Corrigendum: Real-World Treatment Patterns of Antiviral Prophylaxis for Cytomegalovirus Among Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Linked USRDS-Medicare Database Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10528.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/ti.2023.12367.].

Development and validation of algorithms for identifying lines of therapy in multiple myeloma using real-world data.

Aim: To validate algorithms based on electronic health data to identify composition of lines of therapy (LOT) in multiple myeloma (MM). Materials & methods: This study used available electronic health data for selected adults within Henry Ford Health (Michigan, USA) newly diagnosed with MM in 2006-2017. Algorithm performance in this population was verified via chart review. As with prior oncology studies, good performance was defined as positive predictive value (PPV) ≥75%. Results: Accuracy for identifying LOT1 (N = 133) was 85.0%. For the most frequent regimens, accuracy was 92.5-97.7%, PPV 80.6-93.8%, sensitivity 88.2-89.3% and specificity 94.3-99.1%. Algorithm performance decreased in subsequent LOTs, with decreasing sample sizes. Only 19.5% of patients received maintenance therapy during LOT1. Accuracy for identifying maintenance therapy was 85.7%; PPV for the most common maintenance therapy was 73.3%. Conclusion: Algorithms performed well in identifying LOT1 - especially more commonly used regimens - and slightly less well in identifying maintenance therapy therein.

Electronic health data helps us understand treatment in the 'real world'. The data has great value in cancer if we can identify the drugs patients get. Yet this is hard in multiple myeloma (MM), where treatment is complex. Algorithms (set of decision rules) to identify drugs can help here. We tested an existing algorithm for identifying 'lines of therapy' (LOT) given to patients with MM. Each LOT included one or more drugs for MM. We also developed and tested a new algorithm for 'maintenance therapy'. This is a treatment given to help maintain the response to the main MM treatment. We tested how well the algorithms identified MM treatments in electronic health data. This data came from Henry Ford Health, a healthcare system in Michigan, USA. Treatments were confirmed by cancer specialists who reviewed medical charts. The LOT algorithm was good at finding the first LOT patients. The maintenance algorithm did a fair job of identifying the most used therapy. Our algorithms could help researchers study the real-world treatment of MM.

Real-World Treatment Patterns of Antiviral Prophylaxis for Cytomegalovirus Among Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Linked USRDS-Medicare Database Study.

Limited data exist on cytomegalovirus (CMV) antiviral treatment patterns among kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). Using United States Renal Database System registry data and Medicare claims (1 January 2011-31 December 2017), we examined CMV antiviral use in 22,878 KTRs who received their first KT from 2011 to 2016. Three-quarters of KTRs started CMV prophylaxis (85.8% of high-, 82.4% of intermediate-, and 32.1% of low-risk KTRs). Median time to prophylaxis discontinuation was 98, 65, and 61 days for high-, intermediate-, and low-risk KTRs, respectively. Factors associated with receiving CMV prophylaxis were high-risk status, diabetes, receipt of a well-functioning kidney graft, greater time on dialysis before KT, panel reactive antibodies ≥80%, and use of antithymocyte globulin, alemtuzumab, and tacrolimus. KTRs were more likely to discontinue CMV prophylaxis if they developed leukopenia/neutropenia, had cardiovascular disease, or received their kidney from a deceased donor. These findings suggest that adherence to the recommended duration of CMV-prophylaxis for high and intermediate-risk patients is suboptimal, and CMV prophylaxis is overused in low-risk patients.

Risk of venous thromboembolism among women receiving ospemifene: a comparative observational study.

