Healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with a newly confirmed diagnosis of lupus nephritis in the United States over a 5-year follow-up period.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and healthcare costs in patients with newly confirmed lupus nephritis (LN) in the United States over a 5-year follow-up period. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study (GSK Study 214102) utilized administrative claims data to identify individuals with a newly confirmed diagnosis of LN between August 01, 2011, and July 31, 2018, based on LN-specific International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes. Index was the date of first LN-related diagnosis code claim. HCRU, healthcare costs, and incidence of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares were reported annually among eligible patients with at least 5 years continuous enrollment post-index. RESULTS: Of 2,159 patients with a newly confirmed diagnosis of LN meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, 335 had at least 5 years continuous enrollment post-index. HCRU was greatest in the first year post-LN diagnosis across all categories (inpatient admission, emergency room [ER] visits, ambulatory visits, and pharmacy use), and trended lower, though remained substantial, in the 5-year follow-up period. Among patients with LN and HCRU, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) number of ER visits and inpatient admissions were 3.7 (4.6) and 1.8 (1.5), respectively, in Year 1, which generally remained stable in Years 2-5; the mean (SD) number of ambulatory visits and pharmacy fills were 35.8 (25.1) and 62.9 (43.8), respectively, in Year 1, and remained similar for Years 2-5. Most patients (≥ 91.6%) had ≥ 1 SLE flare in each of the 5 years of follow-up. The proportion of patients who experienced a severe SLE flare was higher in Year 1 (31.6%) than subsequent years (14.3-18.5%). Total costs (medical and pharmacy; mean [SD]) were higher in Year 1 ($44,205 [71,532]) than subsequent years ($29,444 [52,310]-$32,222 [58,216]), driven mainly by inpatient admissions (Year 1: $21,181 [58,886]; subsequent years: $7,406 [23,331]-$9,389 [29,283]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a newly confirmed diagnosis of LN have substantial HCRU and healthcare costs, particularly in the year post-diagnosis, largely driven by inpatient costs. This highlights the need for improved disease management to prevent renal damage, improve patient outcomes, and reduce costs among patients with renal involvement.

Real-world users of triple therapy for asthma in the US.

OBJECTIVES: For patients with asthma who remain symptomatic on a medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2 agonist, addition of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist as a supplementary controller is a recommended option. However, real-world data on the characteristics and treatment patterns of these patients are limited. This study described the demographics and clinical characteristics of new users of single- or multiple-inhaler triple therapy and treatment patterns preceding triple-therapy initiation. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study used medical and pharmacy claims data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database. METHODS: The study population comprised adults with asthma with or without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initiating triple therapy with single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI; 100/62.5/25 µg) or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) between September 18, 2017, and September 30, 2019. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns in the 12 months preceding triple-therapy initiation were described (baseline period). RESULTS: A total of 12,395 patients were included. Among FF/UMEC/VI initiators with asthma (n = 1301), the mean age was 49.0 years and 59.3% were women. During the baseline period, 81.5% of patients used controller therapy, 94.7% used rescue medications, and 42.0% reported at least 1 asthma-related exacerbation; the annual mean exacerbation rate was 0.96. Similar trends were observed among patients with asthma initiating MITT and patients with comorbid asthma-COPD initiating FF/UMEC/VI or MITT. CONCLUSION: In real-world practice, triple therapy is often utilized following other asthma controller medication use. High disease burden, as evidenced by substantial use of rescue medications and continued asthma-related exacerbations, suggests that patients may not have achieved adequate asthma control prior to triple-therapy initiation.

