Clinical burden of invasive Escherichia coli disease among older adult patients treated in hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Invasive extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli disease (IED) can lead to severe outcomes, particularly among older adults. However, the clinical burden of IED in the U.S. has not been well characterized. METHODS: IED encounters among patients ≥ 60 years old were identified using the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database (10/01/2015-03/31/2020) by either a positive E. coli culture in blood or another normally sterile body site and ≥ 1 sign of systemic inflammatory response syndrome or signs of sepsis, or a positive E. coli culture in urine with urinary tract infection and signs of sepsis. Medical resource utilization, clinical outcomes, and E. coli isolate characteristics were descriptively reported during the first IED encounter and during the following year (observation period). RESULTS: Overall, 19,773 patients with IED were included (mean age: 76.8 years; 67.4% female; 78.5% with signs of sepsis). Most encounters involved community-onset IED (94.3%) and required hospitalization (96.5%; mean duration: 6.9 days), with 32.4% of patients being admitted to the intensive care unit (mean duration: 3.7 days). Most E. coli isolates were resistant to ≥ 1 antibiotic category (61.7%) and 34.4% were resistant to ≥ 3 antibiotic categories. Following their first IED encounter, 34.8% of patients were transferred to a skilled nursing/intermediate care facility, whereas 6.8% had died. During the observation period, 36.8% of patients were rehospitalized, 2.4% had IED recurrence, and in-hospital death increased to 10.9%. CONCLUSIONS: IED is associated with substantial clinical burden at first encounter with considerable long-term consequences. Findings demonstrate the need for increased IED awareness and highlight potential benefits of prevention.

Risk factors associated with newly diagnosed attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults: a retrospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of risk factors for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) may facilitate early diagnosis; however, studies examining a broad range of potential risk factors for ADHD in adults are limited. This study aimed to identify risk factors associated with newly diagnosed ADHD among adults in the United States (US). METHODS: Eligible adults from the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database (10/01/2015-09/30/2021) were classified into the ADHD cohort if they had ≥ 2 ADHD diagnoses (index date: first ADHD diagnosis) and into the non-ADHD cohort if they had no observed ADHD diagnosis (index date: random date) with a 1:3 case-to-control ratio. Risk factors for newly diagnosed ADHD were assessed during the 12-month baseline period; logistic regression with stepwise variable selection was used to assess statistically significant association. The combined impact of selected risk factors was explored using common patient profiles. RESULTS: A total of 337,034 patients were included in the ADHD cohort (mean age 35.2 years; 54.5% female) and 1,011,102 in the non-ADHD cohort (mean age 44.0 years; 52.4% female). During the baseline period, the most frequent mental health comorbidities in the ADHD and non-ADHD cohorts were anxiety disorders (34.4% and 11.1%) and depressive disorders (27.9% and 7.8%). Accordingly, a higher proportion of patients in the ADHD cohort received antianxiety agents (20.6% and 8.3%) and antidepressants (40.9% and 15.8%). Key risk factors associated with a significantly increased probability of ADHD included the number of mental health comorbidities (odds ratio [OR] for 1 comorbidity: 1.41; ≥2 comorbidities: 1.45), along with certain mental health comorbidities (e.g., feeding and eating disorders [OR: 1.88], bipolar disorders [OR: 1.50], depressive disorders [OR: 1.37], trauma- and stressor-related disorders [OR: 1.27], anxiety disorders [OR: 1.24]), use of antidepressants (OR: 1.87) and antianxiety agents (OR: 1.40), and having ≥ 1 psychotherapy visit (OR: 1.70), ≥ 1 specialist visit (OR: 1.30), and ≥ 10 outpatient visits (OR: 1.51) (all p < 0.05). The predicted risk of ADHD for patients with treated anxiety and depressive disorders was 81.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health comorbidities and related treatments are significantly associated with newly diagnosed ADHD in US adults. Screening for patients with risk factors for ADHD may allow early diagnosis and appropriate management.

Treatment patterns among children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the United States - a retrospective claims analysis.

BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral disorder affecting approximately 10.0% of children and 6.5% of adolescents in the United States (US). A comprehensive assessment of the current treatment landscape is warranted to highlight potential unmet needs of children and adolescents with ADHD. Therefore, this study described treatment patterns and healthcare costs among commercially insured children and adolescents with ADHD in the US. METHODS: Children and adolescents with ADHD initiating pharmacological treatment indicated for ADHD were identified from IBM MarketScan Commercial Database (2014-2018). A treatment sequence algorithm was used to examine treatment patterns, including discontinuation (≥ 180 days following the last day of supply of any ADHD treatment), switch, add-on, and drop (discontinuation of an agent in combination therapy), during the 12-month study period following the index date (i.e., first observed ADHD treatment). Total adjusted annual healthcare costs were compared between patients with and without treatment changes. RESULTS: Among 49,756 children and 29,093 adolescents included, mean age was 9 and 15 years, respectively, and 31% and 38% were female. As the first treatment regimen observed, 92% of both children and adolescents initiated a stimulant and 11% initiated combination therapy. Over half of the population had a treatment change over 12 months-59% of children and 68% of adolescents. Treatment discontinuation over 12 months was common in both populations-21% of children and 36% of adolescents discontinued treatment. Healthcare costs increased with the number of treatment changes observed; children and adolescents with treatment changes (i.e., 1, 2, or ≥ 3) incurred an incremental annual cost of up to $1,443 and $2,705, respectively, compared to those without a treatment change (p < 0.001). Costs were largely driven by outpatient visits. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 12-month period, treatment changes were commonly observed and were associated with excess costs, highlighting the unmet treatment needs of children and adolescents with ADHD in the US.

Reasons for treatment changes in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a chart review study.

BACKGROUND: Adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often cycle through multiple treatments for reasons that are not well documented. This study analyzed the reasons underlying treatment changes among adults treated for ADHD in a real-world setting. METHODS: Data were collected via an online reporting form completed by eligible physicians between October and November 2020. Data for adult patients in the United States who were diagnosed with ADHD and initiated a treatment regimen within 1 to 5 years of chart abstraction were obtained. Reason for a treatment change was described for a randomly selected regimen episode, which spanned from treatment initiation until the earliest among treatment add-on/switch or discontinuation, death, or date of chart abstraction. The overall rate of ADHD/treatment-related complications were also described. Physician satisfaction with current treatment options for adult ADHD and opinions on areas for improvement were assessed. RESULTS: Data on 320 patients were reported by 152 physicians specializing in psychiatry (40.1%), pediatrics (25.0%), family medicine (21.7%), and internal medicine (13.2%). Patients had a mean age of 29.3 years; most were diagnosed with ADHD as adults (57.5%) and within the previous 5 years (56.5%). Selected treatment regimens included stimulants (79.1%), nonstimulants (14.7%), and combination therapy (5.6%) for an average duration of 1.9 years. Among patients with treatment discontinuation (N = 59), the most common reasons for discontinuation were suboptimal symptom management (55.9%), occurrence of ADHD/treatment-related complications (25.4%), and patient attitude/dislike of medication (25.4%). The main reasons for other key treatment changes were inadequate/suboptimal management of symptoms and cost considerations. Over 40% of patients had ≥ 1 documented ADHD/treatment-related complication, irrespective of whether they led to a treatment change. One in 5 physicians (19.8%) were very dissatisfied, moderately dissatisfied, or neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with current treatment options for ADHD in adults; the top 3 suggested improvements were lower risk of abuse (71.7%), longer effect duration (65.1%), and fewer ADHD/treatment-related complications (61.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The top reasons for treatment changes among adults with ADHD are lack of efficacy and ADHD/treatment-related complications, highlighting the importance of developing more effective and safer treatments to alleviate the burden of ADHD.

Identifying individuals with undiagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder in a large United States civilian population - a machine learning approach.