Introduction: The primary aim of this study was to compare the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among women initiating ospemifene vs other selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) therapies for estrogen-deficiency conditions or breast cancer prevention, and vs women with untreated vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA). The secondary objective examined numerous additional safety outcomes. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study using the IBM Watson MarketScan claims database. Women receiving ospemifene, another SERM, or with a new diagnosis of VVA with no treatment from 1 May 2013 to 2 October 2018 were followed through the claims for incident adverse outcomes. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of VTE following cohort entry; secondary outcomes included cerebrovascular events and other adverse events potentially associated with SERM use. Cox models compared the risk of VTE between ospemifene and comparators, using a variety of approaches to control for confounding. Results: The incidence of VTE during the first continuous treatment episode was 3.39 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.55-6.43) events per 1,000 person-years (PY) for ospemifene (N = 8977), 11.30 (95% CI: 8.81-14.28) events per 1,000 PY for comparator SERM (N = 12,621), and 10.92 (95% CI: 10.49-11.37) events per 1,000 PY for untreated VVA (N = 242,488). Cox models indicated no increase in risk of VTE for ospemifene vs other SERMs (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.19-0.82), and vs untreated VVA (HR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.24-0.91). Conclusion: This real-world safety analysis found no increase in risk of VTE or other adverse events with use of ospemifene in postmenopausal women. Plain Language Summary: Introduction: This study assessed the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among women treated with ospemifene or another selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) therapy and women with untreated vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA). Numerous additional safety outcomes were examined.Methods: This study was conducted in the IBM Watson MarketScan claims database. Women receiving ospemifene, another SERM, or with a new diagnosis of VVA with no treatment from 1 May 2013 to 2 October 2018 were followed through the claims for adverse outcomes, including VTE, cerebrovascular events (such as stroke), and other outcomes that might occur with use of a SERM. The analyses compared the risk of VTE between ospemifene and the other two groups, using methods that accounted for differences in patient characteristics between the groups. Because few women over 72 years old used ospemifene, the main analyses examined women aged 54-72 years.Results: The analyses included 8,977 ospemifene users, 12,621 other SERM users, and 242,488 women with untreated VVA. Among women aged 54-72 years, only 9 experienced a VTE during ospemifene treatment, while 55 other SERM users and 1,788 women with untreated VVA had a VTE. The analyses that accounted for differences between the groups confirmed that the risk of VTE was no higher in ospemifene users than in either comparison group.Conclusion: This real-world safety analysis found no increase in risk of VTE or other adverse events with use of ospemifene in postmenopausal women.

Individualized HbA1c target selection and achievement in the Multinational Observational Study Assessing Insulin Use (MOSA1c) type 2 diabetes study.

AIM: To identify which individual-, physician-, and the healthcare system-related factors can predict individualized hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) targets and the likelihood of reaching those targets after initial insulin therapy over a two-year follow-up period. METHODS: Real-world data, including baseline characteristics of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), psychosocial data, and diabetes medication use, collected from the Multinational Observational Study Assessing Insulin Use (MOSA1c) study in 18 countries were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 225 of 1194 people with T2DM (18.8%) who received initial insulin therapy for ≥3 months reached HbA1c targets at two-year follow-up; most were likely to be White (64.9%) and perceptions of their relationship with physicians were less positive than those who did not reach HbA1c targets. Higher baseline HbA1c (>8%) was the strongest predictor of being assigned an HbA1c target >7% (odds ratio [OR] 6.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.97, 9.26). A smaller difference between baseline and target HbA1c levels was the strongest predictor of reaching an HbA1c target at two-year follow-up (large vs small difference, OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17, 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Several factors were significantly associated with establishing individualized HbA1c targets and reaching these targets. A small proportion of people with T2DM on insulin therapy reached their HbA1c target. Personalized management of glycemic targets necessitates the adoption of multi-factorial strategies, as several factors could influence an individual's glycemic outcome. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01400971.

Incidence of venous thromboembolism among postmenopausal women prescribed ospemifene, selective estrogen receptor modulators for noncancer indications, or untreated vulvar and vaginal atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: Ospemifene is a nonsteroidal selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) for the treatment of moderate symptomatic vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA) due to menopause. A postauthorization safety study is currently examining the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among postmenopausal women receiving ospemifene or other SERM (raloxifene, bazedoxifene, or tamoxifen, for noncancer indications), or with untreated VVA. METHODS: This interim analysis used the US MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims database from 2013 to 2017 to identify incident VTE. The incidence rate and 95% confidence interval of VTE during the first continuous course of treatment (or continuous untreated time for the untreated cohort) were calculated for each cohort overall and by age group, with sensitivity analyses examining incidence in the short term (up to 90 days) and long term (all available follow-up, regardless of treatment changes). RESULTS: Analyses included 8,188 ospemifene users, 11,777 other SERM users, and 220,242 women with untreated VVA. The incidence per 1,000 person-years and 95% confidence interval of VTE were 3.7 (1.7-7.1) for ospemifene, 11.5 (8.9-14.6) for other SERM, and 11.3 (10.8-11.7) for untreated VVA. Stratification by age and altering the time frame for analysis produced results with similar patterns to the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This interim analysis of an ongoing study suggests a favorable safety profile for ospemifene with respect to VTE. Comparative analyses with covariate adjustment will be performed when data accrual is complete.

