Associations between lipoprotein(a), oxidized phospholipids, and extra-coronary vascular disease.

The roles of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and related oxidized phospholipids (OxPL) in the development and progression of coronary disease is known, but their influence on extra-coronary vascular disease is not well-established. We sought to evaluate associations between Lp(a), OxPL apolipoprotein B (OxPL-apoB), and apolipoprotein(a) (OxPL-apo(a)) with angiographic extra-coronary vascular disease and incident major adverse limb events (MALE). 446 participants who underwent coronary and/or peripheral angiography were followed up for a median of 3.7 years. Lp(a) and OxPLs were measured before angiography. Elevated Lp(a) was defined as ≥150 nmol/L. Elevated OxPL-apoB and OxPL-apo(a) were defined as greater than or equal to the 75th percentile (OxPL-apoB ≥8.2 nmol/L and OxPL-apo(a) ≥35.8 nmol/L, respectively). Elevated Lp(a) had a stronger association with the presence of extra-coronary vascular disease compared to OxPLs and was minimally improved with the addition of OxPLs in multivariable models. Compared to participants with normal Lp(a) and OxPL concentrations, participants with elevated Lp(a) levels were twice as likely to experience a MALE (OR 2.14 95% CI: 1.03, 4.44) and the strength of the association as well as the C statistic of 0.82 was largely unchanged with the addition of OxPL-apoB and OxPL-apo(a). Elevated Lp(a) and OxPLs are risk factors for progression and complications of extra-coronary vascular disease. However, the addition of OxPLs to Lp(a) does not provide additional information about risk of extra-coronary vascular disease. Therefore, Lp(a) alone captures the risk profile of Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) in the development and progression of atherosclerotic plaque in peripheral arteries. These results lay a foundation in support of studying Lp(a) lowering medications and their effect on limb-related complications.

Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with hypercholesterolemia: a retrospective analysis of a large US real-world database cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines developed by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recommend lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. This study described LLT utilization patterns and LDL-C goal achievement (to <70 mg/dL) among patients with ASCVD in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (CDM). Patients with their first ASCVD diagnosis (index date) in the CDM database between July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, were followed for ≥12 months to assess LLT utilization patterns and change in LDL-C. LLTs included were statins and non-statin LLTs (ezetimibe, fibrates, and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors). Adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC), defined as the number of days with drug on-hand (or number of days exposed to drug) divided by the 12-month follow-up period. Patients with PDC ≥0.8 were considered adherent. RESULTS: Among the patients with ASCVD (N = 1,424,893) included in this study, only 621,978 (43.7%) had at least one LDL-C measurement at baseline (6 months prior to and 3 months after the index date). The mean age was 71.5 years, and almost half of the patients were female. Patients were followed for a mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of 30.6 (11.4) months (median of 29.9 months). During the follow-up, about one-quarter of the patients did not receive any LLT. Among treated patients, 89.5% received statins and 10.5% received non-statin LLT. Less than half (47.6%) of the patients were adherent to the index treatment during the 12-month follow-up. Even in patients receiving combination therapy (statin + non-statin LLT), a sizable proportion (35.8%) showed an increase in LDL-C over the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study highlighted limited LDL-C monitoring in patients with ASCVD, and unmet need in terms of suboptimal utilization of non-stain LLTs, limited adherence to LLTs, and inadequate lipid control after treatment (among those with LDL-C measurements during the follow-up period) need to be addressed to improve outcomes in this patient cohort.

International societies of cardiologists recommend use of medications to lower the "bad" cholesterol, and its risk of cardiovascular diseases like stroke. We aimed to describe how those medications are being used and to what extent patients with cardiovascular diseases in the United States have their "bad" cholesterol under control. Results of this study indicate that cholesterol check-up among the patients was limited. Among recommended medications, statins were mostly used, whereas use of other recently approved medications was minimal. One-quarter of patients were not prescribed medications to control their cholesterol. Moreover, patients were not taking the medications as frequently as prescribed.

