Health-related quality of life outcomes with prasugrel among medically managed non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients: Insights from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated without revascularization. The TRILOGY ACS trial randomized patients with ACS to either prasugrel or clopidogrel therapy plus aspirin. Outcomes showed a complex pattern suggestive of late benefits with respect to repeat clinical events and benefits confined to patients who underwent angiography. Here, we examine the HRQoL correlates of these patterns. METHODS: HRQoL was measured at baseline and 3, 12, and 24 months or end of study (EOS) in 7243 patients aged <75 years using the EuroQol 3-level, group 5-dimension index (EQ-5D). Linear mixed effects models for repeated measures were used to examine treatment differences in HRQoL overall, stratified by angiography status, and among patients who did and did not have non-fatal events. RESULTS: No baseline differences in HRQoL were seen between patients randomized to prasugrel (n=3620) or clopidogrel (n=3623). At 24 months, remaining patients assigned to prasugrel (n=1450) vs. clopidogrel (n=1443) had higher EQ-5D index scores (86.4 vs. 84.9, P=.01). Mixed effects models found no difference in EQ-5D scores among prasugrel and clopidogrel patients overall across subgroups stratified by angiography status. However, among patients with non-fatal clinical events, patients on clopidogrel reported a larger decrement in HRQoL than patients on prasugrel (79.5±18.1 vs. 80.6±18.0; P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was no difference in HRQoL outcomes among patients receiving prasugrel vs. clopidogrel. However, the differential effects of the treatments among patients with non-fatal events require further investigation.

Patterns of statin initiation, intensification, and maximization among patients hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Intensive statins are superior to moderate statins in reducing morbidity and mortality after an acute myocardial infarction. Although studies have documented rates of statin prescription as a quality performance measure, variations in hospitals' rates of initiating, intensifying, and maximizing statin therapy after acute myocardial infarction are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed statin use at admission and discharge among 4340 acute myocardial infarction patients from 24 US hospitals (2005-2008). Hierarchical models estimated site variation in statin initiation in naïve patients, intensification in those undergoing submaximal therapy, and discharge on maximal therapy (defined as a statin with expected low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering ≥ 50%) after adjustment for patient factors, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level. Site variation was explored with a median rate ratio, which estimates the relative difference in risk ratios of 2 hypothetically identical patients at 2 different hospitals. Among statin-naïve patients, 87% without a contraindication were prescribed a statin, with no variability across sites (median rate ratio, 1.02). Among patients who arrived on submaximal statins, 26% had their statin therapy intensified, with modest site variability (median rate ratio, 1.47). Among all patients without a contraindication, 23% were discharged on maximal statin therapy, with substantial hospital variability (median rate ratio, 2.79). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, multicenter acute myocardial infarction cohort, statin therapy was begun in nearly 90% of patients during hospitalization, with no variability across sites; however, rates of statin intensification and maximization were low and varied substantially across hospitals. Given that more intense statin therapy is associated with better outcomes, changing the existing performance measures to include the intensity of statin therapy may improve care.

Changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels after discharge for acute myocardial infarction in a real-world patient population.

Aggressively managing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) after myocardial infarction (MI) is a cornerstone of secondary prevention. The changes in LDL-C after MI and the factors associated with LDL-C levels are unknown. Therefore, we directly measured fasting LDL-C levels in 797 MI patients from 24 US hospitals from 2005 to 2008. Mean LDL-C levels at discharge, 1 month, and 6 months were 95.1, 81.9, and 87.1 mg/dL, respectively. In a hierarchical, multivariable, repeated measures model, older age, male sex, and hypertension were associated with lower LDL-C levels, whereas self-reported avoidance of health care because of cost was associated with higher LDL-C. Both the presence and intensity of statin therapy at discharge were strongly associated with LDL-C levels, with adjusted mean 6-month changes of -3.4 mg/dL (95% confidence interval (CI): -12.1, 5.3) for no statins; 1.7 mg/dL (95% CI: -4.7, 8.1) for low statins; -10.2 mg/dL (95% CI: -14.5, -6.0) for moderate statins; and -13.9 mg/dL (95% CI: -19.7, -8.0) for intensive statins (P < 0.001). In conclusion, we found that greater reductions in LDL-C levels after MI were strongly associated with the presence and intensity of statin therapy, older age, male sex, hypertension, and better socioeconomic status. These findings support the use of intensive statin therapy in post-MI patients and provide estimates of the expected LDL-C changes after MI in a real-world population.