STK11 (LKB1) mutations in metastatic NSCLC: Prognostic value in the real world.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in STK11 (STK11m) and frequently co-occurring KRAS mutations (KRASm/STK11m) are associated with poor survival in metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) immuno-oncology trials. There are limited data regarding the prognostic significance of these mutations in a real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed de-identified electronic medical records from the Flatiron Clinico-Genomic database to identify patients with mNSCLC who had initiated first-line immunotherapy (IO; alone or in combination) or chemotherapy under routine care between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2017. The primary objectives were to assess the prevalence of STK11m and KRASm/STK11m and to determine associations of these mutations with overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS). RESULTS: Of 2407 patients with mNSCLC, STK11m and KRASm/STK11m were present in 13.6% and 6.5% of patients, respectively. Worse OS outcomes were observed in patients with STK11m versus STK11wt mNSCLC receiving IO (first-line, HR [95% CI], 1.4 [0.9-2.3; p = 0.1]; second-line [subset of first-line cohort], HR, 1.6 [1.3-2.0; p = 0.0002]) or chemotherapy (first-line, HR, 1.4 [1.2-1.6; p < 0.0001]); PFS outcomes showed similar trends. KRASm/STK11m double mutations were associated with worse OS and PFS outcomes versus KRASwt/STK11wt with IO and chemotherapy, similar to the single mutation (STK11m vs STK11wt) findings. CONCLUSIONS: This large observational genomic study among patients receiving routine care highlights the negative prognostic impact of STK11m in patients with mNSCLC treated with IO or chemotherapy. These results complement previous clinical trial data and provide further evidence in the real world of a patient population that would benefit from new treatment options.

Prescriber Compliance With Liver Monitoring Guidelines for Pazopanib in the Postapproval Setting: Results From a Distributed Research Network.

OBJECTIVES: Pazopanib received US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2009 for advanced renal cell carcinoma. During clinical development, liver chemistry abnormalities and adverse hepatic events were observed, leading to a boxed warning for hepatotoxicity and detailed label prescriber guidelines for liver monitoring. As part of postapproval regulatory commitments, a cohort study was conducted to assess prescriber compliance with liver monitoring guidelines. METHODS: Over a 4-year period, a distributed network approach was used across 3 databases: US Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, a US outpatient oncology community practice database, and the Dutch PHARMO Database Network. Measures of prescriber compliance were designed using the original pazopanib label guidelines for liver monitoring. RESULTS: Results from the VA (n = 288) and oncology databases (n = 283) indicate that prescriber liver chemistry monitoring was less than 100%: 73% to 74% compliance with baseline testing and 37% to 39% compliance with testing every 4 weeks. Compliance was highest near drug initiation and decreased over time. Among patients who should have had weekly testing, the compliance was 56% in both databases. The more serious elevations examined, including combinations of liver enzyme elevations meeting the laboratory definition of Hy's law were infrequent but always led to appropriate discontinuation of pazopanib. Only 4 patients were identified for analysis in the Dutch database; none had recorded baseline testing. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, prescriber compliance was reasonable near pazopanib initiation but low during subsequent weeks of treatment. This study provides information from real-world community practice settings and offers feedback to regulators on the effectiveness of label monitoring guidelines.

Autoimmune disease concomitance among inflammatory bowel disease patients in the United States, 2001-2002.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may share an underlying pathogenesis with other autoimmune diseases. METHODS: Two United States data sets with patient-level medical and drug claims were used to explore the occurrence of autoimmune diseases in patients with IBD, particularly Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), with that in controls. From 2001 to 2002 IBD patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, diagnosis codes in the IMS Health Integrated Administration Claims Database and the Market Scan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database. Controls were selected by matching on sex, age, Census Bureau region, and length of previous medical insurance coverage. Odds ratios (ORs) evaluated the risk relationship between IBD patients and controls within an estimated Mantel-Haenszel 95% confidence interval. Sensitivity analysis tested the case identification method used to select IBD patients. RESULTS: The risk for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) was substantially increased across both data sets: OR (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 7.8 (5.6-10.8) in IMS Health and 5.8 (3.9-8.6) in MarketScan. The risk for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was 2.7 (2.4-3.0) and 2.1 (1.8-2.3), respectively; for multiple sclerosis (MS); the ORs were 1.5 (1.2-1.9) and 1.6 (1.2-2.1), respectively. There was no increased risk for type 1 diabetes mellitus, and the results for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) were inconsistent. The sensitivity analysis supported these findings. CONCLUSIONS: A much higher risk for RA, AS, PsA, and MS was observed in IBD patients compared with controls. Prospective epidemiologic studies are needed to confirm these findings and explore the pathogenic mechanism of this relationship.

