Gaining Consensus Around Patient Risk Groups and Prognostic Profiles to Guide CMV Management Among Patients With Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant: Insights From a Delphi Panel With Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Experts.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to characterize patient risk groups and prognostic profiles to optimize clinical decision-making and guide appropriate medical cytomegalovirus (CMV) management among patients with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). METHODS: Between 8/2021 and 2/2022, a 3-round modified Delphi study was conducted to generate consensus among 10 international experts in HSCT and infectious diseases. Experts were asked about treatment and prognoses for patients in 7 distinct clinical scenarios. Furthermore, experts were asked to risk-stratify patients by pre-/post-transplant characteristics. Consensus around opting for/against a treatment was observed if ≥75% or <25% of experts reported ≥50% likelihood to recommend or if treatments were ranked inside/outside the top 2 options and ≥75% of experts were within 1 SD of mean ranks. RESULTS: Experts agreed on several unmet needs in CMV disease management post-HSCT, particularly avoidance of treatment-limiting toxicities with conventional CMV therapy and the emergence of both refractory and drug-resistant treatment failures. Experts considered CMV viral load, resistance profile, and route of administration as critical to treatment selection. For newer CMV therapeutic options, experts listed a lack of long-term use data, concerns over potential resistance, high cost, and limited availability as challenges restricting adoption and successful patient management. CONCLUSIONS: Experts achieved consensus around patient risk stratifications and factors influencing therapeutic options. Recommendations emerging from this Delphi study may support practicing physicians when confronted with challenging CMV scenarios in patients with HSCT.

Awareness, attitudes, and practices on meningococcal serogroup B vaccination in the United States among parents of older adolescents and among young adults.

OBJECTIVE: Meningococcal serogroup B (MenB) vaccination is recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for adolescents and young adults 16-23-years-old under shared clinical decision-making (SCDM). However, MenB vaccination coverage in this population remains low in the United States (US). We investigated the awareness, attitudes, and practices regarding MenB disease and vaccination among parents of 16-18-year-old older adolescents and among 19-23-year-old young adults. METHODS: An online survey was conducted in September-October 2022 among parents of older adolescents and among young adults recruited from a US-based patient panel. RESULTS: There were 606 total participants, including parents of MenB-vaccinated (n = 151) and non-vaccinated (n = 154) adolescents, and also MenB-vaccinated (n = 150) and non-vaccinated (n = 151) young adults. Non-vaccinated cohorts reported low awareness of MenB disease (58.3-67.5%) and vaccination (49.7-61.0%), though awareness was higher among non-vaccinated parents. However, all cohorts reported high interest in learning more about MenB disease and vaccination. Vaccinated cohorts relied on primary care providers (PCPs) to initiate MenB vaccination conversation and had a low awareness of SCDM at 35.1-45.3%, though those aware of SCDM were more likely to participate in decision-making. Barriers to MenB vaccination included lack of PCP recommendation, vaccine side effects, and uncertainty about vaccination need. CONCLUSIONS: There are gaps in awareness of MenB disease, vaccination, and SCDM among parents and patients in the US, resulting in missed opportunities for discussing and administering MenB vaccination. Targeted education on MenB and vaccination recommendations may increase these opportunities and improve MenB vaccination awareness and initiation.

MenB disease, a type of meningitis, is a serious and life-threatening illness. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that 16­23-year-olds get a MenB vaccine after talking with their healthcare provider and deciding it is the right choice. As of 2021, only about 3 in 10 17-year-olds had received a MenB vaccine. In this study, we used an online survey to learn about parents of older teens' (16­18-years-old) and young adults' (19­23-years-old) awareness, thoughts, and practices related to meningitis and the MenB vaccine. Parents of non-vaccinated teens, and non-vaccinated young adults, had a lower awareness of the causes, risks, and symptoms of meningitis, and the MenB vaccine. In addition, most parents thought the impact of meningitis would be severe, compared with young adults who thought it would be less severe. Most participants were also not aware of their role in deciding if they or their child should be vaccinated against MenB. However, most showed a high interest in learning more about meningitis and the MenB vaccine. We also found that most teens and young adults who did receive the MenB vaccine received it right after talking about it with their healthcare provider. These findings show a clear opportunity to address gaps in awareness and thoughts about meningitis and MenB vaccination. Providing education and resources to parents, young adults, and healthcare providers could create more opportunities to discuss MenB vaccination and lead to more teens and young adults accessing vaccination and being protected against meningitis.