Health Care Costs With Sustained Oral Corticosteroid Use in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to compare health care costs, health care resource utilization, and adverse events associated with sustained oral corticosteroid (OCS) use versus no OCS use in systemic lupus erythematosus. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used claims data (January 1, 2006-July 31, 2019) from patients with systemic lupus erythematosus aged ≥5 years with ≥24 months of continuous enrollment. Health care costs, health care resource utilization, and OCS-related adverse events were assessed. The sustained OCS cohort (defined as ≥12 months of continuous OCS use) was divided into exposure categories based on the number of 6-month classification periods with >5 mg/d OCS (0, 1-2, or 3-4). FINDINGS: Of the 6234 patients in the sustained OCS use cohort, there were 1587 (25.5%) patients with 0 periods of >5 mg/d OCS use, 2087 (33.5%) patients with 1 to 2 periods of >5 mg/d OCS use, and 2560 (41.1%) patients with 3 to 4 periods of >5 mg/d OCS use; the no OCS use cohort included 7828 patients. Adjusted health care cost differences (95% CIs) were significantly greater for patients with 0, 1 to 2, and 3 to 4 periods of OCS use >5 mg/d versus the no OCS use cohort ($7774 [5426-10,223], $21,738 [18,898-25,321], and $30,119 [26,492-33,774], respectively). A higher proportion of patients in all OCS exposure categories required health care resource utilization (≥99.7% vs 93.4%) and experienced OCS-related adverse events (94.3%-96.8% vs 82.6%) versus the no OCS use cohort, with more periods of OCS use >5 mg/d associated with increased health care resource utilization and adverse events. IMPLICATIONS: Sustained OCS use in systemic lupus erythematosus was associated with high economic burden, health care resource utilization, and OCS-related adverse events. These data highlight the need for health care providers to carefully consider OCS use in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Associated Costs in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Diagnosed With Lupus Nephritis.

BACKGROUND: Lupus nephritis (LN) is among the most severe organ manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), affecting between 31% and 48% of patients, usually within five years of SLE diagnosis. SLE without LN is associated with a high economic burden on the healthcare system, and although data are limited, several studies have shown that SLE with LN could increase this burden.  Aim: We aimed to compare the economic burden of LN versus SLE without LN among patients managed in routine clinical practices in the USA and describe the clinical course of these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage health insurance. It included 2310 patients with LN and 2310 matched patients who had SLE without LN; each patient was followed for 12 months after diagnosis (the patient's index date). Outcome measures included healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), direct healthcare costs, and SLE clinical manifestations.  Results: In all healthcare settings, the mean (SD) use of all-cause healthcare resources was significantly higher in the LN versus SLE without LN cohort, including the mean number of ambulatory visits (53.9 (55.1) vs 33.0 (26.0)), emergency room visits (2.9 (7.9) vs 1.6 (3.3)), inpatient stays (0.9 (1.5) vs 0.3 (0.8)), and pharmacy fills (65.0 (48.3) vs 51.2 (42.6)) (all p<0.001). Total all-cause costs per patient in the LN cohort were also significantly higher compared with the SLE without LN cohort ($50,975 (86,281) vs $26,262 (52,720), p<0.001), including costs for inpatient stays and outpatient visits. Clinically, a significantly higher proportion of patients with LN experienced moderate or severe SLE flares compared with the SLE without LN cohort (p<0.001), which may explain the difference in HCRU and healthcare costs. CONCLUSION: All-cause HCRU and costs were higher for patients with LN than for matched patients with SLE without LN, highlighting the economic burden associated with LN.

The cost of flares among patients with systemic lupus erythematosus with and without lupus nephritis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Assess healthcare costs associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares among patients with and without lupus nephritis (LN). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used medical and pharmacy claims data from the United States-based Optum Clinformatics database to identify adults with SLE between 1 January 2016, and 31 December 2018. Index was the date of a patient's earliest SLE diagnosis claim during the identification period. Patients were categorized based on ICD-9/-10 diagnosis codes into one of two cohorts: SLE with LN (LN) and SLE without LN (non-LN). Baseline characteristics were assessed in the 12 months preceding index (baseline period). The presence, severity, and healthcare costs (in 2019 US dollars) of flares were determined in the 12 months following index (follow-up period). RESULTS: Overall, 11,663 patients with SLE were included (LN, n = 2916; non-LN, n = 8747). During the baseline period, a greater proportion of patients in the LN cohort versus non-LN cohort had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥4 (72.5% vs 13.7%) and inpatient stays (41.0% vs 17.0%). A total of 12,190 flares were identified during the follow-up period (LN, 3494; non-LN, 8696). A greater proportion of flares experienced by patients with LN versus those without LN were moderate (61.2% vs 53.6%) and severe (10.6% vs 5.4%). The mean (standard deviation [SD]) number of moderate and severe flares per patient was greater among the LN cohort than the non-LN cohort (moderate: LN, 1.8 [1.2] and non-LN, 1.4 [1.2]; severe: LN, 0.2 [0.6] and non-LN, 0.1 [0.3]). The mean (SD) total healthcare costs associated with SLE flares of any severity were greater for patients with LN (LN, $5842 [9604]; non-LN, $2600 [4249]). The mean (SD) cost per flare increased with severity (mild: LN, $2753 [4640] and non-LN, $1606 [2710]; moderate: LN, $4561 [7156] and non-LN, $2587 [3720]; severe: LN, $29,148 [27,273] and non-LN, $14,829 [19,533]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SLE with LN have greater healthcare costs than those without LN. Flares among patients with LN were more frequent, severe, and costly than among patients without LN. This highlights the need for treatments that prevent or reduce flares among patients with SLE, both with and without LN.

