of commercially insured patients with acromegaly in the United States: a retrospective analysis. J. Manag. Care Spec. Pharm. 21(12), 1106–1112 (2015).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective study used administrative claims data from a commercially insured US population to assess the disease burden among patients with acromegaly. The authors highlighted the need for improved disease management strategies due to high acromegaly-related healthcare costs.
18.
Burton T, Le Nestour E, Bancroft T, Neary M. Real-world comorbidities and treatment patterns of patients with acromegaly in two large US health plan databases. Pituitary 16(3), 354–362 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective study used administrative claims data from two US commercial health plan databases and emphasized the high incidence of comorbidities associated with acromegaly, especially among patients who received acromegaly-related treatment. This finding may reflect insufficient disease management and poor disease control.
19.
Liu J, Barrett JS, Leonardi ET et al. Natural history and real-world data in rare diseases: applications, limitations, and future perspectives. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 62(Suppl. 2), S38–S55 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
20.
Konrad R, Zhang W, Bjarndóttir M, Proaño R. Key considerations when using health insurance claims data in advanced data analyses: an experience report. Health Syst. (Basingstoke) 9(4), 317–325 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
21.
Behrendt C-A, Debus ES, Mani K, Sedrakyan A. The strengths and limitations of claims based research in countries with fee for service reimbursement. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 56(5), 615–616 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
22.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer price index, medical care, 2014–2024 (2024). Available at: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SAM?output_view=data
Google Scholar
23.
Broder MS, Neary MP, Chang E, Cherepanov D, Katznelson L. Treatments, complications, and healthcare utilization associated with acromegaly: a study in two large United States databases. Pituitary 17(4), 333–341 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective study used administrative claims data from two US databases and found that complications were common among patients with acromegaly patients, leading to increased healthcare utilization. The authors postulated that improved disease management might reduce healthcare utilization and costs.
24.
Yuen KCJ, Munoz KA, Brook RA et al. Health benefit costs and absenteeism among employed patients with acromegaly. Endocr. Pract. 27(10), 1034–1039 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
25.
Chuang C-C, Bhurke S, Chen S-Y, Dinet J, Brulais S, Gabriel S. Treatment patterns and economic burden in patients treated for acromegaly in the USA. Drugs – Real World Outcomes 2(3), 299–309 (2015).
PubMed
Google Scholar
26.
Aagaard C, Christophersen AS, Finnerup S et al. The prevalence of acromegaly is higher than previously reported: changes over a three-decade period. Clin. Endocrinol. 97(6), 773–782 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
27.
Karapanou O, Tzanela M, Christoforaki M et al. Therapeutic trends and outcome of acromegaly: a single center experience over a 40-year period. Hormones 15(3), 368–376 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective single-center study in Greece evaluated acromegaly treatment trends and outcomes over a 40-year period and reported higher rates of medical treatment over time. Although the authors found improvements in acromegaly outcomes in the last 20 years, they highlighted that many patients still experience uncontrolled disease.
28.
Cremaschi A, Sala E, Lavezzi E et al. Recurrence in acromegaly: two tertiary centers experience and review of the literature. J. Endocrinol. Invest. 47(9), 2269–2277 (2024).
PubMed
Google Scholar
29.
Del Porto LA, Liubinas SV, Kaye AH. Treatment of persistent and recurrent acromegaly. J. Clin. Neurosci. 18(2), 181–190 (2011).
PubMed
Google Scholar
30.
Kyriakakis N, Seejore K, Hanafy A, Murray RD. Management of persistent acromegaly following primary therapy: the current landscape in the UK. Endocrinol. Diabetes Metab. 3(3), e00158 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
31.
Donegan DM, Iñiguez-Ariza N, Sharma A et al. Necessity of multimodal treatment of acromegaly and outcomes. Endocr. Pract. 24(7), 668–676 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
32.
Burton T, Le Nestour E, Neary M, Ludlam WH. Incidence and prevalence of acromegaly in a large US health plan database. Pituitary 19(3), 262–267 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
33.
Broder MS, Chang E, Cherepanov D, Neary MP, Ludlam WH. Incidence and prevalence of acromegaly in the United States: a claims-based analysis. Endocr. Pract. 22(11), 1327–1335 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
|