Gaining consensus around patient risk groups and prognostic profiles to guide CMV management among patients with solid organ transplant: Insights from a Delphi panel with SOT experts.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to characterize patient risk groups and respective prognostic profiles to optimize clinical decision-making and guide appropriate medical cytomegalovirus (CMV) management among patients with solid organ transplant (SOT). METHODS: Between September 2021 and February 2022, a three-round modified Delphi study was conducted to generate consensus among 14 international experts in virology and organ transplantation. Experts were asked about treatment and prognoses for patients in seven distinct clinical scenarios. Furthermore, experts were asked to risk-stratify patients by pre-/post-transplant characteristics. Consensus around opting for/against a treatment was observed if ≥75% or <25% of experts reported ≥50% likelihood to recommend or if treatments were ranked inside/outside the top two options and ≥75% of experts were within 1 standard deviation of the mean rank. RESULTS: Experts agreed on several unmet needs in CMV disease management post-SOT, particularly avoidance of treatment-limiting toxicities with conventional CMV therapy and emergence of both primary refractory and drug resistant treatment failures. Experts considered CMV viral load, resistance profile, and route of administration as critical to treatment selection. For newer CMV therapeutic options, experts listed lack of long-term use data, concerns over potential resistance, high cost and limited availability as challenges restricting adoption, and successful patient management. CONCLUSION: Experts achieved consensus around patient risk stratifications and factors influencing therapeutic options. Recommendations emerging from this Delphi study may support practicing physicians when confronted with challenging CMV scenarios in SOT patients, but additional experiences with newer anti-CMV agents are needed to re-validate expert consensus and update post-transplant CMV guidelines.

Impact of suboptimal or inappropriate treatment on healthcare resource use and cost among patients with uncomplicated urinary tract infection: an analysis of integrated delivery network electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: Although uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs; occurring in female patients without urological abnormalities or history of urological procedures or complicating comorbidities) are one of the most common community infections in the United States (US), limited data are available concerning associations between antibiotic resistance, suboptimal prescribing, and the economic burden of uUTI. We examined the prevalence of suboptimal antibiotic prescribing and antibiotic resistance and its effects on healthcare resource use and costs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized electronic health record data from a large Mid-Atlantic US integrated delivery network database, collected July 2016-March 2020. Female patients aged ≥ 12 years with a uUTI, who received ≥ 1 oral antibiotic treatment within ± 5 days of index uUTI diagnosis, and had ≥ 1 urine culture with antimicrobial susceptibility test, were eligible for inclusion in the study. The study examined the proportion of antibiotics that were inappropriately or suboptimally prescribed among patients with confirmed uUTI, and total healthcare costs (all-cause and UTI-related) within 6 months after a uUTI, stratified by antibiotic susceptibility and/or inappropriate or suboptimal treatment. Patient outcomes were assessed after 1:1 propensity score matching of patients with antibiotic-susceptible versus not-susceptible isolates and then by other covariates (e.g., demographics and recent healthcare use). A similar propensity score calculation was used to analyze the effect of inappropriate/suboptimal treatment on health outcomes. Costs were adjusted to 2020 US dollars ($). RESULTS: Among 2565 patients with a uUTI included in the analysis, the most commonly prescribed antibiotics were nitrofurantoin (61%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (19%), and ciprofloxacin (15%). More than one-third of the sample (40.2%) had isolates that were not-susceptible to ≥ 1 antibiotic indicated for treating patients with uUTI. Two-thirds (66.6%) of study-eligible patients were prescribed appropriate treatment; 29.9% and 11.9% were prescribed suboptimal and/or inappropriate treatment, respectively. Inappropriate or suboptimally prescribed patients had greater all-cause and UTI-related costs compared with appropriately prescribed patients. Differences were most striking among patients with antibiotic not-susceptible isolates. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight how the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance combined with suboptimal treatment of patients with uUTI increases the burden on healthcare systems. The finding underlines the need for improved prescribing accuracy by better understanding regional resistance rates and developing improved diagnostic tests.

Economic burden of antibiotic-not-susceptible isolates in uncomplicated urinary tract infection: Analysis of a US integrated delivery network database.