Cost-Effectiveness of Combination of Baricitinib and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in the United States: A Modelling Study.

INTRODUCTION: Baricitinib-remdesivir (BARI-REM) combination is superior to remdesivir (REM) in reducing recovery time and accelerating clinical improvement among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), specifically those receiving high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation. Here we assessed the cost-effectiveness of BARI-REM versus REM in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the USA. METHODS: A three-state model was developed addressing costs and patient utility associated with COVID-19 hospitalization, immediate post hospital care, and subsequent lifetime medical care. Analysis was performed from the perspective of a payer and a hospital. Both perspectives evaluated two subgroups: all patients and patients who required oxygen. The primary measures of benefit in the model were patient quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accrued during and after hospitalization, cost per life years gained, cost per death avoided, and cost per use of mechanical ventilation avoided. RESULTS: In the base-case payer perspective with a lifetime horizon, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM resulted in an incremental total cost of $7962, a gain of 0.446 life years and gain of 0.3565 QALYs over REM. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of using BARI-REM were estimated as $22,334 per QALY and $17,858 per life year. The base-case and sensitivity analyses showed that the total incremental cost per QALY falls within the reduced willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY applied under health emergencies. In all hospitalized patients, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM reduced total hospital expenditures per patient by $1778 and total reimbursement payments by $1526, resulting in a $252 reduction in net costs per patient; it also resulted in a net gain of 0.0018 QALYs and increased survival of COVID-19 hospitalizations by 2.7%. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that BARI-REM is cost-effective compared to using REM for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The base-case results of this cost-effectiveness model were most sensitive to average annual medical costs for recovered patients.

Adherence to guidelines for sensitivity analysis: cost-effectiveness analyses of dual oral antiplatelet therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Cost-effectiveness analyses of new treatments for cardiovascular disease frequently require input parameters whose values are known with uncertainty due to limited data. The objective of this paper is to examine the extent to which published sensitivity analyses addressing this uncertainty adhere to Health Technology Assessment (HTA) guidelines. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematic review of published cost-effectiveness analyses was performed for an example drug treatment scenario, dual oral antiplatelet therapy compared with aspirin alone following acute coronary syndromes and/or percutaneous coronary intervention. The following medical literature databases were searched for articles published from January 1997 to June 2007: PubMed, Cochrane Collaboration, EMBASE and the Health Economic Evaluation Database (HEED). Evidence tables were created to show the sensitivity of the cost-effectiveness estimates to changes in the input parameter values, as well as the data sources used for the reference-case and sensitivity analysis input parameter values. The extent to which the sensitivity analyses adhered to HTA guidelines were also examined. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness ratios were most sensitive to changes in the efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy and reference-case model assumptions about costs beyond the trial period. Although alternative values tested in the sensitivity analysis for some input parameters were based on observed ranges or distributions, alternative values tested for many other input parameters were assumed without justification. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity analyses in the cost-effectiveness studies of dual oral antiplatelet therapy were not fully adherent with HTA guidelines. In particular, long-term costs and benefits were not always included in the sensitivity estimates, the impact of differential effects on death and myocardial infarction was not explored, and justification for the alternative parameter values tested was not always provided.

Cost of care for new versus recurrent acute coronary syndrome patients.