A 5-Year Retrospective, Observational Study Assessing Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Outcome Measures to Characterize Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Burden in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the use of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease measures in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in a US community-based rheumatology physician network over 5 years. METHODS: This retrospective, observational cohort study (GSK Study 213818) of patients with SLE utilized electronic medical records (01 January 2010-31 December 2019) from the United Rheumatology Normalized Integrated Community Evidence database. The index was the date of first SLE diagnosis recorded in the database; the observation period was 5 years post-index. RA disease measures evaluated were: Pain Index, Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MD-HAQ), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), Physician Global Assessment (PGA), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), Tender Joint Count (TJC), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS-28). The number of patients with measures utilized, the score on each measure, and proportion of patients per disease activity category were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 5990 patients with SLE were included. The most frequently used measures were Pain Index, SJC, TJC, MD-HAQ, PtGA, RAPID3, and PGA (cumulative use over Years 1-5: 23.9-71.3%). For all measures, frequency of use was lowest in Year 1, followed by a general increase from Year 1 to Year 5. Scores remained relatively stable for most measures, and the proportion of patients in remission or with low/moderate disease activity per RAPID3 increased. CONCLUSION: RA disease measure utilization in SLE was generally infrequent but increased over time. Pain Index and MD-HAQ were the most commonly applied cumulatively across 5 years of follow-up. The rationale for the increased use of these measures in SLE over time requires further exploration. In the absence of a clinically applicable SLE-specific measure, the use of RA measures, for example in conjunction with SLE measures, may provide an alternative approach for measuring disease activity, representing an opportunity to improve patient outcomes.

Impact of adherence to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß-agonists on asthma outcomes in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal adherence to maintenance medication has been associated with poor outcomes in asthma. This study examined single-inhaler inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) adherence and asthma-related outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective observational study of patients with asthma initiating ICS/LABA used data from IQVIA PharMetrics Plus (1 January 2014-31 March 2019). Patients included were ⩾18 years old and had ⩾12 months continuous eligibility before, and ⩾180 days follow-up after, the index date. Adherence was measured as proportion of days covered ([PDC] adherent ⩾ 0.8; non-adherent <0.8) each quarter, with outcomes measured each subsequent quarter. Endpoints were asthma-related overall and severe (inpatient/emergency department [ED] visit) exacerbations, rescue medication use, and asthma-related healthcare resource utilization and costs. Regression models evaluated associations between adherence and outcomes, controlling for repeated measures and differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 50,037 patients were included (mean age 45.3 years; mean follow-up 23.3 months). Adherent patients were less likely to experience asthma-related overall (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.942 [0.890, 0.998]; p = 0.041), or severe exacerbations (aOR [95% CI]: 0.778 [0.691, 0.877]; p < 0.001) per quarter versus non-adherent patients. Adherent patients had lower severe exacerbation rates (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] [95% CI]: 0.792 [0.702, 0.893]; p < 0.001) but similar overall exacerbation rates (aRR [95% CI]: 0.993 [0.945, 1.044]; p = 0.783) versus non-adherent patients. The odds of rescue medication use were lower per 20% PDC increase (aOR [95% CI] short-acting ß2 agonist: 0.991 [0.985, 0.996]; p = 0.001; oral corticosteroid: 0.988 [0.982, 0.995]; p < 0.001). Adherent patients were less likely to visit EDs per quarter (aOR [95% CI]: 0.775 [0.680, 0.883]; p < 0.001) and odds of hospitalization were lower per 20% PDC increase (aOR [95% CI]: 0.930 [0.881, 0.982]; p = 0.009). Across most measures, adherent patients incurred lower costs. CONCLUSION: This real-world study highlights the short-term clinical and economic benefits of ICS/LABA adherence in asthma, particularly in reducing severe exacerbations.

