A novel integrated care concept (NICC) versus standard care in the treatment of chronic cardiovascular diseases: protocol for the randomized controlled trial CardioCare MV.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases are the major cause of death globally and represent a major economic burden on health care systems. Positive effects of disease management programs have been shown for patients with heart failure (HF). Remote monitoring and telemonitoring with active intervention are beneficial in atrial fibrillation (AF) and therapy-resistant hypertension (TRH), respectively. For these patients, we have developed a novel integrated care concept (NICC) which combines telemedicine with intensive support by a care center, including a call center, an integrated care network including inpatient and outpatient care providers and guideline therapy for patients. METHODS: The aim of the study is to demonstrate the superiority of NICC over guideline therapy alone. The trial is designed as open-label, bi-center, parallel-group design with two groups and a blinded observer. Patients will be included if they are either inpatients or if they are referred to the outpatient clinic of the hospitals by their treating physician. Randomization will be done individually with stratification by cardiovascular disease (AF, HF, TRH), center and admission type. Primary endpoints are based on the 1-year observation period after randomization. The first primary endpoint is the composite endpoint consisting of mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction. The number of hospitalizations form the second primary endpoint. The third primary endpoint is identical to the first primary endpoint plus cardiac decompensation. Adjustments for multiple testing are done using a fall-back strategy. Secondary endpoints include patient adherence, health care costs, quality of life, and safety. A sample size of 2930 gives 80% power at the two-sided 2.5% test level for the first primary endpoint. The power for the second primary endpoint is 99.8% at this sample size, and it is 80% with 1086 patients. DISCUSSION: This study will inform care providers whether quality of care can be improved by an integrated care concept providing telemedicine through a round-the-clock call center approach. We expect that cost of the NICC will be lower than standard care because of reduced hospitalizations. If the study has a positive result, NICC is planned to be immediately rolled out in the federal state of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania and other federal states in Germany. The trial will also guide additional research to disentangle the effects of this complex intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS, ID: DRKS00013124 . Registered on 5 October 2017; ClinicalTrials.gov , ID: NCT03317951. Registered on 17 October 2017.

Drug safety and the impact of drug warnings: An interrupted time series analysis of diabetes drug prescriptions in Germany and Denmark.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the impact of drug safety warnings from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) on drug utilisation and their interaction with information released through national reimbursement bodies. METHODS: Insurance claims data on anti-diabetic drug prescriptions in primary care in Germany and Denmark were analysed using interrupted time series analysis, with EMA drug warnings for thiazolidinediones (TZDs) in 2007 and 2011 as the intervention. Monthly drug utilisation data per substance in defined daily dosages (DDD) consumed per 1000 insurees were retrieved from the Danish national drug prescriptions register and one large statutory sickness fund in Germany. RESULTS: TZDs were generally reimbursed in Germany but restricted to individual reimbursement in Denmark. Consequently, utilisation of TZDs was much higher in Germany in 2007 compared with Denmark. For rosiglitazone, the drug warning had a significant impact on utilisation, reducing the number of DDD per 1000 insurees per day by -0.0105 in Denmark and -0.0312 in Germany (p-values<0.05). For pioglitazone, neither of the drug warnings had a significant effect on utilisation. CONCLUSION: The impact of EMA drug warnings differed across countries and might be mediated by information released through national reimbursement bodies and physician associations. Increasing complexity of new drugs and modified approval procedures require a strengthening of information exchange between drug regulation bodies and physicians to ensure patient safety.

The impact of recent chemotherapy innovation on the longevity of myeloma patients: US and international evidence.

The longevity of multiple myeloma patients increased sharply since the late 1990s. This increase coincided with the introduction of several important innovations in chemotherapy for myeloma. In this study, we aim to quantify the impact of recent chemotherapy innovation on the longevity of myeloma patients using both time-series US data and longitudinal data on 38 countries. We estimate that almost two-thirds (0.99 years) of the 1997-2005 increase in the life expectancy of American myeloma patients was due to an increase in the number of chemotherapy regimens now preferred by specialists. Based on a back-of-the-envelope calculation, this means that the cost per US life-year gained from post-1997 chemotherapy innovation is unlikely to have exceeded $46,000. We also investigate the impact of chemotherapy innovation on the myeloma mortality rate using longitudinal country-level data on 38 countries during the period 2002-2012. Countries that had larger increases in the number of chemotherapy regimens now preferred by specialists had larger subsequent declines in myeloma mortality rates, controlling for myeloma incidence. The (marginal) effect on the mortality rate of one additional preferred chemotherapy regimen is similar in other countries to its effect in the US. Non-US prices of two of the three new drugs were lower than US prices, so recent myeloma chemotherapy innovation may have been more cost-effective in other countries than it was in the US. Recent chemotherapy innovation has had a significant positive impact on the longevity of myeloma patients in the countries in which the drugs have been available.