INTRODUCTION: The economic burden of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) continues long after the acute event has resolved. This study compared ACS-related costs between new and recurrent ACS patients using retrospective claims data from a large US health plan. METHODS: Patients with ACS were identified using ICD-9 codes between the 1st January 2001 and the 30th June 2003. The first diagnosis was defined as the index event. Patient claims were examined 1 year before, and up to 1 year after, the index event. Hospitalisations, revascularisations and costs for new and recurrent cohorts were compared. Multivariate regression was used to examine cost predictors. RESULTS: In total, 15,508 patients were identified, 82% had new ACS. The new ACS cohort was more likely to have myocardial infarction and be hospitalised for the index event, leading to higher index event costs. However, the recurrent ACS cohort had more re-hospitalisations, longer lengths of inpatient stay and a higher probability of revascularisation during follow-up. The index event cost per patient and per patient-month was higher for new ACS patients. After adjusting for confounding factors, multivariate cost models revealed annualised follow-up medical costs were 9.9% higher (p=0.017) and annualised follow-up pharmacy costs were 8.3% higher (p< or =0.0001) for the new ACS cohort. CONCLUSION: Newly diagnosed ACS patients had significantly higher adjusted costs in the year following the index event, but recurrent ACS patients still experienced high medical costs. More emphasis by providers and patients on adherence to treatment guidelines may be one step to improving patient outcomes. *This paper was presented in part at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Annual Meeting, 7th April 2006.

One-Year Clinical Effectiveness Comparison of Prasugrel with Ticagrelor: Results from a Retrospective Observational Study using an Integrated Claims Database.

BACKGROUND: No direct comparisons of ticagrelor and prasugrel with 1-year clinical follow-up have been reported. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to compare 1-year clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and treated with either ticagrelor or prasugrel in a real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients from a payer database who were aged ≥18 years and had ACS managed with PCI with no history of transient ischemic attack (TIA)/stroke. Data were propensity matched for prasugrel use with a 3:1 prasugrel:ticagrelor ratio. Post-discharge net adverse clinical event (NACE) rate at 1 year was evaluated for noninferiority using a pre-defined 20% margin. NACE was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or rehospitalization for bleeding. RESULTS: In total, 15,788 ACS-PCI patients were included (prasugrel 12,797; ticagrelor 2991). Prasugrel-treated patients were younger; less likely to be female, have prior myocardial infarction (MI), diabetes, or non-ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI); and more likely to have unstable angina (UA) than ticagrelor-treated patients. Prior to matching, NACE and MACE (P < 0.01) were lower, with no difference in bleeding with prasugrel compared with ticagrelor. After matching, there was no significant difference in baseline characteristics. Noninferiority was demonstrated for NACE, MACE, and bleeding between prasugrel and ticagrelor. NACE and MACE were significantly lower with prasugrel use, primarily driven by heart failure, with no significant difference in all-cause death, MI, UA, revascularization, TIA/stroke, or bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, physicians preferentially used prasugrel rather than ticagrelor in younger ACS-PCI patients with lower risk of bleeding or comorbidities. After propensity matching, clinical outcomes associated with prasugrel were noninferior to those with ticagrelor.

Accuracy of Medical Claims for Identifying Cardiovascular and Bleeding Events After Myocardial Infarction : A Secondary Analysis of the TRANSLATE-ACS Study.