Adherence and Persistence to Single-Inhaler Versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Asthma Management.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines recommend triple therapy for patients with asthma who remain uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist therapy. Previously, triple therapy was only available via multiple inhalers. Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) is approved as maintenance treatment for asthma; however, real-world information on adherence and persistence is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare adherence and persistence among adult patients with asthma receiving single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used IQVIA PharMetrics Plus data to evaluate patients with asthma who initiated once-daily FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 mcg or MITT between September 18, 2017, and September 30, 2019. Inverse probability weighting and multivariable regression adjusted for differences in characteristics between the FF/UMEC/VI and MITT cohorts. Adherence was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC) and proportion of patients achieving PDC ≥0.8 and PDC ≥0.5. Non-persistence was identified as a >45-day gap between fills. RESULTS: The study included 1396 FF/UMEC/VI and 5115 MITT initiators. Three months after initiation, FF/UMEC/VI users had significantly higher mean PDC versus MITT users (0.68 vs 0.59; P < .001) and 31% more likely to be adherent (PDC ≥0.8; 40.6% vs 31.3%; adjusted risk ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.31 [1.13-1.54]; P < .001). Similar patterns were observed at 6 and 12 months post initiation. In addition, FF/UMEC/VI users were 49% more likely to persist at 12 months than MITT users (25.9% vs 15.1%, adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]: 1.49 [1.39-1.60]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with asthma initiating triple therapy with FF/UMEC/VI had significantly better adherence and persistence compared with MITT initiators.

Disease burden and treatment adherence among children and adolescent patients with asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To assess asthma burden and medication adherence in a US de-identified patient level claims database. METHODS: This retrospective observational study used the IQVIA PHARMETRICS PLUS database to identify patients aged 5-17 years, diagnosed with asthma between 01/01/2012-09/30/2017 (asthma cohort), and those initiating treatment with twice-daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or twice-daily ICS/long-acting beta2 agonists (LABA) (treatment cohorts; index date = first dispensing). Patient characteristics, asthma medication, and healthcare resource utilization were assessed over a 12-month baseline period. Treatment cohort endpoints were assessed in a 12-month follow-up period, including: adherence using proportion of days covered (PDC); persistence (no gap >45 days between dispensings). RESULTS: The asthma cohort included 186,868 patients (112,689 children, mean age 7.9 years; 74,179 adolescents, mean age 14.3 years). During baseline, 34.5% used ICS or ICS/LABA, 24% used oral corticosteroids, 11.1% had ≥1 asthma-related emergency department visit, 2.2% had ≥1 asthma-related hospitalization. Among treatment cohorts, 47,276 and 10,247 patients initiated twice-daily ICS and ICS/LABA, respectively (mean ages: 9.9; 12.5 years). Mean PDC adherence to twice-daily ICS and ICS/LABA was 30% and 34% at 6 months (PDC ≥0.8: 4.3%; 6.1%); 21% and 24% at 12 months (PDC ≥0.8: 1.8%; 2.8%). Persistence with twice-daily ICS and ICS/LABA was 10.1% and 14.2% at 6 months; 5.6% and 8.0% at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: A large disease burden and unmet need exist among US children/adolescent asthma patients, evidenced by low use of, and poor adherence to, ICS-containing medication, the notable proportion of oral corticosteroid users, and higher-than-expected asthma-related emergency department and hospitalization rates.