Model parameters influencing the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure: evidence from a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize cost-effectiveness (CE) evidence of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The impact of different modeling approaches and parameters on the CE results is also described. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review using multiple databases: Embase®; MEDLINE®; MEDLINE®-In Process; NIHR CRD database including DARE, NHS EED, and HTA databases; and the Cost Effectiveness Analysis registry. We also reviewed HTA countries' websites to identify CE reports of sacubitril/valsartan, published up to 25-July-2021. Articles published in English as full-texts, conference-abstracts, or HTA reports were included. RESULTS: We included 44 CE models [39 from 37 publications (22 full-texts; 15 conference-abstracts) and 5 HTAs; Europe, n = 20; North and South Americas, n = 14; Asia and Australia, n = 10]. Most models adopted a Markov structure with constant transition probabilities of events (n = 27) or a mix of Markov and regression-based models (n = 16), with variations in structural assumptions and chosen parameters. Study authors concluded sacubitril/valsartan to be a cost-effective therapy in 37/41 models in chronic HFrEF patients and 2/3 models in hospitalized patients stabilized after an acute decompensation for HF. CE models showing sacubitril/valsartan not to be a cost-effective treatment generally modeled a shorter time horizon. Effect of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, cost, duration of effect and time horizon was the main model drivers. CONCLUSIONS: Most evidence indicated sacubitril/valsartan is cost-effective in HFrEF. The use of a lifetime horizon is recommended in future models as HF is a chronic disease. Data on the CE of sacubitril/valsartan in the inpatient setting were limited and further research is warranted.

Characteristics and lipid lowering treatment patterns in patients tested for lipoprotein(a): A real-world US study.

Objective: Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and has no approved pharmacotherapies. Limited real-world data exists on the proportion of patients with available Lp(a) test results, characteristics of these patients, and their use of lipid lowering therapies (LLTs) for secondary prevention (SP) and primary prevention (PP) of ASCVD. Methods: Patients with measured Lp(a) receiving LLTs for SP or PP of ASCVD were identified in the Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart database. Lp(a) distribution and LLT utilization including persistence and adherence were assessed. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between Lp(a) levels and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels after index LLT, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Results: Overall, 2154 SP and 7179 PP patients met eligibility criteria. Of patients with available laboratory data, only 0.7% (SP) and 0.6% (PP) had Lp(a) test results. In the SP cohort, Lp(a) levels ≥125 nmol/L and ≥175 nmol/L were 26.4% and 17.6%, respectively, and the mean (SD) Lp(a) levels (overall SP cohort 90.4 [97.9] nmol/L) were highest in Black patients (123.4 [117.4]; p<0.001). Statin monotherapy was the most frequently prescribed LLT in SP patients overall (89.4%). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) persistence of LLTs was 227 (91, 649) days and 33.6% achieved ≥80% proportion of days covered (PDC). Patients with Lp(a) ≥175 nmol/L had 2.1 times greater odds of having elevated LDL-C (≥70 mg/dL) post-LLT than those with Lp(a) <175 nmol/L (p = 0.031). Similar findings were observed in the PP population. Conclusions: Lp(a) screening was rare. Elevated Lp(a) was observed in more than one-quarter of patients receiving LLTs, with the highest mean Lp(a) levels observed in Black patients. Low adherence to LLTs was prevalent and at least half of patients failed to achieve their respective LDL-C target thresholds despite treatment. Finally, high Lp(a) levels were associated with worse LDL-C control.

