Validation of an Updated Algorithm to Identify Patients With Incident Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Administrative Claims Databases.

PURPOSE: Real-world lung cancer data in administrative claims databases often lack staging information and specific diagnostic codes for lung cancer histology subtypes. This study updates and validates Turner's 2017 treatment-based algorithm using more recent claims and electronic health record (EHR) data. METHODS: This study used Optum's deidentified Market Clarity Data of linked medical and pharmacy claims with EHR data. Eligible patients had an incident lung cancer diagnosis (January 2014-December 2020) and ≥one valid histology code for lung cancer 30 days before to 60 days after diagnosis. Histology and stage information from the EHR were used to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). We evaluated the Turner algorithm using cohort 1 patients diagnosed between June 2014 and October 2015 (step 1) and between November 2015 and December 2020 after approval of immunotherapies (step 2). Next, we evaluated cohort 2 patients diagnosed between November 2015 and December 2020 using an updated algorithm incorporating the latest US treatment guidelines (step 3), and compared the results for cohort 2 (Turner algorithm, step 2 patients). Furthermore, an algorithm to determine early NSCLC (eNSCLC; stage I-III) versus metastatic or advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (stage IV) was evaluated among patients with available histology and stage information. RESULTS: A total of 5,012 patients were included (cohort 1, step 1: n = 406; cohort 1, step 2: n = 2,573; cohort 2, step 3: n = 2,744). The updated algorithm showed improved performance relative to the previous Turner algorithm for sensitivity (0.920-0.932), specificity (0.865-0.923), PPV (0.976-0.988), and NPV (0.640-0.673). The eNSCLC algorithm showed high specificity (0.874) and relatively low sensitivity (0.539). CONCLUSION: An updated treatment-based algorithm identifying patients with incident NSCLC was validated using EHR data and distinguished lung cancer subtypes in claims databases when EHR data were not available.

Cost of Disease Progression in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma After Frontline Treatment With Rituximab Plus Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, novel agents have become available to treat relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); the impact of such agents on treatment costs has not been formally studied. We present results from 2 independent, retrospective, real-world cohort analyses to determine the cost of disease progression after first-line rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analyses were conducted using the IQVIA PharMetricsⓇ Plus claims database and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry-Medicare-linked database (SEER-Medicare) and included patients ≥18 years and ≥66 years, respectively. "No progression" was defined as no second-line therapy for ≥2 years after the end of first-line R-CHOP and "treated progression" as initiating a second-line therapy within 2 years following the end of first-line R-CHOP. Analyses were adjusted for baseline covariates, and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs were compared between progressors and nonprogressors. RESULTS: The IQVIA PharMetrics Plus analysis (January 1, 2010-June 30, 2018) included 871 patients (nonprogressors, n = 725; progressors, n = 146), including 10 patients who received chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Treated progression was associated with significantly higher adjusted PPPM costs than no progression ($10,554 vs. $1561, P < .001). The SEER-Medicare analysis (January 1, 2010-December 31, 2017) included 4099 patients (nonprogressors, n = 3389; progressors, n = 710), including 12 patients receiving CAR-T. Treated progression was associated with significantly higher adjusted PPPM costs than no progression ($10,928 vs. $2902, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Treated progression of DLBCL increases adjusted PPPM costs by over $8000 compared with no progression.

Disease severity and mortality in Alzheimer's disease: an analysis using the U.S. National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the relative risk of death across all stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is lacking but greatly needed for the evaluation of new interventions. We used data from the Uniform Data Set (UDS) of the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) to assess the expected survival of a person progressing to a particular stage of AD and the relative risk of death for a person in a particular stage of AD compared with cognitively normal (CN) people. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of mortality and its determinants in participants with incident mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to AD or AD dementia compared with CN participants. Overall survival and hazard ratios of all-cause mortality in participants ≥ 50 years of age with clinically assessed or diagnosed MCI due to AD, or mild, moderate, or severe AD dementia, confirmed by Clinical Dementia Rating scores, versus CN participants were estimated, using NACC UDS data. Participants were followed until death, censoring, or until information to determine disease stage was missing. RESULTS: Aged between 50 and 104 years, 12,414 participants met the eligibility criteria for the study. Participants progressing to MCI due to AD or AD dementia survived a median of 3-12 years, with higher mortality observed in more severe stages. Risk of death increased with the severity of AD dementia, with the increase significantly higher at younger ages. Participants with MCI due to AD and CN participants had a similar risk of death after controlling for confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: Relative all-cause mortality risk increases with AD severity, more so at younger ages. Mortality does not seem to be higher for those remaining in MCI due to AD. Findings might imply potential benefit of lower mortality if preventing or delaying the progression of AD is successful, and importantly, this potential benefit might be greater in relatively younger people. Future research should replicate our study in other samples more representative of the general US population as well as other populations around the world.