Symptom control in patients with asthma using inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists (fluticasone furoate/vilanterol or budesonide/formoterol) in the US: a retrospective matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI), an inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist therapy, reduces the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and improves lung function and symptom control in patients with asthma. However, real-world data remain limited among asthma patients in the United States (US). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study propensity score (PS) matched adult asthma patients initiating once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg with patients initiating twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (B/F) 160/4.5 mcg using a US claims database (January 1, 2015-December 31, 2018). Asthma control was measured by the mean number of short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) canisters dispensed per patient-year (PPY) during follow-up. Time to first, and rates of, overall and severe asthma exacerbations were also measured. RESULTS: After PS matching, 18,531 patients receiving FF/VI were matched to 18,531 patients receiving B/F. Mean SABA canisters dispensed PPY was significantly lower for FF/VI users compared with B/F users (FF/VI: 1.47, B/F: 1.64; p < 0.001). FF/VI use resulted in 13% significantly lower risk of having an overall asthma-related exacerbation and 22% lower risk of a severe exacerbation versus B/F use (overall exacerbation hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.87 [0.82-0.92], p < 0.001; severe exacerbation HR [95% CI]: 0.78 [0.63-0.97], p = 0.027). Asthma-related exacerbation rates per 100 patient-days were also significantly lower for the FF/VI group compared with the B/F group (overall: 0.0475 vs. 0.0558, p < 0.001; severe: 0.0026 vs. 0.0033, p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world practice, initiation of once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg in adults with asthma was associated with lower use of SABA and fewer asthma-related exacerbations, which may indicate better asthma control, when compared with use of twice-daily B/F 160/4.5 mcg.

Characteristics of Treated Asthmatics Experiencing Exacerbations in a US Database: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

RATIONALE: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) recommend a stepwise approach to asthma management, with the goals of maintaining asthma control and reducing exacerbations. Although asthma treatments reduce the frequency of exacerbations, they still occur. We aimed to characterize the treated United States of America (US) adult asthma population, including those experiencing exacerbations, in terms of socio-demographics, clinical characteristics, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort of asthma patients aged ≥18 years on 01 January 2014 with ≥1 ICD-9 asthma code (493.xx) enrolled in a US healthcare claims database during 2013-2014. Patients who had ≥2 asthma medication dispensings during 2013 (baseline), including ≥1 in the 90-day period before index date, were classified according to NHLBI step. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, or lung cancer diagnoses were excluded. Demographics, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, and HRU were described during baseline. Exacerbations and HRU were described during 2014 (follow-up period). RESULTS: In total, 72,156 patients were included; 10,590 (14.7%) had ≥1 exacerbation during follow-up. Approximately 44% of patients were classified as NHLBI Steps 1-2, 41% as Steps 3-4, and 11% as Steps 5-6. Exacerbation frequency increased with step (Steps 1, 2, and 3: 12-14%; Steps 4, 5, and 6: 16-26%). Compared with the overall population during baseline, patients with an exacerbation had similar demographics, but differences were observed for comorbid allergic rhinitis (46.4% vs 40.1%, respectively), blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/µL (45.5% vs 39.6%, respectively), and asthma-related healthcare encounters (62.9% vs 52.4%, respectively). Overall, asthma-related HRU during follow-up increased with NHLBI step. CONCLUSION: Exacerbations were observed among patients classified at each NHLBI step and were more frequent with increasing step. Exacerbations and asthma-related HRU highlight the continued unmet need in the treated US asthma population.