Adherence to guidelines for use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia: results of a retrospective study of an electronic medical-records database in the United States, 2002-2006.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) commonly occurs in cancer patients receiving conventional myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Two national guidelines regarding the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in CIA were released in 2002. Because of poorer disease outcomes and increased risk of adverse events associated with ESAs in recent studies, the use of ESAs has been increasingly restricted in practice guidelines in the years 2007 and 2008. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide a baseline for adherence to national guidelines in the use of ESAs for CIA between 2002 and 2006. METHODS: This retrospective study used the Varian Medical Oncology database (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, California) of electronic medical records, representing 17 outpatient oncology organizations at 71 clinic locations in the United States. Adults diagnosed with any malignant neoplasm who started conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy between January 1, 2002, and September 30, 2006, were included. The proportion of patients receiving an ESA was calculated by hemoglobin (Hb) level during each chemotherapy cycle, stratified by line of chemotherapy and year. Logistic regression modeling identified predictors of ESA use in anemic patients during the first chemotherapy cycle. RESULTS: The records of 17,731 cancer patients were evaluated. Median (SD) age was 61 (13) years, and 58.9% were female. Most patients (84.1%) had a solid tumor. Many patients (41.3%) received platinum containing chemotherapy and 74.4% received combination chemotherapy. During the first 5 cycles of first-line chemotherapy among patients with CIA (Hb <11 g/dL), ESAs were used by 55.8% of patients at cycle 1 and 68.9% at cycle 5. ESA use in CIA patients increased across lines of chemotherapy and time. Few patients (2.8%) received an ESA at Hb >13 g/dL. The statistically significant predictors of ESA use included age >65 years, eastern US residence, private health insurance, community-based care, and solid tumors, especially lung cancer. CONCLUSION: The patterns we observed were generally consistent with prevailing ESA labels and national guidelines during 2002 through 2006. Although ESA use in patients with CIA increased over chemotherapy cycles, lines of chemotherapy, and time, <70% of CIA episodes were treated with ESAs during the initial 5 chemotherapy cycles.

Use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents among chemotherapy patients with hemoglobin exceeding 12 grams per deciliter.