BACKGROUND: The proportion of patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that remain undiagnosed may be substantial. Without an accurate diagnosis, these patients may lack PTSD-targeted treatments and experience adverse health outcomes. This study used a machine learning approach to identify and describe civilian patients likely to have undiagnosed PTSD in the US commercial population. METHODS: The IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Subset (10/01/2015-12/31/2018) was used. A random forest machine learning model was developed and trained to differentiate between patients with and without PTSD using non-trauma-based features. The model was applied to patients for whom PTSD status could not be confirmed to identify individuals likely and unlikely to have undiagnosed PTSD. Patient characteristics, symptoms and complications potentially related to PTSD, treatments received, healthcare costs, and healthcare resource utilization were described separately for patients with PTSD (Actual Positive PTSD cohort), patients likely to have PTSD (Likely PTSD cohort), and patients without PTSD (Without PTSD cohort). RESULTS: A total of 44,342 patients were classified in the Actual Positive PTSD cohort, 5683 in the Likely PTSD cohort, and 2,074,471 in the Without PTSD cohort. While several symptoms/comorbidities were similar between the Actual Positive and Likely PTSD cohorts, others, including depression and anxiety disorders, suicidal thoughts/actions, and substance use, were more common in the Likely PTSD cohort, suggesting that certain symptoms may be exacerbated among those without a formal diagnosis. Mean per-patient-per-6-month healthcare costs were similar between the Actual Positive and Likely PTSD cohorts ($11,156 and $11,723) and were higher than those of the Without PTSD cohort ($3616); however, cost drivers differed between cohorts, with the Likely PTSD cohort experiencing more inpatient admissions and less outpatient visits than the Actual Positive PTSD cohort. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the lack of a PTSD diagnosis and targeted management of PTSD may result in a greater burden among undiagnosed patients and highlights the need for increased awareness of PTSD in clinical practice and among the civilian population.

Impact of agitation in long-term care residents with dementia in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To describe characteristics and compare clinical outcomes including falls, fractures, infections, and neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) among long-term care residents with dementia with and without agitation. METHODS: A cross-sectional secondary analysis of administrative healthcare data was conducted whereby residents with dementia residing in a long-term care facility for ≥12 months were identified from the AnalytiCare LLC database (10/2010-06/2014) and were classified into mutually exclusive cohorts (Agitation Cohort or No-Agitation Cohort) based on available agitation-related symptoms. Entropy balancing was used to balance demographic and clinical characteristics between the two cohorts. The impact of agitation on clinical outcomes was compared between balanced cohorts using weighted logistic regression models. RESULTS: The study included 6,265 long-term care residents with dementia among whom, 3,313 were included in the Agitation Cohort and 2,952 in the No-Agitation Cohort. Prior to balancing, residents in the Agitation Cohort had greater dementia-related cognitive impairment and clinical manifestations compared to the No-Agitation Cohort. After balancing, residents with and without agitation, respectively, received a median of five and four distinct types of medications (including antipsychotics). Further, compared to residents without agitation, those with agitation were significantly more likely to have a recorded fall (OR = 1.58), fracture (OR = 1.29), infection (OR = 1.18), and other NPS (OR = 2.11). CONCLUSIONS: Agitation in long-term care residents with dementia was associated with numerically higher medication use and an increased likelihood of experiencing falls, fractures, infections, and additional NPS compared to residents without agitation, highlighting the unmet need for effective management of agitation symptoms in this population.

Improvement in Quality of Life with OnabotulinumtoxinA for Cervical Dystonia: POSTURe.

INTRODUCTION: Symptoms of cervical dystonia (CD) can vary in severity and cause significant pain. OnabotulinumtoxinA is an approved treatment for CD. This study assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with CD who received multiple onabotulinumtoxinA treatments. METHODS: This prospective, observational standard-of-care study was conducted at multiple neurology centers in Québec, Canada. Patients reported the health impact of CD using the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP)-58, before and after up to eight onabotulinumtoxinA treatments. Other measures included the Cervical Dystonia Severity Rating Scale by physician, employment status using the Work Productivity Questionnaire and pain using the Pain Numeric Rating Scale (PNRS). Adverse events (AEs) were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were enrolled (safety population, n = 61; modified efficacy population, n = 58). Participants were mostly females who were employed; most (79.3%) had torticollis. In all, 21/62 patients (33.9%) discontinued the study. At the final visit, there was a statistically significant (p < 0.001) improvement in all eight CDIP-58 subscales, particularly head and neck symptoms (-31.0) and psychosocial functioning (-28.2). Employment increased from baseline (55%) to the end of the study (64%), and there was improvement in work productivity. There was a significant (p < 0.0001) reduction in pain measured by the PNRS, from -0.5 post-treatment 1 to -2.4 at end of study. AEs (neck pain, muscular weakness, dysphagia, nausea) were consistent with onabotulinumtoxinA use. CONCLUSION: These real-world data indicate that after repeated, long-term use, onabotulinumtoxinA continues to be a safe and effective treatment for CD, improving HRQoL and work productivity.

