Healthcare utilization of patients with hereditary angioedema treated with lanadelumab and subcutaneous C1-inhibitor concentrate.

Background: New hereditary angioedema (HAE) treatments have become available in recent years for the treatment of HAE due to C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency, including two subcutaneous (SC) options: a monoclonal antibody (lanadelumab) and a plasma-derived C1-INH concentrate (SC-C1-INH). Limited real-world data on these therapies have been reported. Objective: The objective was to describe new users of lanadelumab and SC-C1-INH, including demographics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and treatment patterns before and after beginning treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study that used an administrative claims data base. Two mutually exclusive cohorts of adult (ages ≥18 years) new users of lanadelumab or SC-C1-INH with ≥180 days of continuous use were identified. HCRU, costs, and treatment patterns were assessed in the 180-day period before the index date (new treatment use) and up to 365 days after the index date. HCRU and costs were calculated as annualized rates. Results: Forty-seven patients who used lanadelumab and 38 patients who used SC-C1-INH were identified. The most frequently used on-demand HAE treatments at baseline were the same for both cohorts: bradykinin B2 antagonists (48.9% of the patients on lanadelumab, 52.6% of the patients on SC-C1-INH) and C1-INHs (40.4% of the patients on lanadelumab, 57.9% of the patients on SC-C1-INH). More than 33% of the patients continued to fill on-demand medications after treatment initiation. Annualized angioedema-associated emergency department visits and hospitalizations decreased after initiation of treatment, from 1.8 to 0.6 for the patients on lanadelumab and from 1.3 to 0.5 for the patients on SC-C1-INH. Annualized total healthcare costs after treatment initiation in the database were $866,639 and $734,460 for the lanadelumab and SC-C1-INH cohorts, respectively. Pharmacy costs accounted for >95% of these total costs. Conclusion: Although HCRU decreased after the initiation of treatment, angioedema-associated emergency department visits and hospitalizations and on-demand treatment fills were not completely eliminated. This indicates ongoing disease and treatment burden despite use of modern HAE medicines.

Identification of responders to inhaled corticosteroids in a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease population using cluster analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify clusters of patients who may benefit from treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) versus LABA alone, in terms of exacerbation reduction, and to validate previously identified clusters of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (based on diuretic use and reversibility). DESIGN: Post hoc supervised cluster analysis using a modified recursive partitioning algorithm of two 1-year randomised, controlled trials of fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) versus VI alone, with the primary end points of the annual rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations. SETTING: Global. PARTICIPANTS: 3255 patients with COPD (intent-to-treat populations) with a history of exacerbations in the past year. INTERVENTIONS: FF/VI 50/25 µg, 100/25 µg or 200/25 µg, or VI 25 µg; all one time per day. OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean annual COPD exacerbation rate to identify clusters of patients who benefit from adding an ICS (FF) to VI bronchodilator therapy. RESULTS: Three clusters were identified, including two groups that benefit from FF/VI versus VI: patients with blood eosinophils >2.4% (RR=0.68, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.79), or blood eosinophils ≤2.4% and smoking history ≤46 pack-years, experienced a reduced rate of exacerbations with FF/VI versus VI (RR=0.78, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.96), whereas those with blood eosinophils ≤2.4% and smoking history >46 pack-years were identified as non-responders (RR=1.22, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.58). Clusters of patients previously identified in the fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (SAL) versus SAL trials of similar design were not validated; all clusters of patients tended to benefit from FF/VI versus VI alone irrespective of diuretic use and reversibility. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COPD with a history of exacerbations, those with greater blood eosinophils or a lower smoking history may benefit more from ICS/LABA versus LABA alone as measured by a reduced rate of exacerbations. In terms of eosinophils, this finding is consistent with findings from other studies; however, the validity of the 2.4% cut-off and the impact of smoking history require further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT01009463; NCT01017952; Post-results.