Importance: Pragmatic clinical trial designs have proposed the use of medical claims data to ascertain clinical events; however, the accuracy of billed diagnoses in identifying potential events is unclear. Objectives: To compare the 1-year cumulative incidences of events when events were identified by medical claims vs by physician adjudication and to assess the accuracy of bill-identified events using physician adjudication as the criterion standard. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc analysis of a clinical trial assessed the medical claims forms and records for all rehospitalizations at 233 US hospitals within 1 year of the index acute myocardial infarction (MI) of 12 365 patients enrolled in the Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study between April 1, 2010, and October 31, 2012. Fourteen patients (0.1%) died during the index hospitalization and were excluded from analysis. Recurrent MI, stroke, and bleeding events were identified per the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis and procedural codes in medical bills. These events were independently adjudicated by study physicians through medical record reviews using the prespecified criteria of recurrent MI and stroke and the bleeding definition by the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) scale. Medical claims were reported on a Uniform Bill-04 claims form; claims were collected from all hospitals visited by patients enrolled in TRANSLATE-ACS. Agreement between medical claims-identified events and physician-adjudicated events over the 12 months after discharge was assessed with the κ statistic. Data were analyzed from January 30, 2015, to March 2, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Event rates within 1 year after MI. Results: Among 12 365 patients with acute MI, 8890 (71.9%) were men and mean (SD) age was 60 (11.6) years. The cumulative 1-year incidence of events identified by medical claims was 4.3% for MI, 0.9% for stroke, and 5.0% for bleeding. Incidence rates based on physician adjudication were 4.7% for MI, 0.9% for stroke, and 5.4% for bleeding. Agreement between medical claims-identified and physician-adjudicated events was modest, with a κ of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.79) for MI and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.41 to 0.68) for stroke events. In contrast, agreement between medical claims-identified and physician-adjudicated bleeding events was poor, with a κ of 0.24 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.30) for any hospitalized bleeding event and 0.15 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.20) for moderate or severe bleeding on the GUSTO scale. Conclusions and Relevance: Event rates at 1 year after MI were lower for MI, stroke, and bleeding when medical claims were used to identify events than when adjudicated by physicians. Medical claims diagnoses were only modestly accurate in identifying MI and stroke admissions but had limited accuracy for bleeding events. An alternative approach may be needed to ensure good safety surveillance in cardiovascular studies. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01088503.

How Reliable are Patient-Reported Rehospitalizations? Implications for the Design of Future Practical Clinical Studies.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal clinical investigations often rely on patient reports to screen for postdischarge adverse outcomes events, yet few studies have examined the accuracy of such patient reports. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) in the TRANSLATE-ACS study were asked during structured interviews at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months postdischarge to report any rehospitalizations. The accuracy of patient-reported rehospitalizations within 1 year of postdischarge was determined using claims-based medical bill validation as the reference standard. The cumulative incidence of rehospitalizations was compared when identified by patient report versus medical bills. Patients were categorized by the accuracy in reporting events (accurate, under-, or over- reporters) and characteristics were compared between groups. Among 10 643 MI patients, 4565 (43%) reported 7734 rehospitalizations. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of patient-reported rehospitalizations were low at 67% and 59%, respectively. A higher cumulative incidence of rehospitalization was observed when identified by patient report versus medical bills (43% vs 37%; P<0.001). Overall, 18% of patients over-reported and 10% under-reported the number of hospitalizations. Compared with accurate reporters, under-reporters were more likely to be older, female, African American, unemployed, or a non-high-school graduate, and had greater prevalence of clinical comorbidities such as diabetes and past cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of patient-reported rehospitalizations was low with patients both under- and over-reporting events. Longitudinal clinical research studies need additional mechanisms beyond patient report to accurately identify rehospitalization events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01088503.

Predictors of high-cost managed care patients with acute coronary syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To develop predictive models of high-cost acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients using demographic, disease, and treatment characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective, administrative claims analysis utilizing pharmacy, medical, and eligibility data from a large US managed care organization. METHODS: ACS was defined by ICD-9 codes for unstable angina (UA) or acute myocardial infarction (AMI). New onset patients (without ACS claims) in the prior six months were identified for the time period 07/01/99-06/30/01, and followed up to 12 months, health plan disenrollment, or death. Cost was measured as that incurred during the initial episode plus subsequent follow-up or during the subsequent follow-up only. Patients were dichotomized as high-cost (top 20%) or low-cost (bottom 80%), based on total costs. Logistic regression was used to examine the association for being classified as high-cost. RESULTS: A total of 13 731 patients were included: 51.7% with UA, 39.6% with AMI and 8.7% with both UA and AMI. The mean age was 54.2 years and 68.2% were male. A number of co-morbidities (hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, etc.) predicted high-cost patients. Among medications, prior ACE inhibitor use predicted high-cost patients. While revascularization procedures, in general, were strong predictors of high-cost, revascularization during the index ACS episode (opposed to revascularization during the follow-up) decreased the odds of being high-cost (odds ratio [95% CI] 0.615 [0.506-0.748]). CONCLUSION: High-cost patients with new onset ACS can be predicted by some characteristics, but many of these characteristics are non-modifiable co-morbidities. Payers and providers may find opportunities for clinical and cost-saving interventions for these patients.