Mental Health and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Nephrology Nurses: A Survey-Based Cross-Sectional Study.

Nephrology nurses face health and wellness challenges due to significant work-related stressors. This survey, conducted online between July 24 and August 17, 2020, assessed the psychological well-being of nephrology nurses in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 393). Respondents reported feeling burned out from work (62%), symptoms of anxiety (47% with Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7] scores ≥ 5), and major depressive episodes (16% with Patient Health Questionnaire-2 [PHQ-2] scores ≥ 3). Fifty-six percent (56%) of survey respondents reported caring for COVID-19 patients, and 62% were somewhat or very worried about COVID-19. Factors, including high workload, age, race, and the COVID-19 pandemic, may partially explain the high proportion of nephrology nurses who reported symptoms of burnout, anxiety, and depression.

The societal economic burden of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is one of the most common inherited kidney diseases characterized by progressive development of renal cysts and numerous extra-renal manifestations, eventually leading to kidney failure. Given its chronic and progressive nature, ADPKD is expected to carry a substantial economic burden over the course of the disease. However, there is a paucity of evidence on the impact of ADPKD from a societal perspective. This study aimed to estimate the direct and indirect costs associated with ADPKD in the United States (US). METHODS: A prevalence-based approach using data from scientific literature, and governmental and non-governmental organizations was employed to estimate direct healthcare costs (i.e., medical services, prescription drugs), direct non-healthcare costs (i.e., research and advocacy, donors/recipients matching for kidney transplants, transportation to/from dialysis centers), and indirect costs (i.e., patient productivity loss from unemployment, reduced work productivity, and premature mortality, caregivers' productivity loss and healthcare costs). The incremental costs associated with ADPKD were calculated as the difference between costs incurred over a one-year period by individuals with ADPKD and the US population. Sensitivity analyses using different sources and assumptions were performed to assess robustness of estimates and account for variability in published estimates. RESULTS: The estimated total annual costs attributed to ADPKD in 2018 ranged from $7.3 to $9.6 billion in sensitivity analyses, equivalent to $51,970 to $68,091 per individual with ADPKD. In the base scenario, direct healthcare costs accounted for $5.7 billion (78.6%) of the total $7.3 billion costs, mostly driven by patients requiring renal replacement therapy ($3.2 billion; 43.3%). Indirect costs accounted for $1.4 billion (19.7%), mostly driven by productivity loss due to unemployment ($784 million; 10.7%) and reduced productivity at work ($390 million; 5.3%). Total excess direct non-healthcare costs were estimated at $125 million (1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: ADPKD carries a considerable economic burden, predominantly attributed to direct healthcare costs, the majority of which are incurred by public and private healthcare payers. Effective and timely interventions to slow down the progression of ADPKD could substantially reduce the economic burden of ADPKD.

The risk of cardiovascular events in psoriasis patients treated with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors versus phototherapy: An observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a risk factor for cardiovascular events. OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of major cardiovascular events and the effect of cumulative treatment exposure on cardiovascular event risk in patients with psoriasis treated with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFis) versus phototherapy. METHODS: Adult patients with psoriasis were selected from a large US administrative claims database (from the first quarter of 2000 through the third quarter of 2014) and classified in 2 mutually exclusive cohorts based on whether they were treated with TNFis or phototherapy. Cardiovascular event risk was compared between cohorts using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Cumulative exposure was defined based on treatment persistence. RESULTS: A total of 11,410 TNFi and 12,433 phototherapy patients (psoralen plus ultraviolet A light phototherapy, n = 1117; ultraviolet B light phototherapy, n = 11,316) were included in this study. TNFi patients had a lower risk of cardiovascular events compared to phototherapy patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.77, P < .05). The risk reduction associated with 6 months of cumulative exposure was 11.2% larger for patients treated with TNFis compared to phototherapy (P < .05). LIMITATIONS: Information on psoriasis severity and mortality was limited/not available. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with psoriasis who were treated with TNFis exhibited a lower cardiovascular event risk than patients treated with phototherapy. Cumulative exposure to TNFis was associated with an incremental cardiovascular risk reduction compared to phototherapy.