Lipoprotein(a), Oxidized Phospholipids, and Coronary Artery Disease Severity and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) and oxidized phospholipids (OxPLs) are each independent risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The extent to which Lp(a) and OxPLs predict coronary artery disease (CAD) severity and outcomes in a contemporary, statin-treated cohort is not well established. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the relationships between Lp(a) particle concentration and OxPLs associated with apolipoprotein B (OxPL-apoB) or apolipoprotein(a) (OxPL-apo[a]) with angiographic CAD and cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: Among 1,098 participants referred for coronary angiography in the CASABLANCA (Catheter Sampled Blood Archive in Cardiovascular Diseases) study, Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) were measured. Logistic regression estimated the risk of multivessel coronary stenoses by Lp(a)-related biomarker level. Cox proportional hazards regression estimated the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (coronary revascularization, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular death) in follow-up. RESULTS: Median Lp(a) was 26.45 nmol/L (IQR: 11.39-89.49 nmol/L). Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) were highly correlated (Spearman R ≥0.91 for all pairwise combinations). Lp(a) and OxPL-apoB were associated with multivessel CAD. Odds of multivessel CAD per doubling of Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) were 1.10 (95% CI: 1.03-1.18; P = 0.006), 1.18 (95% CI: 1.03-1.34; P = 0.01), and 1.07 (95% CI: 0.99-1.16; P = 0.07), respectively. All biomarkers were associated with cardiovascular events. HRs for MACE per doubling of Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) were 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03-1.14; P = 0.001), 1.15 (95% CI: 1.05-1.26; P = 0.004), and 1.07 (95% CI: 1.01-1.14; P = 0.02), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing coronary angiography, Lp(a) and OxPL-apoB are associated with multivessel CAD. Lp(a), OxPL-apoB, and OxPL-apo(a) are associated with incident cardiovascular events. (Catheter Sampled Blood Archive in Cardiovascular Diseases [CASABLANCA]; NCT00842868).

Health and Economic Evaluation of Sacubitril-Valsartan for Heart Failure Management.

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration expanded labeling of sacubitril-valsartan from the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) to all patients with HF, noting the greatest benefits in those with below-normal EF. However, the upper bound of below normal is not clearly defined, and value determinations across a broader EF range are unknown. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril-valsartan vs renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASis) across various upper-level cutoffs of EF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation included participant-level data from the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) and the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNi with ARB Global Outcomes in HF With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trials. PARADIGM-HF was conducted between 2009 and 2014, PARAGON-HF was conducted between 2014 and 2019, and this analysis was conducted between 2021 and 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: A 5-state Markov model used risk reductions for all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization from PARADIGM-HF and PARAGON-HF. Quality-of-life differences were estimated from EuroQol-5D scores. Hospitalization and medication costs were obtained from published national sources; the wholesale acquisition cost of sacubitril-valsartan was $7092 per year. Risk estimates and treatment effects were generated in consecutive 5% EF increments up to 60% and applied to an EF distribution of US patients with HF from the Get With the Guidelines-Heart Failure registry. The base case included a lifetime horizon from a health care sector perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated at EFs of 60% or less (base case) and at various upper-level EF cutoffs. Results: Among 13 264 total patients whose data were analyzed, for those with EFs of 60% or less, sacubitril-valsartan was projected to add 0.53 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an incremental lifetime cost of $40 892 compared with RASi, yielding an ICER of $76 852 per QALY. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 95% of the values of the ICER occurred between $71 516 and $82 970 per QALY. Among patients with chronic HF and an EF of 60% or less, treatment with sacubitril-valsartan vs RASis would be at least of economic intermediate value (ICER <$180 000 per QALY) at a sacubitril-valsartan cost of $10 242 or less per year, of high economic value (ICER <$60 000 per QALY) at a cost of $3673 or less per year, and cost-saving at a cost of $338 or less per year. The ICERs were $67 331 per QALY, $59 614 per QALY, and $56 786 per QALY at EFs of 55% or less, 50% or less, and 45% or less, respectively. Treatment with sacubitril-valsartan in only those with EFs of 45% or greater (up to ≤60%) yielded an ICER of $127 172 per QALY gained; treatment was more cost-effective in those at the lower end of this range (ICER of $100 388 per QALY gained for those with EFs of 45%-55%; ICER of $84 291 per QALY gained for those with EFs of 45%-50%). Conclusions and Relevance: Cost-effectiveness modeling provided an ICER for treatment with sacubitril-valsartan vs RASis consistent with high economic value for patients with reduced and mildly reduced EFs (≤50%) and at least intermediate value at the current undiscounted wholesale acquisition cost price at an EF of 60% or less. Treatment was more cost-effective at lower EF ranges. These findings may have implications for coverage decisions and value assessments in contemporary clinical practice guidelines.

Developing Clinical Risk Prediction Models for Worsening Heart Failure Events and Death by Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.