Cost of care for new-onset acute coronary syndrome patients who undergo coronary revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines demographic, health characteristics, and total health care utilization in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients who underwent coronary revascularization within the first year of follow-up. BACKGROUND: Revascularization during or after the index ACS event is becoming more common, and it is important to further characterize these patients. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted (July 1, 1999-June 30, 2001) with new onset ACS patients, defined as an emergency room visit or hospitalization with an ICD-9 code for unstable angina (UA) or acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but without an ACS claim in the previous 6 months. Patients were followed up to 12 months to identify total resource utilization (medical, pharmacy, revascularization procedures). RESULTS: A total of 6,929 patients were included and 69% had revascularization performed during the index hospitalization. Mean age was 55 years; 72.9% were male. Revascularization was percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in 5,002 and bypass surgery in 1,927. The index ACS event was AMI in 48.9%; 13.5% had both AMI and UA. Total first-year cost was 210.7 million dollars (30,402 dollars per patient); hospitalization costs were 161.7 million dollars (23,331 dollars per patient). During follow-up, 75.5% received a statin, 75.8% a beta-blocker, and 63.5% of all patients received clopidogrel (84.8% of PCI patients). Mean days of clopidogrel therapy were 83.5. CONCLUSIONS: Early revascularization is a frequent therapeutic strategy in these relatively young managed care patients. The majority of costs were medical and a majority of procedures were PCI. Many patients experienced AMI as their initial cardiovascular event. Drug utilization of statins, beta-blockers, and clopidogrel, according to practice guidelines, was acceptable.

Total first-year costs of acute coronary syndrome in a managed care setting.

OBJECTIVE: There is a limited amount of literature examining the burden and cost of illness of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the managed care population. The goal of this study was to estimate the total cost of health care utilization (health plan plus patient) in the 12-month period following newly onset ACS. The demographic and health characteristics of these patients are compared with the similar data from 2 large clinical trials: CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events) and PROVE IT-TIMI 22 (Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy--Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 22). METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted for the 2-year period from July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2001. ACS was defined as an emergency room visit or hospitalization with a primary International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition/Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis of 410.xx (acute myocardial infarction) or 411.1x (intermediate coronary syndrome). Patients were required to be free of any ACS claim in the previous 6 months. Patients without 6 months of prior continuous enrollment or those patients younger than 18 years were excluded. Patients were followed up to 12 months to identify total medical and pharmacy costs, revascularization procedures, and medication use. RESULTS: A total of 13,731 patients met the inclusion criteria, yielding 133,814 months of follow-up (mean: 9.75 months per patient) and representing approximately 0.4% of the managed care members in the database during the study period. The mean age was 54 years and 68% were male. The total direct cost incurred by the health plan and patients was dollar 309 million (dollar 2,312 per patient-month of follow-up); 72% of total costs were attributable to hospitalizations. The majority of costs were medical (dollar 286 million, 93%), and dollar 23 million (7%) were pharmacy costs. Fifty-one percent of patients had a revascularization procedure, which was typically performed during the index hospitalization (median time to revascularization was 0 days). Coronary artery stent implantation was the most common revascularization procedure (68%). During follow-up, 490 patients (3.6%) had a detectable death, 58% of patients received a beta-blocker, 60% received one or more cholesterol-lowering medications, and 36% of patients received clopidogrel therapy. Aspirin therapy was not measured. CONCLUSIONS: These managed-care patients with newly onset ACS incurred substantial costs in the 12 months following initial presentation. Revascularization was a common therapeutic intervention for these patients. There appear to be opportunities to improve medication therapy after an acute ACS event. There were some demographic and health characteristics that were different in these commercially insured patients from those in 2 large clinical trials.