Increased Prevalence of Cancer in Adult Patients With Psoriasis in the United States: A Claims Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis (Ps) is a chronic inflammatory immune-mediated skin disease that has been identified as a risk factor for various conditions including neoplasms. OBJECTIVE: To compare prevalence of cancer between Ps and Ps-free patients. METHODS: Adult patients continuously enrolled for ≥12 months (≥1 month in 2014) were selected from a large United States (US) claims database (Q1:2010-Q4:2014) and classified as Ps patients (≥2 Ps diagnoses; International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision, [ICD-9] code: 696.1x) and Ps-free patients (no Ps diagnosis). Patients were exactly matched (1:1) based on age, gender, state of residence, and insurance plan type. Prevalence of cancer was compared between cohorts over patients' last 12 months of continuous healthcare plan enrollment using logistic-regression models. RESULTS: A total of 179,066 pairs of Ps and Ps-free patients were selected. Median age was 54.0 years, 51.7% were females. Prevalence of cancer was higher among Ps patients for any type of neoplasms (OR [95% confidence interval (CI)]=1.86 [1.83; 1.89]), malignant neoplasms (OR [95% CI]=1.53 [1.49;1.57]), as well as malignant skin neoplasms (OR [95% CI]=1.87 [1.79; 1.95]), lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues (OR [95% CI]=1.70 [1.57;1.84]), genital (OR [95% CI]=1.33 [1.26;1.41]), breast (OR [95% CI]=1.32 [1.24;1.40]), digestive organs and peritoneum (OR [95% CI]=1.24 [1.13;1.35]), urinary organs (OR [95% CI]=1.49 [1.36;1.64]), respiratory and intrathoracic organs (OR [95% CI]=1.30 [1.17;1.44]), and metastatic cancer (OR [95% CI]=1.14 [1.06;1.24]), all P less than 0.01. LIMITATIONS: Impact of Ps severity could not be assessed. CONCLUSION: Ps patients had a higher prevalence of cancer than Ps-free patients. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(2):180-186.

Prevalence of Psoriasis in Children and Adolescents in the United States: A Claims-Based Analysis.

IMPORTANCE: While psoriasis (Ps) is mainly characterized as an adult disease, it can also develop during childhood. However, prevalence estimates of pediatric psoriasis in the United States (US) are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the 2015 annual prevalence of Ps and moderate-to-severe Ps in pediatric individuals in the US. DESIGN: This is a retrospective study based on a large administrative insurance claims database in the US. SETTING: Data were extracted from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters database, which covers over 60 million individuals with employer-provided health insurance across the US. PARTICIPANTS: Over 4.3 million of individuals continuously enrolled in their healthcare plan in 2015 and under 18 years of age were included in the study. Intervention(s) for Clinical Trials or Exposure(s) for Observational Studies: Not applicable. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Ps was defined based on medical claims with a diagnosis of Ps (ICD-9-CM: 696.1); moderate-to-severe Ps was defined based on medical or pharmacy claims for a systemic treatment (biologic, conventional systemic, or phototherapy) for Ps. Overall and age- and gender-stratified prevalence was estimated for both Ps and moderate-to-severe Ps. RESULTS: The prevalence of Ps was estimated at 128 cases per 100,000 individuals (95% CI: 124-131), that of moderate-to-severe Ps at 16 cases per 100,000 individuals (95% CI: 15-17) in 2015. For both Ps and moderate-to-severe Ps, prevalence estimates were numerically higher in females than in males (146 per 100,000 vs. 110 per 100,000 and 17 per 100,000 vs. 15 per 100,000) and increased with age, ranging from 30 per 100,000 in the 0-3 year old group to 205 per 100,000 in the 12-17 year old group. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This study provides robust estimates of the prevalence of pediatric Ps that can inform decisions pertaining to the management of pediatric patients with Ps. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(2):187-194.