Background There is a need to develop electronic health record-based predictive models for worsening heart failure (WHF) events across clinical settings and across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods and Results We studied adults with heart failure (HF) from 2011 to 2019 within an integrated health care delivery system. WHF encounters were ascertained using natural language processing and structured data. We conducted boosted decision tree ensemble models to predict 1-year hospitalizations, emergency department visits/observation stays, and outpatient encounters for WHF and all-cause death within each LVEF category: HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (LVEF <40%), HF with mildly reduced EF (LVEF 40%-49%), and HF with preserved EF (LVEF ≥50%). Model discrimination was evaluated using area under the curve and calibration using mean squared error. We identified 338 426 adults with HF: 61 045 (18.0%) had HF with reduced EF, 49 618 (14.7%) had HF with mildly reduced EF, and 227 763 (67.3%) had HF with preserved EF. The 1-year risks of any WHF event and death were, respectively, 22.3% and 13.0% for HF with reduced EF, 17.0% and 10.1% for HF with mildly reduced EF, and 16.3% and 10.3% for HF with preserved EF. The WHF model displayed an area under the curve of 0.76 and mean squared error of 0.13, whereas the model for death displayed an area under the curve of 0.83 and mean squared error of 0.076. Performance and predictors were similar across WHF encounter types and LVEF categories. Conclusions We developed risk prediction models for 1-year WHF events and death across the LVEF spectrum using structured and unstructured electronic health record data and observed no substantial differences in model performance or predictors except for death, despite differences in underlying HF cause.

Cost Effectiveness of Inclisiran in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Patients with Elevated Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Despite Statin Use: A Threshold Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inclisiran is a novel, cholesterol-lowering therapy, with a long duration of effect, administered every 6 months (subcutaneously by a healthcare professional). In the ORION-10 trial in US patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in addition to maximum tolerated statins, with or without ezetimibe, inclisiran demonstrated statistically significant reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of up to 51%. This is the first peer-reviewed publication to investigate the price at which inclisiran is cost effective in the US. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the maximum price at which inclisiran is cost effective in addition to standard of care, in US patients with ASCVD, versus standard of care alone, at different willingness-to-pay thresholds. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A lifetime Markov model from the US health system perspective, including 15 health states, was used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of inclisiran. The following states were separated by time from a previous cardiovascular event (0-1 years, 1-2 years, 2+ years ['stable']): initial, unstable angina, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Additional states included revascularization and death (cardiovascular or non-cardiovascular causes). Baseline risk of cardivoascular events were from US database sources or published literature. Reductions in LDL-C from inclisiran were from the ORION-10 trial. LDL-C reduction was used to adjust baseline risk of cardiovascular events, based on established relationships between 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C and decreases in cardiovascular events, from the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists studies. The population included adults with a history of ASCVD, and LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL, despite maximum tolerated doses of statin therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Inclisiran as an adjunct to standard of care, compared with standard of care alone. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The threshold price of inclisiran. RESULTS: Inclisiran as an adjunct to standard of care resulted in threshold annual inclisiran prices of $6383, $9973, and $13,563 at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000, $100,000, and $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY, inclisiran had a 100% probability of being cost effective, with an annual price below $9000. At the publicly available price of $3250 per dose, inclisiran was found to have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio just above the $50,000 per QALY threshold, of $51,686. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study identified the price at which inclisiran is cost effective for the US health system, at generally accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Analysis of Worsening Heart Failure Events in an Integrated Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest to disentangle worsening heart failure (WHF) from location of care and move away from hospitalization as a surrogate for acuity. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence of WHF events across the care continuum from ambulatory encounters to hospitalizations. METHODS: We studied calendar year cohorts of adults with diagnosed heart failure (HF) from 2010-2019 within a large, integrated health care delivery system. Electronic health record (EHR) data were accessed for outpatient encounters, emergency department (ED) visits/observation stays, and hospitalizations. WHF was defined as ≥1 symptom, ≥2 objective findings including ≥1 sign, and ≥1 change in HF-related therapy. Symptoms and signs were ascertained using natural language processing. RESULTS: We identified 103,138 eligible individuals with mean age 73.6 ± 13.7 years, 47.5% women, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 51.4% ± 13.7%. There were 1,136,750 unique encounters including 743,039 (65.4%) outpatient encounters, 224,670 (19.8%) ED visits/observation stays, and 169,041 (14.9%) hospitalizations. A total of 126,008 WHF episodes were identified, including 34,758 (27.6%) outpatient encounters, 28,301 (22.5%) ED visits/observation stays, and 62,949 (50.0%) hospitalizations. The annual incidence (events per 100 person-years) of WHF increased from 25 to 33 during the study period primarily caused by outpatient encounters (7 to 10) and ED visits/observation stays (4 to 7). The 30-day rate of hospitalizations for WHF ranged from 8.2% for outpatient encounters to 12.4% for hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: ED visits/observation stays and outpatient encounters account for approximately one-half of WHF events, are driving the underlying growth in HF morbidity, and portend a poor short-term prognosis.

