Clinical outcomes of adjuvant nivolumab in resected stage III melanoma: comparison of CheckMate 238 trial and real-world data.

OBJECTIVES: Nivolumab is approved as adjuvant therapy for resected stage III/IV melanoma based on the phase 3 CheckMate 238 trial. This analysis compared outcomes from CheckMate 238 with those from the real-world Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database in patients with resected stage III melanoma (per AJCC-8) treated with adjuvant nivolumab. MATERIALS: Outcomes included baseline characteristics, overall survival (OS) in the CheckMate 238 cohort (randomization until death or last known alive), and real-world overall survival (rwOS) in the Flatiron Health cohort (nivolumab initiation until death or data cutoff). rwOS was compared with OS using unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was combined with the adjusted model to reduce baseline discrepancies. RESULTS: The CheckMate 238 and real-world cohorts included 369 and 452 patients, respectively (median age, 56.0 and 63.0 years; median follow-up, 61.4 vs. 25.5 months). rwOS was not different from OS in the unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.27; 95% CI 0.92-1.74), adjusted (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.67-1.54), and adjusted IPTW (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.63) analyses. In the adjusted analysis, 2-year OS and rwOS rates were 84%. Median OS and rwOS were not reached. After IPTW, OS and rwOS were not different (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.64). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis, OS in the CheckMate 238 trial was similar to rwOS in the Flatiron Health database after adjustments in patients with resected stage III melanoma (per AJCC-8) treated with adjuvant nivolumab, validating the trial results.

Clinical characteristics and management of patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in a real-world setting: analysis of the Ipsos NASH therapy monitor database.

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is the more severe, inflammatory type of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). NASH, a leading indication for liver transplantation, is growing in prevalence. The extent of liver fibrosis, ranging from fibrosis stage (FS) of none (F0) to cirrhosis (F4), is a strong predictor of health outcomes. There is little information on patient demographics and clinical characteristics by fibrosis stage and NASH treatment outside of academic medical centers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study using Ipsos' syndicated NASH Therapy Monitor database, consisting of medical chart audits provided by sampled NASH-treating physicians in the United States in 2016 (n = 174) and 2017 (n = 164). Data was collected online. RESULTS: Of 2,366 patients reported on by participating physicians and included in the analysis, 68% had FS F0-F2, 21% had bridging fibrosis (F3), and 9% had cirrhosis (F4). Common comorbidities were type 2 diabetes (56%), hyperlipidemia (44%), hypertension (46%), and obesity (42%). Patients with more advanced fibrosis scores (F3-F4) had higher comorbidity rates than patients with F0-F2. Commonly used diagnostic tests included ultrasound (80%), liver biopsy (78%), AST/ALT ratio (43%), NAFLD fibrosis score (25%), transient elastography (23%), NAFLD liver fat score (22%), and Fatty Liver Index (19%). Most commonly prescribed medications were vitamin E (53%), statins (51%), metformin (47%), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (28%), and beta blockers (22%). Medications were commonly prescribed for reasons other than their known effects. CONCLUSION: Physicians in this study, drawn from a spectrum of practice settings, relied on ultrasound and liver biopsy for diagnosis and vitamin E, statins, and metformin for pharmacological treatment of NASH. These findings imply poor adherence to guidelines in the diagnosis and management of NAFLD and NASH. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a liver disease caused by excess fat in the liver which can lead to liver inflammation and scarring (fibrosis), ranging from stage F0 (no scarring) to F4 (advanced scarring). The stage of liver scarring can predict the likelihood of future health problems, including liver failure and liver cancer. However, we do not fully understand how patient characteristics may vary at different stages of liver scarring. We looked at medical information from physicians treating patients diagnosed with NASH to understand how patient characteristics might differ based on the severity of their liver scarring. The majority (68%) of patients were stage F0-F2, with 30% having advanced scarring (F3-F4). In addition to NASH, many patients also had type 2 diabetes, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and obesity. Patients with more advanced scarring (F3-F4) were more likely to have these diseases than patients with less severe disease (F0-F2). Diagnosis of NASH by participating physicians was based on tests including imaging (ultrasound, CT scan, MRI), liver biopsy, blood tests, and whether patients had other conditions that would put them at risk for NASH. The medications that the doctors prescribed most often to their patients included vitamin E and drugs to treat high cholesterol, high blood pressure, or diabetes. Medications were frequently prescribed for reasons other than their known effects. By understanding how patient characteristics vary by stages of liver scarring and how NASH is currently managed may help guide the evaluation and treatment of NASH when NASH-specific therapies become available.

Review of Real-World Implementation Data on Emtricitabine-Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate as HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in the United States.

The antiretroviral combination of emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in individuals at high risk for acquiring human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in July 2012. Since then, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for the use of PrEP have been published and implemented into clinical practice throughout the United States. A number of published open-label and PrEP demonstration projects have evaluated the real-world use of PrEP including analysis of the barriers to its use and addressing major concerns. Despite the approval of FTC/TDF for PrEP, its use for this indication relies on patient and provider acceptance, and its effectiveness requires patient adherence and retention in care during periods of high-risk behaviors. Concerns regarding the use of PrEP in healthy individuals persist and include medication adverse effects including renal dysfunction and bone mineral density loss; risk compensation leading to HIV infections, sexually transmitted infections, and unintended pregnancies; and the development of drug resistance in the event of seroconversion. The cost-effectiveness of PrEP continues to be assessed with the greatest cost-effectiveness remaining in those at highest risk of acquiring HIV. Additionally, cases of HIV acquisition in individuals who are adherent to PrEP highlight scenarios in which PrEP is not 100% effective including against the transmission of drug-resistant HIV strains. This review examines data on the implementation of PrEP outside the setting of clinical trials with the aim of providing clinicians with a summary of the current barriers and opportunities for PrEP use with a specific focus on the role of pharmacists in the optimization of PrEP implementation.