Adverse Medical Conditions Across Treatment Options in Patients With Psoriasis: A Claims-Based Analysis

Objective: To assess the real-world risk of developing adverse medical conditions (AMCs) among patients with psoriasis treated with biologic therapies or conventional systemic/topical therapies (CST/topical). Methods: Adult patients with psoriasis were identified from the Truven MarketScan US claims database (2008 Q3­2015 Q3) and classified into cohorts based on treatment initiated on the index date (adalimumab [ADA], etanercept [ETN], ustekinumab [UST], infliximab [IFX], or CST/topical). Incident AMCs were identified while on treatment from diagnoses recorded in medical claims and included abnormal test results, infections, mental disorders, cardiovascular disease, malignancies (skin and non-skin), and respiratory disease. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare AMC risk for (1) ADA, ETN, and UST (separately) vs CST/topical, and (2) ADA vs other biologic therapies (ETN, UST, and IFX combined). Regressions were adjusted for age, gender, region, insurance plan type, year, Charlson comorbidity index, and prior AMCs; and based on stepwise selection, comorbidities, specialist encounters, and frequently prescribed treatments. Results: A total of 42,981 patients were identified (ADA: 5,197; ETN: 3,311; UST: 1,370; IFX: 187; CST/topical: 32,916). Across cohorts, median age was 46­50 years, 46.2%­53.1% were female, and median follow-up duration was 3.3­7.9 months. For all cohorts, infection was the most frequent AMC (28.7%­41.8%). Compared with CST/topical, ADA, ETN, and UST were associated with a lower risk of infections (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.93, 0.92, and 0.86, respectively, all P<0.05). ADA was associated with a lower risk of malignancies (aHR: 0.71, P<0.05), and ETN was associated with a lower risk of respiratory disease (aHR: 0.80, P<0.05). Compared with biologic therapies, ADA was not associated with higher risk of AMCs. Conclusions: Compared to CST/topical, biologic therapies were associated with similar or lower risk of AMCs. Comparison between ADA and other biologic therapies suggests a similar safety profile with respect to the studied AMCs.

Cardiovascular event risk assessment in psoriasis patients treated with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors versus methotrexate.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare major cardiovascular event risk in psoriasis patients receiving methotrexate or tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor (TNFi) and to assess TNFi treatment duration impact on major cardiovascular event risk. METHODS: Adult psoriasis patients with ≥2 TNFi or methotrexate prescriptions in the Truven MarketScan Databases (Q1 2000-Q3 2011) were classified as TNFi or methotrexate users. The index date for each of these drugs was the TNFi initiation date or a randomly selected methotrexate dispensing date, respectively. Cardiovascular event risks and cumulative TNFi effect were analyzed by using multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: By 12 months, TNFi users (N = 9148) had fewer cardiovascular events than methotrexate users (N = 8581) (Kaplan-Meier rates: 1.45% vs 4.09%: P < .01). TNFi users had overall lower cardiovascular event hazards than methotrexate users (hazard ratio = 0.55; P < .01). Over 24 months' median follow-up, every 6 months of cumulative exposure to TNFis were associated with an 11% cardiovascular event risk reduction (P = .02). LIMITATIONS: Lack of clinical assessment measures. CONCLUSIONS: Psoriasis patients receiving TNFis had a lower major cardiovascular event risk compared to those receiving methotrexate. Cumulative exposure to TNFis was associated with a reduced risk for major cardiovascular events.

Costs associated with adverse events during treatment episodes for adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication is frequently associated with adverse events (AEs), but limited real-world data exist regarding their costs from a payer's perspective. Therefore, this study evaluated the healthcare costs associated with common AEs among adult patients treated for ADHD in the US. METHODS: Eligible adults treated for ADHD were identified from a large US claims database (1 October 2015-30 September 2021). A retrospective cohort study design was used to assess excess healthcare costs and costs directly related to AE-specific claims per-patient-per-month (PPPM) associated with 10 selected AEs during ADHD treatment. To account for all costs associated with the AE, treatment episodes with a given AE were compared to similar treatment episodes without this AE. Entropy balancing was used to create cohorts with similar characteristics. Studied AEs were selected based on their prevalence in clinical trials for common ADHD medications and were identified from ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes recorded in claims. RESULTS: Among the 461,464 patients included (mean age: 34.2 years; 45.5% males), 49.4% had ≥1 AE during their treatment episode. Treatment episodes with AEs were associated with statistically significant AE-specific medical costs (erectile dysfunction: $57; fatigue: $82; dry mouth: $90; diarrhea: $162; insomnia: $147; anxiety: $281; nausea: $299; constipation: $356; urinary hesitation: $491; feeling jittery: $723) and excess healthcare costs PPPM (erectile dysfunction: $120, fatigue: $248, insomnia: $265, anxiety: $380, diarrhea: $441, dry mouth: $485, nausea: $709, constipation: $802, urinary hesitation: $1,105, feeling jittery: $1,160; p < .05). LIMITATIONS: AEs were identified based on recorded diagnosis on medical claims and likely represent more severe AEs. Therefore, costs may not be representative of milder AEs. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that AEs occurring during ADHD treatment episodes are associated with significant healthcare costs. This highlights the potential of treatments with favorable safety profiles to alleviate the burden experienced by patients and the healthcare system.