BACKGROUND: Prior to 2007, the erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa were indicated for use in chemotherapyinduced anemia to achieve target hemoglobin (Hb) levels of approximately 12 grams per deciliter (gm per dL), and treatment was to be withheld if Hb exceeded 13 gm per dL. In March 2007, the FDA changed the labeling of the ESAs to add boxed warnings, updated in November 2007, to include the following key points: (a) ESAs should be used only to treat anemia that occurs in patients with cancer while they are undergoing chemotherapy; (b) treatment with ESAs should be stopped when chemotherapy ends; and (c) dosing ESAs to an Hb target of 12 gm per dL or greater has resulted in more rapid cancer progression or shortened overall survival in patients with breast, head and neck, lymphoid, cervical, and non-small cell lung malignancies. In January 2008, the FDA specified that the increased risk of more rapid tumor growth or shortened survival was associated with ESAs when "administered in an attempt to achieve a Hb level of 12 gm per dL or greater, although many patients did not reach that level." A new black-box warning regarding this association was added to the labels of the ESAs in March 2008, and the FDA mandated further label changes on July 30, 2008, that ESA therapy should not be initiated in patients receiving chemotherapy at Hb levels of 10 gm per dL or higher. OBJECTIVE: To (a) assess the prevalence and predictors of ESA administrations at Hb levels above 12 gm per dL among patients with a diagnosis of solid or hematologic cancer or myelodysplastic syndrome who began their first regimen of conventional myelosuppressive chemotherapy between 2002 and 2006, and (b) describe patterns of ESA treatment subsequent to the first ESA administration at Hb above 12 gm per dL. METHODS: Using the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant Varian Medical Oncology database of de-identified electronic medical records from 17 U.S. outpatient oncology practices, adults (aged 18 years or older) with any cancer diagnosis who began chemotherapy between January 1, 2002, and September 30, 2006, were identified. The Hb value associated with each ESA administration was defined as the closest Hb measurement within 7 days prior to the ESA administration. A first ESAHb > 12 was defined as the first time an ESA, either epoetin or darbepoetin, was given with an associated Hb greater than 12 gm per dL during the first chemotherapy regimen recorded in the database for each patient. Hb levels and ESA administrations after the first ESAHb > 12 were determined. Logistic regression models identified predictors of initial receipt of an ESAHb > 12, and of receiving further ESA treatment following the first such administration. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2002, and September 30, 2006, there were 17,731 patients on chemotherapy, the mean (SD) age was 60 (13.2) years; 58.9% were female; 24.6% had breast cancer, 22.2% had lung cancer, 15.8% had colorectal cancer, 11.8% had hematologic cancer, and 25.6% had other or multiple cancers. Of these, 8,086 (45.6%) received an ESA at any time during the regimen, and 7,606 (42.9%) received an ESA at a known Hb level (i.e., Hb measurement within 7 days prior to ESA administration). During the first recorded chemotherapy regimen, 1,844 patients (10.4% of the chemotherapy cohort, 24.2% of ESA users with a known Hb; n = 1,226 epoetin, n = 618 darbepoetin) received an ESAHb > 12. Among patients receiving ESA treatment at a known Hb level, significant predictors of receiving an ESAHb > 12 included treatment in a community-based clinic rather than a hospital-affiliated clinic (odds ratio [OR] = 2.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.40-3.65), location of practice in the eastern United States (OR for Midwest = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.57- 0.78; OR for West = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.22-0.34), hematologic cancer rather than solid tumor (OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.21-1.71), private health insurance (OR for public health insurance = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.70-0.93; OR for other/ unknown insurance = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.47-0.62), and year of regimen 2002- 2003 (ORs = 0.75, 0.74, and 0.71 for 2004, 2005, and 2006, respectively). Following the first ESAHb > 12, 276 (22.5%) of the patients on epoetin and 276 (44.7%) on darbepoetin received no further ESA treatment during the next 6 weeks (Pearson chi-square = 96.1, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of outpatient oncology practices between 2002 and 2006 revealed that 24% of ESA users with a known Hb level received ESAHb > 12. Dose withholding subsequently occurred in 23%- 45% of those patients. A higher proportion of patients on epoetin than darbepoetin continued ESA treatment after the first administration of ESAHb > 12.

The costs of treating acute heart failure: an economic analysis of the SURVIVE trial.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental cost per life year gained with levosimendan relative to dobutamine in treatment of acute heart failure based on the Survival of Patients with Acute Heart Failure in Need of Intravenous Inotropic Support (SURVIVE) trial. METHODS: SURVIVE enrolled 1,327 patients (levosimendan 664, dobutamine 663) from nine nations with 180-day survival from date of randomisation as the primary endpoint. Hospital resource utilisation was determined via clinical case reports. Unit costs were derived from hospital payment schedules for France, Germany and the UK, and represent a third-party payer perspective. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed for a subset of the SURVIVE patient population selected in accordance with current levosimendan labeling. RESULTS: Mortality in the levosimendan group was 26 versus 28% for dobutamine (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.13, p=0.40). Initial hospitalisation length of stay was identical (levosimendan 14.4, dobutamine 14.5, p=0.98). Slightly lower rates of readmission were observed for levosimendan relative to dobutamine at 31 (p=0.13) and 180 days (p=0.23). Mean costs excluding study drug were equivalent for the index admission (levosimendan euro5,060, dobutamine euro4,952; p=0.91) and complete episode (levosimendan euro5,396, dobutamine euro5,275; p=0.93). CONCLUSION: At an acquisition cost of euro600 per vial, there is at least 50% likelihood that levosimendan is cost effective relative to dobutamine if willingness to pay is equal to or greater than euro15,000 per life year gained.