Real-world evidence: Patient views on asthma in respiratory specialist clinics in America.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30% to 50% of patients with moderate/severe asthma have inadequately controlled disease despite adherence to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) therapy. Data on prevalence and burden of uncontrolled asthma in specialty settings are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and burden of uncontrolled asthma in respiratory specialist clinics in the United States. METHODS: Adults with physician-diagnosed asthma attending pulmonary and allergy clinics with self-reported ICS use in the previous 4 weeks completed an electronic questionnaire including the Asthma Control Test and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Additional information was collected using an electronic case report form. RESULTS: Of 774 patients attending 12 pulmonary and 12 allergy clinics, 53% were not well controlled (mean [SD] Asthma Control Test, 14.3 [3.6] vs 22.4 [1.6] in well-controlled patients). Among ICS/LABA users, 56% were not well controlled, which increased with increasing ICS dose (low-dose 45.7%; high-dose 59.7%). The not well-controlled group reported more respiratory illnesses, more comorbidities, and poorer health-related quality of life (mean [SD] St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, 46.1 [18.9] vs 19.8 [12.9] in the well-controlled group). These patients also had more asthma exacerbations (≥1 exacerbation, 68.9% vs 43.1%) and increased health care resource utilization (≥1 asthma-related hospitalization, 10.7% vs 2.7%); 27.3% were also receiving systemic corticosteroids. Approximately 40% of the population were eligible for step-up to ICS/LABA/long-acting muscarinic antagonist triple therapy, and 20% were eligible for biologic therapy. CONCLUSION: Substantial unmet needs exist among patients with inadequately controlled asthma managed in United States specialist settings, which may be addressed by improved patient and physician education, better guideline implementation, and improved adherence.

Medication adherence in patients with asthma using once-daily versus twice-daily ICS/LABAs.

OBJECTIVE: This real-world observational study compared medication adherence and persistence among patients with asthma receiving the once-daily inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA) fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) versus the twice-daily ICS/LABAs budesonide/formoterol (B/F) and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/SAL). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study conducted using IQVIATM Health Plan Claims Data included patients with asthma ≥18 years of age initiating ICS/LABA therapy with FF/VI, B/F, or FP/SAL between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2016 (index date). Patients had ≥12 months and ≥3 months of continuous eligibility pre- and post-index date, respectively. Patients receiving FF/VI were separately matched 1:1 with patients receiving B/F or FP/SAL using propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable regression to balance baseline covariates between cohorts. The primary endpoint was medication adherence, measured by proportion of days covered (PDC). Secondary endpoints included proportion of patients achieving PDC ≥ 0.5 and PDC ≥ 0.8 and persistence with index medication, measured by time to discontinuation (>45-day gap in therapy). RESULTS: After PSM, 3,764 and 3,339 patients receiving FF/VI were matched with patients receiving B/F or FP/SAL, respectively. Mean PDC was significantly higher for FF/VI versus B/F (0.453 vs 0.345; adjusted p < 0.001) and FP/SAL (0.446 vs 0.341; adjusted p < 0.001). The proportion of patients achieving PDC ≥ 0.5 or PDC ≥ 0.8, and treatment persistence were significantly higher for FF/VI versus B/F and FP/SAL (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, patients initiating FF/VI had better adherence and lower risk of discontinuing treatment versus B/F or FP/SAL, suggesting that once-daily ICS/LABA treatment might improve adherence and persistence compared with twice-daily alternatives.

Adherence and usage patterns of inhaled corticosteroids-long-acting beta-agonists by using inhaler-monitoring technology.

Background: Results of previous research indicate that adherence to prescribed inhaled corticosteroid-long-acting beta2-agonist (ICS-LABA) asthma controller medications is suboptimal, yet actual daily-use patterns are unclear and may be influenced by regimen complexity or dosing frequency. Objective: To investigate real-world use of asthma medications by using inhaler sensors for the ICS-LABA controllers: twice-daily fluticasone propionate (FP) plus salmeterol (SAL) and once-daily fluticasone furoate (FF) plus vilanterol (VI); and albuterol rescue medication. Methods: This longitudinal, two-phase, observational study included adults with asthma-prescribed FP-SAL (phase I) or FF-VI (phase II), and albuterol metered-dose inhalers. The participants completed baseline and follow-up surveys, and used clip-on inhaler sensors to monitor real-time inhaler use over the 6-month study period. Pharmacy claims data for the 6-month follow-up period were used to assess refills of ICS-LABA and albuterol inhalers. Results: Patients who used twice-daily FP-SAL received a sufficient dose (≥2 actuations/day) approximately one third of the time, those on once-daily FF-VI received a sufficient dose (≥1 actuation/day) ∼60% of the time. Patients who used once-daily FF-VI were more likely to take their medication as prescribed versus those who used twice-daily FP-SAL. There were no significant differences in the percentage of albuterol-free days (FP-SAL, 68.06% [n = 241]; FF-VI, 72.67% [n = 127]; p = 0.230). Exploratory outcomes are reported in this article's Online Supplemental Material. Claims-based measures of adherence were higher than sensor-based measures, hence claims data may have overestimated adherence, whereas sensors may have more accurately measured patients' medication use. Conclusion: These data supported the use of inhaler sensors as tools to directly and accurately measure ICS-LABA adherence and rescue medication use, and the adherence benefits of once-daily versus twice-daily ICS-LABA regimens.