Assessment of centanafadine in adults with ADHD: a matching adjusted indirect comparison versus methylphenidate hydrochloride extended release (Concerta).

OBJECTIVE: To compare safety and efficacy of centanafadine versus methylphenidate hydrochloride extended release (ER; Concerta) in adults with ADHD. METHODS: Without head-to-head trials, anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) of adverse event rates reported across trials and mean change from baseline in Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score between centanafadine and methylphenidate hydrochloride ER were conducted. Pooled patient-level data from two centanafadine trials (NCT03605680/NCT03605836) and aggregate data from one published methylphenidate hydrochloride ER trial (NCT00937040) were used. Characteristics of individual patients from the centanafadine trials were matched to aggregate baseline characteristics from the methylphenidate hydrochloride ER trial using propensity score weighting. A sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the results to the capping of extreme weights (i.e. >99th percentile). RESULTS: Compared with methylphenidate hydrochloride ER, centanafadine was associated with significantly lower risk of dry mouth (risk difference [RD] in percentage points: -11.95), initial insomnia (-11.10), decreased appetite (-8.05), anxiety (-5.39), palpitations (-5.25), and feeling jittery (-4.73) though a significantly smaller reduction in AISRS score (4.16-point). In the sensitivity analysis, the safety results were consistent with the primary analysis but there was no significant difference in efficacy between centanafadine and methylphenidate hydrochloride ER. CONCLUSION: In this MAIC, centanafadine had better safety and possibly lower efficacy than methylphenidate hydrochloride ER. While safety results were robust across analyses, there was no efficacy difference between centanafadine and methylphenidate hydrochloride ER in the sensitivity analysis. Considering its favorable safety profile, centanafadine may be preferred among patients for whom treatment-related adverse events are a concern.

Treatment Preferences of Adult Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder - A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Background: Understanding patient preferences for treatments may facilitate shared decision-making. This study assessed adult patient preferences for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatments in a sample of 600 patients in the United States (US). Methods: A web-based discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey was conducted among treated adults with ADHD. Participants were recruited from Dynata's US panel (06/22/2023-07/06/2023). Attributes and levels, identified based on clinical inputs and published data, included efficacy and safety. Participants' preferences were estimated using conditional logistic regression. Willingness to trade-off and attributes' relative importance were calculated. Overall preferences for treatment profiles approximating centanafadine, lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine, and viloxazine were estimated using adjusted total utilities. Results were stratified by current treatment status. Sensitivity analyses including participants who passed validity tests were conducted. Results: Among the 600 participants (mean age 37.9 years; 66.2% female; 50.8% treated), all attributes had a statistically significant impact on preferences for ADHD treatments (p < 0.001); the most important attribute was improvement in ADHD symptoms (36%), followed by risks of nausea (25%), insomnia (20%), anxiety (8%), dry mouth (6%), and feeling jittery (5%). Together, safety attributes accounted for >60% of relative importance in decision-making. Participants were willing to forgo 0.59, 0.57, 0.49, 0.32, and 0.17 percentage points of symptom improvement to achieve one-percentage-point reduced risk of insomnia, nausea, anxiety, feeling jittery, and dry mouth, respectively. Centanafadine profile had consistently higher adjusted total utilities than its comparators. Similar results were obtained in the subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Efficacy was the most important attribute for patients when making treatment decision, but taken together, AEs had greater relative importance than efficacy alone. Accordingly, a profile resembling that of centanafadine would be preferred by an average patient compared to key competitors due to its favorable safety profile. These findings may help improve treatment decision-making, enhance treatment satisfaction, and foster adherence.