A Natural Language Processing-Based Approach for Identifying Hospitalizations for Worsening Heart Failure Within an Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

Importance: The current understanding of epidemiological mechanisms and temporal trends in hospitalizations for worsening heart failure (WHF) is based on claims and national reporting databases. However, these data sources are inherently limited by the accuracy and completeness of diagnostic coding and/or voluntary reporting. Objective: To assess the overall burden of and temporal trends in the rate of hospitalizations for WHF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study, performed from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, used electronic health record (EHR) data from a large integrated health care delivery system. Exposures: Calendar year trends. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalizations for WHF (ie, excluding observation stays) were defined as 1 symptom or more, 2 objective findings or more including 1 sign or more, and 2 doses or more of intravenous loop diuretics and/or new hemodialysis or continuous kidney replacement therapy. Symptoms and signs were identified using natural language processing (NLP) algorithms applied to EHR data. Results: The study population was composed of 118 002 eligible patients experiencing 287 992 unique hospitalizations (mean [SD] age, 75.6 [13.1] years; 147 203 [51.1%] male; 1655 [0.6%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 28 451 [9.9%] Asian or Pacific Islander, 34 903 [12.1%] Black, 23 452 [8.1%] multiracial, 175 840 [61.1%] White, and 23 691 [8.2%] unknown), including 65 357 with a principal discharge diagnosis and 222 635 with a secondary discharge diagnosis of HF. The study population included 59 868 patients (20.8%) with HF with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (<40%), 33 361 (11.6%) with HF with a midrange EF (HFmrEF) (40%-49%), 142 347 (49.4%) with HF with a preserved EF (HFpEF) (≥50%), and 52 416 (18.2%) with unknown EF. A total of 58 042 admissions (88.8%) with a primary discharge diagnosis of HF and 62 764 admissions (28.2%) with a secondary discharge diagnosis of HF met the prespecified diagnostic criteria for WHF. Overall, hospitalizations for WHF identified on NLP-based algorithms increased from 5.2 to 7.6 per 100 hospitalizations per year during the study period. Subgroup analyses found an increase in hospitalizations for WHF based on NLP from 1.5 to 1.9 per 100 hospitalizations for HFrEF, from 0.6 to 1.0 per 100 hospitalizations for HFmrEF, and from 2.6 to 3.9 per 100 hospitalizations for HFpEF. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that the burden of hospitalizations for WHF may be more than double that previously estimated using only principal discharge diagnosis. There has been a gradual increase in the rate of hospitalizations for WHF with a more noticeable increase observed for HFpEF.

Mapping the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) Onto EQ-5D-3L in Heart Failure Patients: Results for the Japanese and UK Value Sets.

