Real-world evidence to advance knowledge in pulmonary hypertension: Status, challenges, and opportunities. A consensus statement from the Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute's Innovative Drug Development Initiative's Real-world Evidence Working Group.

This manuscript on real-world evidence (RWE) in pulmonary hypertension (PH) incorporates the broad experience of members of the Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute's Innovative Drug Development Initiative Real-World Evidence Working Group. We aim to strengthen the research community's understanding of RWE in PH to facilitate clinical research advances and ultimately improve patient care. Herein, we review real-world data (RWD) sources, discuss challenges and opportunities when using RWD sources to study PH populations, and identify resources needed to support the generation of meaningful RWE for the global PH community.

Burden of pulmonary hypertension due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Analysis of exacerbations and healthcare resource utilization in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The burden of pulmonary hypertension (PH) among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is not well understood. The present retrospective cohort study aimed to quantify the clinical and economic burden of PH in patients with COPD. METHODS: Adults with COPD were retrospectively identified in the Optum® Clinformatics® Data Mart between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2021. Those diagnosed with PH were assigned to the PH-COPD cohort and those without a diagnosis of PH were assigned to the COPD cohort. Outcomes, including the number of visits for exacerbations and all-cause and COPD-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs per patient per month (PPPM), were compared between cohorts. Baseline and study outcomes were analyzed descriptively. For significance testing, continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-tests and categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-square tests. RESULTS: A total of 1627 patients with PH-COPD were matched 1:1 to COPD patients without PH. A greater percentage of PH-COPD patients experienced COPD exacerbations vs. the COPD cohort (p < 0.001) and the PH-COPD cohort had more total (p < 0.001) and severe exacerbation-related visits PPPM (p < 0.001). All-cause and COPD-related HCRU PPPM estimates were higher among the PH-COPD cohort vs. the COPD cohort (p < 0.01). Total all-cause (p < 0.001) and COPD-related costs (p < 0.001) were higher among PH-COPD patients than COPD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PH-COPD had higher rates of severe exacerbations, hospitalizations, and costs compared to COPD patients without PH, underscoring the need for targeted therapies to prevent and manage PH in patients with COPD.

Inhaled treprostinil vs iloprost: Comparison of adherence, persistence, and health care resource utilization in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is associated with a substantial clinical and economic burden. Inhaled prostacyclins are a well-established part of pharmacotherapy for PAH. There are differences between inhaled therapies in the burden imposed by administration frequency. Simpler and less time-consuming inhaled PAH therapies may improve both adherence and persistence and potentially affect outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare real-world health care resource use, costs, and treatment adherence and persistence in patients with PAH who initiated inhaled treprostinil or iloprost. METHODS: Adult patients with 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient medical claims separated by at least 30 days with a diagnosis of PAH were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision or Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes with a pharmacy claim for inhaled treprostinil or iloprost. Patients were required to be continuously enrolled in the health plan for 6 months prior to and 12 months after the index date. A proportion of days covered of 0.8 or more was considered adherent; persistence was no gap in therapy for at least 60 days. All-cause health care resource utilization and all-cause costs were assessed. RESULTS: 405 and 62 patients were included in the inhaled treprostinil and iloprost cohorts, respectively. Adherence (50.9% and 22.6%; P < 0.0001) and persistence (6 months, 65.2% vs 35.5%; 12 months, 46.7% vs 16.1%; log-rank P < 0.001) were significantly better with inhaled treprostinil. Post-index allcause inpatient admissions (39.3% vs 54.8%; P = 0.02) and post-index emergency department (ED) utilization (36.3% vs 50.0%; P = 0.04) were lower with inhaled treprostinil. Among patients who were persistent with therapy through 12 months, there was no significant difference between groups in mean (SD) all-cause total costs ($266,462 [137,324] vs $262,826 [112,452] for inhaled treprostinil vs iloprost, respectively; P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that inhaled treprostinil is less burdensome, is associated with greater adherence and persistence, and may reduce all-cause hospitalizations and ED visits. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by the United Therapeutics Corporation to obtain data for this analysis and compose the manuscript. Dr Burger has served as clinical investigator in multicenter interventional trials sponsored by United Therapeutics but did not receive any direct compensation. Drs Wu and Morland and Mr Classi are employees of United Therapeutics Corporation and own stock/shares in the company.

Considerations When Selecting Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Pulmonary Hypertension: A Narrative Review.

It is well established that pulmonary hypertension (PH) places a substantial burden on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). As more effective treatments have been developed for this condition, evaluating treatment benefit based on experiences reported by patients regarding their well-being and physical, social, and emotional functioning has increased. A review of the published literature and clinical trials in PH was conducted to identify and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess PH-specific HRQoL for use in clinical studies. The Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review, emPHasis-10, Living with Pulmonary Hypertension Questionnaire, and Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Symptoms and Impact were selected for in-depth evaluation with respect to their content validity, psychometric properties, interpretation guidelines, conceptual coverage, and administrative feasibility. Recommendations for clinical study end point strategies are provided. The review identified many strengths for each of the PROMs. Content development for all PROMs followed best practices, and any weaknesses in assessment of measurement properties were from a scarcity of available data. Although conceptual coverage and patient burden varied greatly across the PROMs, each provided a unique strength relative to the others, and no one PROM was recommended as most appropriate across all contexts of use. Optimal end point selection for assessing PH-specific HRQoL thus requires consideration of the purpose and situation in which the assessment will be conducted. These recommendations should be considered as a snapshot of a quickly evolving landscape that should be updated as new information emerges.

Identifying Patients with Group 3 Pulmonary Hypertension Associated with COPD or ILD Using an Administrative Claims Database.