Characteristics and Medication Use of Psoriasis Patients Who May or May Not Qualify for Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials impose exclusion criteria that may limit the generalizability of results. OBJECTIVES: To (a) determine the percentage of real-world patients who would qualify for psoriasis randomized controlled trials; (b) ascertain differences between moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients who would be eligible, ineligible, or potentially eligible for clinical trials; and (c) compare their biologic treatment patterns. METHODS: Moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients were identified from the U.S. Department of Defense health care database from January 1, 2008, to October 31, 2013. Eligibility classification for psoriasis trials was based on common trial exclusion criteria involving medical conditions and recent treatment history. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns of 4 biologics (adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, and ustekinumab) were compared between groups. Adherence was measured by medication possession ratio and persistence as continuous time on drug with ≤ 90-day gap between supply times. RESULTS: Among 16,284 qualifying psoriasis patients, 4,677 (28.7%) were medically ineligible, and 8,466 (52.0%) had ineligibility-related treatments that could be stopped prior to trial entry; the latter patients were considered potentially eligible for psoriasis trials. Common reasons for medical ineligibility included malignancies and hematologic disorders; treatment ineligibilities included use of topical corticosteroids and phototherapy. Medically ineligible patients were older and had more comorbidities, while potentially eligible patients were younger and healthier than trial-eligible patients. Most treatment patterns were similar across groups, except that, compared with the trial-eligible group, medically ineligible patients had greater adherence to infliximab and potentially trial-eligible patients had greater adherence and persistence to adalimumab. CONCLUSIONS: This large real-world study found that patients who may be ineligible for psoriasis trials differ in important respects (e.g., comorbidities, prior treatments) from their trial-eligible counterparts. Regardless of their differences at baseline, adherence, persistence, and switching of biologic medications are largely similar, with few differences noted among groups. DISCLOSURES: Financial support for this study was provided by Lilly USA. Wu has received research funding from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Coherus Biosciences, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sandoz, and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, and he is a consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries. Malatestinic, Goldblum, Solotkin, Lin, Johnston, and Araujo are employees and/or stock owners of Lilly. Nordstrom, Kistler, and Fraeman are employees of Evidera, which received funding from Lilly to conduct this study. LCDR Hawley is a military service member. This work was prepared as part of her official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides that "copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government." Title 17 U.S.C. 101 defines a U.S. government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the U.S. government as part of that person's official duties. Research data were derived from an approved Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, Virginia, institutional review board protocol. The views expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government. Study concept and design were contributed by Malatestinic and Araujo, along with the other authors. Nordstrom, Kistler, Fraeman, and Sicignano collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by Wu, Lin, and Hawley, along with Malatestinic, Nordstrom, Solotkin, and Araujo. The manuscript was written by Johnston, Malatestinic, Kistler, Wu, and Araujo, along with Nordstrom, Goldblum, Solotkin, Hawley, and Sicignano, and revised by Goldblum, Solotkin, Malatestinic, and Araujo, along with Nordstrom, Wu, Fraeman, Johnston, Hawley, and Sicignano.

Estimating costs of care for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the resource use patterns and costs of care for patients with incident metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on analyses of retrospective claims data from selected health plans in the United States. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A case-control analysis was performed using claims from years 1998-2004. Incident mCRC cases were identified based on evidence of a colorectal cancer diagnosis and a metastatic disease diagnosis. Incident mCRC cases could have no other evidence of cancer in the 1-year period before the date of their first mCRC diagnosis. Cases were matched to non-mCRC controls based on age, sex, geographic region, and duration of plan enrollment. Costs were evaluated by phase of disease: diagnosis, treatment, or death phases. Ordinary least squares regressions were performed to evaluate impact of covariates in each phase. RESULTS: Total costs in the follow-up period averaged $97,031 more for mCRC cases than for controls. The main cost drivers for mCRC were hospitalizations ($37,369) and specialist visits ($34,582), which included chemotherapy administration. Approximately 40% of the 672 patients with mCRC who qualified for the phase analysis were identified with a fatal event during follow-up. Monthly costs were similar in the diagnostic phase ($12,205) and death phase ($12,328), but were significantly lower in the treatment phase ($4722). Both mean/median monthly costs increased over time during the study period, regardless of disease phase. CONCLUSION: The economic burden of mCRC is substantial for patients with commercial health plans in the United States, and costs of care have increased substantially in recent years.

Occurrence of hepatotoxicity with pazopanib and other anti-VEGF treatments for renal cell carcinoma: an observational study utilizing a distributed database network.