Background. Health technology assessment bodies in several countries, including Japan and the United Kingdom, recommend mapping techniques to obtain utility scores in clinical trials that do not have a preference-based measure of health. This study sought to develop mapping algorithms to predict EQ-5D-3L scores from the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) in patients with heart failure (HF). Methods. Data from the randomized, double-blind PARADIGM-HF trial were analyzed, and EQ-5D-3L scores were calculated using the Japanese and UK value sets. Several different model specifications were explored to best fit EQ-5D data collected at baseline with KCCQ scores, including ordinary least square regression, two-part, Tobit, and three-part models. Generalized estimating equations models were also fitted to analyze longitudinal EQ-5D data. To validate model predictions, the data set was split into a derivation (n = 4,465) from which the models were developed and a separate sample (n = 1,892) for validation. Results. There were only small differences between the different model classes tested. Model performance and predictive power was better for the item-level models than for the models including KCCQ domain scores. R 2 statistics for the item-level models ranged from 0.45 to 0.52. Mean absolute error in the validation sample was 0.10 for the models using the Japanese value set and 0.114 for the UK models. All models showed some underprediction of utility above 0.75 and overprediction of utility below 0.5, but performed well for population-level estimates. Conclusions. Using data from a large clinical trial in HF, we found that EQ-5D-3L scores can be estimated from responses to the KCCQ and can facilitate cost-utility analysis from existing HF trials where only the KCCQ was administered. Future validation in other HF populations is warranted.

Low persistence with oral biphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporotic fractures are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is recognized that persistence with medication is crucial to reach optimal clinical outcomes. We aimed to estimate the persistence level to weekly and monthly oral bisphosphonates (OBP) in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) over 24 months from therapy initiation in a population-based setting. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study of PMO women ≥50 years initiating OBP recruited through community pharmacies. Data were collected at baseline during face-to-face interviews. Follow-up included pharmacy records (refill dates and medication possession; cohort 1) and telephone-surveys for patients who agreed to be interviewed (cohort 2). Patients were classified as persistent if they refilled their prescription within 30 days after exhausting the time covered by their previous supply. Log-rank tests were used to compare Kaplan-Meier curves of time to non-persistence. RESULTS: Of 427 women recruited with a mean age of 65.0 years, 380 (89%) agreed to be interviewed (cohort 2). Over 24-months of follow-up, 3.4% (95% CI: [2.0%; 5.6%]) of all subjects were persistent to OBP based on pharmacy records. Analysis combining both self-reported information and pharmacy records (cohort 2) showed a persistence estimate of 20.0% (95% CI: [16.1%; 24.2%]). Lower persistence was associated with more frequent OBP dosing and living alone. The most common reason for treatment discontinuation was self-reported adverse events (27.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate a low level of persistence with OBP. Barriers and reasons leading to discontinuation of anti-PMO therapies should be proactively addressed to promote persistence and improve fracture protection.

Cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus zoledronic acid for preventing skeletal-related events in the Czech Republic.

AIMS: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of the subcutaneous RANKL inhibitor, denosumab, vs the intravenous bisphosphonate, zoledronic acid, for the prevention of skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with prostate cancer, breast cancer, and other solid tumors (OST) in the Czech Republic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A lifetime Markov model was developed to compare the effects of denosumab and zoledronic acid on costs (including drug costs and administration, patient management, SREs, and adverse events), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from a national payer perspective. Different discount rates, time horizons, SRE rates, distributions, and nature (asymptomatic vs all SREs), and the inclusion of treatment discontinuation were considered in scenario analyses. The robustness of the model was tested using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Across tumor types, denosumab was associated with fewer SREs, improved QALYs, and higher total costs over a lifetime. The incremental cost per QALY gained for denosumab vs zoledronic acid was 382,673 CZK for prostate cancer, 408,450 CZK for breast cancer, and 608,133 CZK for OST. Incremental costs per SRE avoided for the same tumor type were 54,007 CZK, 51,765 CZK, and 94,426 CZK, respectively. In scenario analyses, the results remained similar to baseline, when different discount rates and time horizons were considered. At a non-official willingness-to-pay threshold of 1.2 million CZK, the probabilities of denosumab being cost-effective vs zoledronic acid were 0.64, 0.67, and 0.49 for prostate cancer, breast cancer, and OST, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The SRE rates used were obtained from clinical trials; studies suggest rates may be higher in clinical practice. Additional evidence on real-world SRE rates could further improve the accuracy of the modeling. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with zoledronic acid, denosumab provides a cost-effective treatment option for the prevention of SREs in patients with prostate cancer, breast cancer, and OST in the Czech Republic.