Evaluating the Cost Burden of Alopecia Areata Treatment: A Comprehensive Review for Dermatologists
Alopecia areata (AA) is managed with prolonged medical treatments and cosmetic therapies, whose cost can be burdensome. We sought to identify the costs of AA treatment and consolidate the available data for the practicing dermatologist by performing a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE. Ten studies including approximately 16,000 patients with AA across a range of Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence were included. Studies showed that despite the limited efficacy of many AA therapies, patients incurred substantial expenses to manage their AA.
Practice Points
- Hair loss treatments and concealment techniques cost the average patient thousands of dollars. Much of this cost burden comes from items not covered by insurance.
- Providers should be wary of gender- or marketing-related surcharges for minoxidil solutions, and oral minoxidil may be a cost-effective option.
- Self-administering diphencyprone at home is more cost- and time-effective than in-office diphencyprone administration and does not decrease efficacy.
Minoxidil solution does not require physician office visits and is available over-the-counter.17 Despite identical ingredients, minoxidil is priced more per volume when marketed to women compared with men, which reflects the larger issue of gender-based pricing that does not exist for other AAD-approved alopecia therapies but may exist for cosmetic treatments and nonapproved therapies (eg, vitamins/supplements) that are popular in the treatment of AA.19 Oral minoxidil was more cost-effective than the topical form, and gender-based pricing was a nonissue.20 However, oral minoxidil requires a prescription, mandating patients incur the cost of an office visit. Patients should be wary of gender- or marketing-related surcharges for minoxidil solutions, and oral minoxidil may be a cost-effective choice.
Diphencyprone is a relatively affordable drug for AA, but the regular office visits traditionally required for its administration increase associated cost.21 Self-administration of DPC at home was more cost- and time-effective than in-office DPC administration and did not decrease efficacy. A regimen combining office visits for initial DPC titration, at-home DPC administration, and periodic office follow-up could minimize costs while preserving outcomes and safety.22
Janus kinase inhibitors are cutting-edge and expensive therapies for AA. The annual cost of these medications poses a tremendous burden on the payer (list price of annual supply ritlecitinib is $49,000),31 be that the patient or the insurance company. Low-dose tofacitinib may be similarly efficacious and could substantially reduce treatment costs.23 The true utility of these medications, specifically considering their steep costs, remains to be determined.
Conclusion
Alopecia areata poses a substantial and recurring cost burden on patients that is multifactorial including treatment, office visits, concealment, alternative therapies, psychosocial costs, and missed time at work. Although several treatment options exist, none of them are definitive. Oral minoxidil and at-home DPC administration can be cost-effective, though the cumulative cost is still high. The cost utility of JAK inhibitors remains unclear. When JAK inhibitors are prescribed, low-dose therapy may be used as maintenance to curb treatment costs. Concealment and therapy costs pose an additional, largely out-of-pocket financial burden. Despite the limited efficacy of many AA therapies, patients incur substantial expenses to manage their AA. This willingness to pay reflects AA’s impact on quality of life and puts these patients at high risk for financial distress. There are no head-to-head studies comparing the cost-effectiveness of the different AA therapies; thus, it is unclear if one treatment is most efficacious. This topic remains an avenue for future investigation. Much of the cost burden of AA treatment falls directly on patients. Increasing coverage of AA-associated expenses, such as minoxidil therapy or wigs, could decrease the cost burden on patients. Providers also can inform patients about cost-saving tactics, such as purchasing minoxidil based on concentration and vehicle rather than marketing directed at men vs women. Finally, some patients may have insurance plans that at least partially cover the costs of wigs but may not be aware of this benefit. Querying a patient’s insurance provider can further minimize costs.