PURPOSE: To quantify the hepatic safety of pazopanib and comparator anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies in clinical practice among renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. METHODS: A population-based cohort study of new anti-VEGF users was conducted in two US healthcare databases, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and an oncology practice network (Altos), and the PHARMO Database Network in The Netherlands. A common protocol was used to collect liver chemistry (LC) data from anti-VEGF initiation through 4 years of follow-up. In the VA population, suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) outcomes were investigated via chart review, with adjudication by hepatologists. RESULTS: In Altos and VA, respectively, the total RCC patients were: pazopanib (156, 243), bevacizumab (122, 99), sorafenib (82, 249) and sunitinib (285, 751). PHARMO contained too few patients to be included. Few cases of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥8× the upper limit of normal were seen across the anti-VEGF cohorts; incidence rates (per 100 person-years) ranged from 0 (sunitinib) to 8.2 (pazopanib) in Altos and from 0 (bevacizumab and sorafenib) to 2.1 (pazopanib) among VA patients. No cases of Hy's law identified by combination LC elevations were seen in patients treated with pazopanib or bevacizumab; one case was observed in those treated with sorafenib, and two cases were found among sunitinib users. One case of adjudicated DILI was observed in a sunitinib-treated patient; none were found among patients treated with pazopanib, bevacizumab or sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS: Severe liver injury occurred infrequently during exposure to pazopanib and other anti-VEGF therapies in a population-based setting.

Validation of Claims Algorithms for Progression to Metastatic Cancer in Patients with Breast, Non-small Cell Lung, and Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Validated algorithms for identifying progression to metastatic cancer could permit the use of administrative claims databases for research in this area. OBJECTIVE: To identify simple algorithms that could accurately detect cancer progression to metastatic breast, non-small cell lung, and colorectal cancer (CRC) using medical and pharmacy claims data. METHODS: Adults with stage I-III breast, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), or CRC in the Geisinger Health System from 2004 to 2011 were selected. Evidence of progression was extracted via manual chart review as the reference standard. In addition to secondary malignancy diagnosis (ICD-9 code for metastases), diagnoses, procedures, and treatments were selected with clinician input as indicators of cancer progression. Random forests models provided variable importance scores. In addition to codes for secondary malignancy, several more complex algorithms were constructed and performance measures calculated. RESULTS: Among those with breast cancer [17/502 (3.4%) progressed], the performance of a secondary malignancy code was suboptimal [sensitivity: 64.7%; specificity: 86.0%; positive predictive value (PPV): 13.9; negative predictive value (NPV): 98.6%]; requiring malignancy at another site or initiation of immunotherapy increased PPV and specificity but decreased sensitivity. For NSCLC [61/236 (25.8%) progressed], codes for secondary malignancy alone (PPV: 47.4%; NPV: 84.8%; sensitivity: 60.7%; specificity: 76.6%) performed similarly or better than more complex algorithms. For CRC [33/276 (12.0%) progressed], secondary malignancy codes had good specificity (92.7%) and NPV (92.3%) but low sensitivity (42.4%) and PPV (43.8%); an algorithm with change in chemotherapy increased sensitivity but decreased other metrics. CONCLUSION: Selected algorithms performed similarly to the presence of a secondary tumor diagnosis code, with low sensitivity/PPV and higher specificity/NPV. Accurate identification of cancer progression likely requires verification through chart review.

A comparison of the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in a large healthcare system.

Dabigatran is approved for stroke risk reduction in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Data from diverse clinical practice settings will help establish whether the risk:benefit ratio seen in clinical trials is comparable with routine clinical care. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in clinical practice. We undertook a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort study (N=12,793 per group; mean age 74) comparing treatment with dabigatran or warfarin in the US Department of Defense claims database, October 2009 to July 2013. Treatment-naïve patients with first prescription claim for dabigatran (either FDA-approved dose) or warfarin between October 2010 and July 2012 (index) and a diagnosis of NVAF during the 12 months before index date were included. Primary outcomes were stroke and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, major gastrointestinal (GI), urogenital or other bleeding, myocardial infarction (MI) and death. Time-to-event was investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Outcomes comparisons were made utilising Cox-proportional hazards models of PSM groups. Dabigatran users experienced fewer strokes (adjusted hazard ratio [95 % confidence intervals] 0.73 [0.55-0.97]), major intracranial (0.49 [0.30-0.79]), urogenital (0.36 [0.18-0.74]) and other (0.38 [0.22-0.66]) bleeding, MI (0.65 [0.45-0.95]) and deaths (0.64 [0.55-0.74]) than the warfarin group. Major bleeding (0.87 [0.74-1.03]) and major GI bleeding (1.13 [0.94-1.37]) was similar between groups and major lower GI bleeding events were more frequent (1.30 [1.04-1.62]) with dabigatran. In conclusion, compared with warfarin, dabigatran treatment was associated with a lower risk of stroke and most outcomes measured, but increased incidence of major lower GI bleeding.