A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: long-term safety and efficacy.

Aim: To compare long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine versus lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), methylphenidate hydrochloride (methylphenidate) and atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), respectively, in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs). Patients & methods: Patient-level data from a centanafadine trial (NCT03605849) and published aggregate data from a lisdexamfetamine trial (NCT00337285), a methylphenidate trial (NCT00326300) and an atomoxetine trial (NCT00190736) were used. Patient characteristics were matched in each comparison using propensity score weighting. Study outcomes were assessed up to 52 weeks and included safety (rates of adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale [AISRS] or ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] score). Results: In all comparisons of matched populations, risks of AEs were statistically significantly lower with centanafadine or non-different between centanafadine and comparator; the largest differences in AE rates included upper respiratory tract infection (risk difference in percentage points: 18.75), insomnia (12.47) and dry mouth (12.33) versus lisdexamfetamine; decreased appetite (20.25), headache (18.53) and insomnia (12.65) versus methylphenidate; and nausea (26.18), dry mouth (25.07) and fatigue (13.95) versus atomoxetine (all p < 0.05). Centanafadine had a smaller reduction in the AISRS/ADHD-RS score versus lisdexamfetamine (6.15-point difference; p < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score versus methylphenidate (1.75-point difference; p = 0.13) and versus atomoxetine (1.60-point difference; p = 0.21). Conclusion: At up to 52 weeks, centanafadine showed significantly lower incidence of several AEs than lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and atomoxetine; efficacy was lower than lisdexamfetamine and non-different from methylphenidate and atomoxetine.

Assessment of centanafadine in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, atomoxetine hydrochloride, and viloxazine extended-release.

BACKGROUND: Head-to-head trials comparing centanafadine, an investigational therapy for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with other treatment options are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare safety and efficacy outcomes of centanafadine sustained-release vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine hydrochloride (atomoxetine), and viloxazine extended-release (viloxazine ER), respectively, using matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). METHODS: This MAIC included patient-level data pooled from 2 centanafadine trials (NCT03605680 and NCT03605836) and published aggregate data from comparable trials of 3 comparators-lisdexamfetamine (NCT00334880), atomoxetine (NCT00190736), and viloxazine ER (NCT04016779)-in adult patients with ADHD. Propensity score weighting was used to match characteristics of individual patients from the centanafadine trials to aggregate baseline characteristics from the respective comparator trials. Safety outcomes were rates of adverse events for which information was available in the centanafadine and respective comparator trials. Efficacy outcome was mean change from baseline in the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score (ADHD Rating Scale [ADHD-RS] was used as proxy in the comparison with lisdexamfetamine). Anchored indirect comparisons were conducted across matched populations of the centanafadine and respective comparator trials. RESULTS: After matching, baseline characteristics in the centanafadine trials were the same as those in the respective comparator trials. Compared with lisdexamfetamine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of lack of appetite (risk difference [RD] in percentage points: 23.42), dry mouth (19.27), insomnia (15.35), anxiety (5.21), nausea (4.90), feeling jittery (3.70), and diarrhea (3.47) (all P < 0.05) but a smaller reduction in the AISRS/ADHD-RS score (6.58-point difference; P < 0.05). Compared with atomoxetine, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of nausea (RD in percentage points: 18.64), dry mouth (17.44), fatigue (9.21), erectile dysfunction (6.76), lack of appetite (6.71), and urinary hesitation (5.84) (all P < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score. Compared with viloxazine ER, centanafadine was associated with a significantly lower risk of fatigue (RD in percentage points: 11.07), insomnia (10.67), nausea (7.57), and constipation (4.63) (all P < 0.05) and no statistically significant difference in the change in AISRS score. CONCLUSIONS: In an anchored MAIC, centanafadine showed a significantly better short-term safety profile than lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine, and viloxazine ER; efficacy was lower than with lisdexamfetamine and comparable (ie, nondifferent) with atomoxetine and viloxazine ER. This MAIC provides important insights on the relative safety and efficacy of common treatment options to help inform treatment decisions in adults with ADHD. Safety assessment was limited to rates of adverse events reported in both trials of a given comparison. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03605680, NCT03605836, NCT00334880, NCT00190736, and NCT04016779.