Do follow-on therapeutic substitutes induce price competition between hospital medicines? Evidence from the Danish hospital sector.

OBJECTIVE: The pricing of follow-on drugs, that offer only limited health benefits over existing therapeutic alternatives, is a recurring health policy debate. This study investigates whether follow-on therapeutic substitutes create price competition between branded hospital medicines. METHODS: New follow-on drugs and their incumbent therapeutic competitors were identified from Danish sales and product registration data on hospital pharmaceuticals using medically relevant criteria. We examined whether follow-on drugs adopt lower prices than their incumbent competitors, and whether incumbent competitors react to entry of follow-ons through price adjustments using a random intercept panel model. RESULTS: We found no evidence that follow-on drugs adopt lower prices than their incumbent competitors. Furthermore, potentially due to low sample size, we found no evidence that prices for incumbent pioneer products were significantly reduced as a reaction to competition from follow-on drugs. CONCLUSION: Competition between patented therapeutic substitutes did not seem to increase price competition and containment of pharmaceutical expenditures in the Danish hospital market. Strengthening hospitals' incentives to consider the price of alternative treatment options paired with a more active formulary management may increase price competition between therapeutic substitutes in the Danish hospital sector in the future.

Direct comparison of treatment responses, remission rates, and drug adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab: results from eight years of surveillance of clinical practice in the nationwide Danish DANBIO registry.

OBJECTIVE: To compare tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors directly regarding the rates of treatment response, remission, and the drug survival rate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to identify clinical prognostic factors for response. METHODS: The nationwide DANBIO registry collects data on rheumatology patients receiving routine care. For the present study, we included patients from DANBIO who had RA (n = 2,326) in whom the first biologic treatment was initiated (29% received adalimumab, 22% received etanercept, and 49% received infliximab). Baseline predictors of treatment response were identified. The odds ratios (ORs) for clinical responses and remission and hazard ratios (HRs) for drug withdrawal were calculated, corrected for age, disease duration, the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), seropositivity, concomitant methotrexate and prednisolone, number of previous disease-modifying drugs, center, and functional status (Health Assessment Questionnaire score). RESULTS: Seventy percent improvement according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria (an ACR70 response) was achieved in 19% of patients after 6 months. Older age, concomitant prednisolone treatment, and low functional status at baseline were negative predictors. The ORs (95% confidence intervals [95% CIs]) for an ACR70 response were 2.05 (95% CI 1.52-2.76) for adalimumab versus infliximab, 1.78 (95% CI 1.28-2.50) for etanercept versus infliximab, and 1.15 (95% CI 0.82-1.60) for adalimumab versus etanercept. Similar predictors and ORs were observed for a good response according to the European League Against Rheumatism criteria, DAS28 remission, and Clinical Disease Activity Index remission. At 48 months, the HRs for drug withdrawal were 1.98 for infliximab versus etanercept (95% 1.63-2.40), 1.35 for infliximab versus adalimumab (95% CI 1.15-1.58), and 1.47 for adalimumab versus etanercept (95% CI 1.20-1.80). CONCLUSION: Older age, low functional status, and concomitant prednisolone treatment were negative predictors of a clinical response and remission. Infliximab had the lowest rates of treatment response, disease remission, and drug adherence, adalimumab had the highest rates of treatment response and disease remission, and etanercept had the longest drug survival rates. These findings were consistent after correction for confounders and sensitivity analyses and across outcome measures and followup times.

Are fish eaters healthier and do they consume less health-care resources?

OBJECTIVE: Regular dietary intake of fish is associated with reduced risk of developing cardiovascular and other chronic diseases, and may improve general well-being. If fish eaters are healthier, they may use fewer health-care resources. The present study aimed to describe the reported intake of fish and fish products in a Danish general population, and to investigate whether fish consumption is associated with generic measures of self-reported health and consumption of health-care resources. DESIGN: Data on eating patterns and health status for 3422 Danish adults were obtained by telephone interview in the Funen County Health Survey. These data were merged with individual-level register data on health-care utilisation. Survey respondents were categorised into those consuming fish at least once weekly (fish eaters) and those consuming fish less frequently (non-fish eaters). RESULTS: People who reported eating fish twice monthly or once weekly had significantly better overall self-reported health than those who rarely eat fish, even after adjustment for age, gender, social characteristics and lifestyle factors. Fish eaters did not have significantly lower aggregated health-care costs, although their hospital utilisation was significantly lower than that for non-fish eaters. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate fish consumption was associated with better self-reported general health even after controlling for possible confounding variables. Overall, fish eaters appeared to use the same amount of health-care resources as non-eaters, although fish eaters used more medicine but were less likely to be admitted to a hospital.