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs) are one of the most common bacterial infections in the United States (US). Contemporary data are important for understanding the health economic impact of antimicrobial-resistant uUTIs. We compared the economic burden among patients with uUTI isolates susceptible or not-susceptible to the initial antibiotic prescription. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized electronic health record data (1 July 2016-31 March 2020) from a large Mid-Atlantic US integrated delivery network database. Patients were females aged ≥ 12 years with a uUTI, who received oral antibiotic treatment and had ≥ 1 urine culture within ± 5 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was the difference in healthcare resource use and costs (all-cause, urinary tract infection [UTI]-related) among patients with susceptible versus not-susceptible isolates during the 6 months after the index uUTI diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included: pharmacy costs, hospital admissions and emergency department visits, as well as the probability of uUTI progressing to complicated UTI (cUTI) between patients with susceptible and not-susceptible isolates. Patient outcomes were compared using 1:1 propensity score matching. Winsorized costs were adjusted to 2020 quarter 1 US dollars ($). RESULTS: A total of 2565 patients were eligible for analysis. The propensity score-matched sample comprised 2018 patients, with an average age of 44.0 and 41.0 years for the susceptible and not-susceptible populations, respectively. In the 6 months post-index uUTI event, patients with not-susceptible isolates had significantly more all-cause prescriptions orders (+ 1.41 [P = 0.001]), UTI-related prescriptions orders (+ 0.26 [P < 0.001]) and a higher probability of all-cause inpatient (+ 1.4% [P = 0.009]), outpatient (+ 6.1% [P = 0.006]), or UTI-related outpatient (+ 3.7% [P = 0.039]) encounters. Patients with a uUTI and an antibiotic-not-susceptible isolate were significantly more likely to progress to cUTI than those with susceptible isolates (odds ratio: 2.35 [confidence interval: 1.66-3.33; P < 0.001]). Over 6 months, patients with not-susceptible versus susceptible isolates had significantly higher all-cause costs (+ $426 [P = 0.031]) and UTI-related costs (+ $157 [P = 0.034]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a uUTI caused by antibiotic-not-susceptible isolates had higher healthcare resource usage, costs, and increased likelihood of progressing to cUTI than those with antibiotic-susceptible isolates.

A Delphi Consensus Approach for Difficult-to-Treat Patients with Severe Hemophilia A without Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past decade, there has been an increase in novel therapeutic options to treat hemophilia A. It is still unclear how these novel treatments are used in the management of patients with hemophilia A, particularly those with challenging clinical scenarios who are typically excluded in clinical trials. PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand the areas of consensus and disagreement among hematologists regarding the preferences toward therapeutic approaches for difficult-to-treat patients with severe hemophilia A without inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During February-June 2020, a three-round modified Delphi study was conducted to generate consensus among 13 US experts in the field of hemophilia. Experts were asked about their preferences toward therapeutic options for patients with challenging clinical situations, including age-related morbidities (eg, myocardial infarction, joint arthropathy), increasing demand for high-impact physical activities, early onset osteoporosis, and newborns with hemophilia A. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement between the panelists. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on many, but not all cases, leaving uncertainty about appropriateness of therapeutic approaches for some patients where clinical evidence is not available or driven by physicians' or patients' preferences toward therapeutic options. A majority of panelists preferred FVIII replacement therapy rather than emicizumab prophylaxis for the challenging cases presented due to established evidence on safety, efficacy, and level of bleed protection for FVIII treatment. CONCLUSION: Recommendations emerging from this study may help guide practicing hematologists in the management of challenging hemophilia A cases. Future studies are needed to address treatment options in the clinical cases where no consensus was reached.

Understanding the evolution of coverage policies for prophylaxis treatments of hemophilia A without inhibitors: a payer Delphi panel.