Observational vignette study to examine patient and healthcare provider perceived impact of asthma-related exacerbations in the US.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) perceive the impact of asthma-related exacerbations. This study examined the impact of asthma-related exacerbations on patients' lives from these different perspectives. METHODS: Web-based surveys were administered to a US sample of adult patients with asthma, and HCPs. Participants reviewed six vignettes describing two hypothetical patients with asthma (25-year-old/single/unemployed/no dependents; and 45-year-old/married/employed/two young children) experiencing mild, moderate, or severe exacerbations and rated the impact on eight measures: EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression), sleep, household costs, and medical costs. The proportions reporting impact for each measure were calculated for each vignette; and patient responses were compared with HCP responses. RESULTS: 302 patients with asthma and 300 HCPs completed the survey. As exacerbation severity increased, a higher proportion of patients and HCPs reported impact of exacerbations on patients with asthma. Compared with HCPs, a greater proportion of patients reported problems with pain/discomfort related to mild and moderate exacerbations. Compared with patients, HCPs were more likely to indicate sleep impact, mobility problems, and financial burden across all exacerbation severity levels; self-care problems with moderate and severe exacerbations; and problems with usual activities and anxiety/depression for severe exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the distinctions between how patients and HCPs perceive the impact of exacerbations is important for optimizing patient care. HCPs may be less aware of patient's concerns about exacerbation-related pain/discomfort. Studies are needed to further understand patient-HCP interactions regarding asthma-related exacerbations.

Characterizing Real-World Use Of Tiotropium In Asthma In The USA.

BACKGROUND: Tiotropium bromide (TIO) is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist recommended as an add-on therapy option for patients with uncontrolled asthma on inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting ß2-agonists (LABA). However, real-world data on TIO use in asthma remains limited. To identify unmet needs, this study explored the use of TIO in US patients with asthma. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used IQVIATM Health Plan Claims Data (October 1, 2014─December 31, 2016). Patients with asthma diagnoses initiating TIO 1.25 or 2.5 mcg after September 16, 2015 (first dispensing on index date) with ≥6 and ≥3 months continuous enrollment pre- and post-index, respectively, were identified. Patients with COPD diagnoses were excluded. Baseline characteristics, healthcare resource utilization and costs, and treatment patterns before and following TIO initiation were described for TIO cohorts and subgroups classified by concomitant medications received during the 30-day period after initiation. RESULTS: The study included 766 TIO 1.25 mcg and 1055 TIO 2.5 mcg users. In the TIO 1.25 mcg cohort, 16% (126/766) used TIO monotherapy while 61% (465/766) used TIO+ICS/LABA± leukotriene receptor antagonists (triple therapy). In TIO 1.25 mcg monotherapy and triple therapy subgroups, 39% and 49% were treated by allergists/pulmonologists, 27% and 48% experienced a moderate/severe asthma exacerbation, and 50% and 68% used rescue oral corticosteroids during the baseline period, respectively. Following triple therapy initiation, 44% of patients discontinued ICS within 6 months. The TIO 2.5 mcg cohort demonstrated similar trends. CONCLUSION: This study provided insights into real-world US use of TIO in asthma. Overall, 16-19% of patients received TIO monotherapy and had high baseline exacerbation rates, suggesting that additional ICS-containing medication may be beneficial. Patients initiating triple therapy were among the most severe, with high baseline exacerbation rates and rescue medication use, and had high post-treatment ICS discontinuation rates, suggesting unmet needs in this population.