Expanding the use of administrative claims databases in conducting clinical real-world evidence studies in multiple sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: Administrative claims databases provide a wealth of data for assessing the effect of treatments in clinical practice. Our aim was to propose methodology for real-world studies in multiple sclerosis (MS) using these databases. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In three large US administrative claims databases: MarketScan, PharMetrics Plus and Department of Defense (DoD), patients with MS were selected using an algorithm identified in the published literature and refined for accuracy. Algorithms for detecting newly diagnosed ('incident') MS cases were also refined and tested. Methodology based on resource and treatment use was developed to differentiate between relapses with and without hospitalization. RESULTS: When various patient selection criteria were applied to the MarketScan database, an algorithm requiring two MS diagnoses at least 30 days apart was identified as the preferred method of selecting patient cohorts. Attempts to detect incident MS cases were confounded by the limited continuous enrollment of patients in these databases. Relapse detection algorithms identified similar proportions of patients in the MarketScan and PharMetrics Plus databases experiencing relapses with (2% in both databases) and without (15-20%) hospitalization in the 1 year follow-up period, providing findings in the range of those in the published literature. LIMITATION: Additional validation of the algorithms proposed here would increase their credibility. CONCLUSIONS: The methods suggested in this study offer a good foundation for performing real-world research in MS using administrative claims databases, potentially allowing evidence from different studies to be compared and combined more systematically than in current research practice.

Mortality and comorbidities in patients with multiple sclerosis compared with a population without multiple sclerosis: An observational study using the US Department of Defense administrative claims database.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited for mortality and comorbidities in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). OBJECTIVES: Compare mortality rates and event rates for comorbidities in MS (n=15,684) and non-MS (n=78,420) cohorts from the US Department of Defense (DoD) database. METHODS: Comorbidities and all-cause mortality were assessed using the database. Causes of death (CoDs) were assessed through linkage with the National Death Index. Cohorts were compared using mortality (MRR) and event (ERR) rate ratios. RESULTS: All-cause mortality was 2.9-fold higher in the MS versus non-MS cohort (MRR, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.9, 2.7-3.2). Frequent CoDs in the MS versus non-MS cohort were infectious diseases (6.2, 4.2-9.4), diseases of the nervous (5.8, 3.7-9.0), respiratory (5.0, 3.9-6.4) and circulatory (2.1, 1.7-2.7) systems and suicide (2.6, 1.3-5.2). Comorbidities including sepsis (ERR, 95% CI: 5.7, 5.1-6.3), ischemic stroke (3.8, 3.5-4.2), attempted suicide (2.4, 1.3-4.5) and ulcerative colitis (2.0, 1.7-2.3), were higher in the MS versus non-MS cohort. The rate of cancers was also higher in the MS versus the non-MS cohort, including lymphoproliferative disorders (2.2, 1.9-2.6) and melanoma (1.7, 1.4-2.0). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of mortality and several comorbidities are higher in the MS versus non-MS cohort. Early recognition and management of comorbidities may reduce premature mortality and improve quality of life in patients with MS.

Incidence of new-onset hypertension in cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study.

This retrospective cohort study was conducted to estimate incidence rates of new-onset hypertension in adult cancer patients identified from the Varian Medical Oncology outpatient database. Incidence rates of increasing levels of hypertension severity were calculated overall and for periods of chemotherapy exposure and nonexposure. Cox models sought predictors of new-onset hypertension severity among baseline and chemotherapy exposure variables. New-onset hypertension was observed in about one-third of 25,090 patients with various cancer types. The incidence rates (IR) of severe and crisis-level hypertension, respectively, were the highest in patients with gastric (18.5 cases per 100 person-years (PY), 5.6 per 100 PY) and ovarian cancer (20.2 per 100 PY, 4.8 per 100 PY). The highest IR of moderate hypertension was observed in patients with renal cancer (46.7 per 100 PY). Across all cancers, chemotherapy exposure was associated with a 2-3.5-fold increase in risk of any degree of hypertension compared to periods of no chemotherapy; higher hypertension levels showed greater variability in relative risks by type and line of therapy but indicated an overall increase associated with chemotherapy exposure. These results help to elucidate the factors influencing HTN among cancer patients and the incidence of HTN relative to chemotherapy exposure.