BACKGROUND: Group 3 pulmonary hypertension (PH) describes a subpopulation of patients with PH due to chronic lung disease and/or hypoxia, with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and interstitial lung disease (ILD) being two large subgroups. Claims database studies provide insights into the real-world treatment patterns and outcomes among these patients. However, claims data do not provide sufficient detail to assign the clinical subtype of PH required for identifying these patients. METHODS: A panel of PH clinical experts and researchers was convened to discuss methodologies to identify patients with Group 3 PH associated with COPD or ILD in retrospective claims databases. To inform the discussion, a literature review was conducted to identify claims-based studies of Group 3 PH associated with COPD or ILD published from 2010 through June 2020. RESULTS: Targeted title and abstract review identified 11 claims-based studies and two conference abstracts (eight based in the United States [US] and five conducted outside the US) that met search criteria. Based on insights from the panel and literature review, the following components were detailed across studies in the identification of Group 3 PH associated with COPD and ILD: (a) COPD or ILD identification, (b) PH identification, (c) defining the sequence between COPD/ILD and PH, and (d) other PH Group and Group 3 PH exclusions. CONCLUSION: This article provides recommended approaches and considerations for identifying and studying patients with Group 3 PH associated with COPD or ILD using administrative claims data that provide the foundation for future validation studies.

Reasons for refusing parenteral therapy: a qualitative study of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

While parenteral prostacyclin (pPCY) therapy, delivered either subcutaneously or intravenously, is recommended for pulmonary arterial hypertension patients with severe or rapidly developing disease, some patients refuse this treatment. This study aimed to understand, directly from patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, why pPCY was refused and, in some cases, later accepted. Interviews were conducted with 25 pulmonary arterial hypertension patients who previously refused pPCY therapy (Group A: Refused/Never initiated (n = 9) and Group B: Refused/Initiated (n = 16)). Patients in both groups believed that pPCY could improve their symptoms, slow disease progression, and provide them a greater ability to perform activities. Reasons for refusal included concern over side effects and the perceived limitations of pPCY on daily activities. Group A perceived their decision as a balance between quality of life and prolonging life and most acknowledged they would reconsider pPCY if other treatment options were exhausted. Group B cited they initiated therapy due to a worsening of symptoms, disease progression, to improve quality of life, to be there for their family, or a desire to live. Following initiation, Group B indicated their experience met expectations with reduced symptoms, slowed disease progression, and perception of improved survival; concerns related to pPCY were described as manageable. Given the efficacy of pPCY therapy, clinicians should apply knowledge of these findings in clinical practice. Patients noted improvements to parenteral pump technologies to include smaller size, water resistance, and implantability may increase their acceptance of this modality. Development efforts should focus on technologies that increase the acceptance of pPCY when indicated.

Opioid-related respiratory and gastrointestinal adverse events in patients with acute postoperative pain: prevalence, predictors, and burden.

Opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are challenging, resource-intensive, and costly opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs). Utilizing the Premier Healthcare Database, we identified patients > 18 years old, who underwent at least one surgical procedure of interest (i.e., cardiothoracic/vascular, general/colorectal, obstetric/gynecologic, orthopedic, or urologic), and received at least one dose of intravenous morphine, hydromorphone, or fentanyl for acute postoperative pain. The incidence of OIRD and PONV using ICD-9 codes, factors influencing these AEs, length of stay (LOS) and related costs were analyzed. Among 592,127 inpatient stays, rates of respiratory depression ranged from 3% (obstetric/gynecologic) to 17% (cardiothoracic/vascular) and nausea/vomiting from 44% (obstetric/gynecologic) to 72% (general/colorectal). Increased odds of OIRD were associated with older age (cardiothoracic/vascular, general/colorectal, obstetric/gynecologic); obesity, respiratory conditions, and sleep apnea (all surgery groups); opioid dose (cardiothoracic/vascular, general/colorectal, orthopedic); and sedative use after day 1. Increased odds of PONV were associated with younger age, female sex, and major disease severity. When respiratory depression or nausea/vomiting was present versus absent, LOS was significantly longer, and hospital costs were higher. In this analysis, OIRD and PONV were more prevalent than previously reported, were associated with identifiable risk factors, and had substantial effects on resource utilization and costs.

IMPLICATION OF ALTERNATIVE MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE THRESHOLD ESTIMATION METHODS ON TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT.

OBJECTIVES: Various minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold estimation techniques have been applied to seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). The objectives of this study are to (i) assess the difference in magnitude of alternative SAR MCID threshold estimates and (ii) evaluate the impact of alternative MCID estimates on health technology assessment (HTA). METHODS: Data describing change from baseline of the reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) for four intranasal SAR treatments were obtained from United States Food and Drug Administration-approved prescribing information. Treatment effects were then compared with anchor-based MCID thresholds derived by Barnes et al. and thresholds obtained from an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) panel. RESULTS: The change in rTNSS score from baseline, represented as the average of the twice-daily recorded scores of the rTNSS, was -2.1 (p < .001) for azelastine hydrochloride 0.10%, 1.35 (p = .014) for ciclesonide, and -1.47 (p < .001) for fluticasone furoate. The change in the rTNSS score from baseline, represented by sum of the AM and PM score, was -2.7 for MP-AzeFlu (p < .001). The rTNSS change from baseline for each product was compared with anchor-based MCID threshold and the AHRQ panel estimates. Comparison of the observed treatment effect to the anchor-based and AHRQ panel MCID thresholds results in different conclusions, with clinically important differences being inferred when anchor-based estimates serve as the reference point. CONCLUSION: The AHRQ panel MCID threshold for the rTNSS was twelve times larger than the anchor-based estimates resulting in conflicting recommendations on whether different SAR treatments provide clinically meaningful benefit.