BACKGROUND: The landscape for hemophilia A prophylaxis is rapidly expanding from factor VIII replacement therapy to include novel treatments such as nonfactor replacement therapies that may enhance coagulation (e.g., emicizumab) or inhibit anticoagulant pathways (e.g., fitusiran and concizumab). For payers, this expansion presents challenges in balancing well-established treatments with new options that cost more and have lesser known real-world safety and efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate likely coverage practices for hemophilia A prophylaxis therapies among U.S. payers given evolving real-world data on safety and efficacy. METHODS: A 3-round modified Delphi process was conducted with representatives of U.S. commercial health plans who had considerable expertise in managing populations of patients with hemophilia. Round 1 consisted of an online questionnaire; round 2 involved an online discussion about the aggregated results from round 1; and round 3 allowed participants to revise their responses from round 1 based on insights gained during round 2. Questions elicited ratings, rankings, and estimates on access restrictions based on given safety and efficacy information for hemophilia A prophylaxis therapies. Consensus was reached if ≥ 74% of panelists (14 of 19) were within 1 SD of the median group estimate during round 3. RESULTS: 19 Payers participated in the research. Among them, 94% dealt with commercial insurance, 94% with Medicare, and 81% with Medicaid; 79% had spent ≥ 5 years in their current role. Panelists reported limited access restrictions on hemophilia A prophylaxis therapies; the most common restrictions were prior authorization (n = 16, 84%) and quantity level limits (n = 13, 67%). Tiering and step therapy were reported by 7 respondents (39%). Respondents agreed that there was an 80% median likelihood that ≥ 9 additional patients with any safety event (e.g., thrombotic event, death) per year would trigger access restrictions, with the median likelihood of restrictions increasing to 95% for another ≥ 10 patients with safety events per year. Respondents also agreed that > 5 thrombotic events requiring treatment per patient per year would have a 98% median likelihood of leading to access restrictions and that ≥ 5 years of real-world safety and efficacy data would be highly likely (95% median likelihood) to affect coverage decisions. Noncoverage was highly unlikely (ranked fifth or sixth of 6 by 14 respondents), as was no restriction-coverage parity (ranked sixth of 6 by 10 respondents). All else being equal, cost continues to affect access policies, with respondents agreeing that a 13%-30% difference in net cost may lead to preferred formulary treatment for a drug with superior efficacy and noninferior safety, inferior efficacy and noninferior safety, or noninferior efficacy and inferior safety. CONCLUSIONS: Payers prefer treatments with well-understood efficacy, safety, and cost over newer treatments with uncertain long-term effects. Relatively unrestricted access to legacy and new hemophilia A prophylaxis will likely continue unless additional real-world safety concerns or major cost differences emerge. DISCLOSURES: Financial support for this study was provided by Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, which was involved in study concept and design. Graf, Tuly, Harley, and Pednekar are employees of PRECISIONheor, a research consultancy to the health and life sciences industries that was contracted by Takeda to conduct this study and write the manuscript. Batt served as a consultant on this project through PRECISIONheor.

Challenges and opportunities in insomnia disorder.

BACKGROUND: Insomnia disorder is a prevalent, often unrecognized condition that affects millions. This clinical disorder is characterized by difficulty initiating or maintaining sleep over a sustained period. In fact, insomnia disorder affects much more than sleep; it increases the risk of developing serious medical and psychiatric comorbidities and can exacerbate existing conditions. The association between insomnia disorder and serious medical and psychiatric comorbidities are complex and directionality is not yet fully understood. There remain gaps in the treatment landscape for insomnia disorder. METHODS: We performed a narrative review of the published literature to identify challenges, unmet needs, and burden associated with insomnia disorder. RESULTS: In this article, we describe the substantial burden that insomnia disorder poses on patients, the healthcare system, and society in the US. This article explores the factors attributable to this burden including limited provider knowledge, inadequate treatment options, and unknown long-term impacts of off-label treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Several recommendations are proposed to address these challenges and improve patient outcomes through efforts to: (1) establish the societal value of treatment; (2) improve the clinical understanding of insomnia disorder; and (3) prioritize development of and access to effective treatments that do not pose addiction potential or tolerability issues.

Post-9/11 Mental Health Comorbidity Predicts Self-Reported Confusion or Memory Loss in World Trade Center Health Registry Enrollees.

Numerous studies report elevated levels of chronic mental health conditions in those exposed to the World Trade Center attacks of 11 September 2001 (9/11), but few studies have examined the incidence of confusion or memory loss (CML) or its association with mental health in 9/11 attack survivors. We investigated the incidence of CML and its association with the number of post-9/11 mental health conditions (PTSD, depression, and anxiety) in 10,766 World Trade Center Health Registry (Registry) enrollees aged 35-64 at the time of the wave 4 survey (2015-2016) that completed all four-wave surveys and met the study inclusion criteria. We employed log-binomial regression to evaluate the associations between CML and the number of mental health conditions. A total of 20.2% of enrollees in the sample reported CML, and there was a dose-response relationship between CML and the number of mental health conditions (one condition: RR = 1.85, 95% CI (1.65, 2.09); two conditions: RR = 2.13, 95% CI (1.85, 2.45); three conditions: RR = 2.51, 95% CI (2.17, 2.91)). Survivors may be experiencing confusion or memory loss partly due to the mental health consequences of the 9/11 attacks. Clinicians treating patients with mental health conditions should be aware of potential cognitive impairment.