High-Risk Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in a Real-World Employed Japanese Population: Prevalence, Cardiovascular Event Rates, and Costs.

AIM: To assess the prevalence of high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD, defined as history of acute coronary syndrome [hACS], cerebrovascular atherosclerotic disease [CeVAD], peripheral artery disease [PAD], or coronary artery disease w/diabetes [CADD]) and associated costs and cardiovascular (CV) events in Japan. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) database (2006-2011). ASCVD prevalence was estimated on the basis of diagnoses for CeVAD, PAD, CADD, and hACS (ACS claim ＞ 30-≤ 365 days after ACS-related hospitalization) during 1/1/ 2008-12/31/2009. Population denominators used in the prevalence estimations were provided by JMDC. A subcohort with an insurance coverage for ≥ 12 months before and ≥ 24 months after first/index ASCVD claim during 1/1/2008-12/31/2009 were analyzed on the basis of costs (in 2012 US dollars) and events. RESULTS: ASCVD prevalence was 1,869/100,000 population. In total, 8,112 patients met inclusion criteria for the cost and CV event analyses. Among these patients, 4.0% experienced any event (myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, hospitalization for unstable angina) in the year after ASCVD diagnosis, which decreased to 2.2% in year 2. First-year event rates were highest (22%) in patients with hACS. Mean [SD] all-cause costs per patient in year 1 were $7,031 [$14,359] for all patients with ASCVD combined. Extrapolated to the entire employed population, total first-year costs were estimated at $8.2 billion. CONCLUSIONS: ASCVD is not rare in Japan, even within a relatively young population of employed persons. Further, the total direct first-year cost burden of ASCVD in the employed Japanese population is high. These data may inform future economic assessments of new ASCVD treatments.

Comparison of healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndrome managed with percutaneous coronary intervention and receiving prasugrel or ticagrelor.

OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and healthcare costs in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor. METHODS: Hospital charge master data were used to identify ACS-PCI patients aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 1 in-hospital claim for prasugrel or ticagrelor between August 1, 2011-April 30, 2013. Treatment groups were propensity matched for baseline and index hospitalization characteristics. HCRU and costs were assessed through 90-days post-discharge. Costs were determined based on hospital-specific cost-to-charge ratios and adjusted to 2013 US dollars. RESULTS: Before matching, ticagrelor patients were older, more-often female, and had increased cardiovascular (CV) and bleeding risks compared with prasugrel patients. Propensity-matched length of index hospital stay (4.7 vs 4.9 days, p = 0.23) and risk for all-cause [30-day: relative risk (RR) = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.73-1.0; 90-day: RR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.80-1.0, and CV-related (30-day: RR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.59-1.0; 90-day: RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.73-1.1) re-hospitalizations did not significantly differ between prasugrel and ticagrelor, respectively. Compared to ticagrelor, the propensity-matched risk of re-hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI) (30-day: RR = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.21-0.75; 90-day: RR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.34-0.81) and an outpatient medical encounter for dyspnea (30-day: RR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.33-0.74; 90-day: RR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.46-0.80) were significantly lower for prasugrel patients, with no significant differences in bleeding encounters between groups (30-day: RR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.54-1.40; 90-day: RR = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.71-1.50). Matched total healthcare costs were not significantly different between groups during the index hospitalization ($36,011 vs $37,247, p = 0.21), 30-days post-discharge ($2007 vs $2522, p = 0.48), 90-days post-discharge ($4564 vs $5242, p = 0.49), and aggregate of the index hospitalization through 90-day follow-up ($40,576 vs $42,494, p = 0.09) timeframes. CONCLUSIONS: Re-hospitalization for MI and outpatient encounters for dyspnea were lower in prasugrel treated than in ticagrelor treated ACS-PCI patients up to 90-days post-index hospitalization discharge, with no difference in bleeding encounters or healthcare costs between the two populations. This data supports the utility of prasugrel in routine clinical practice. These findings should be considered within limitations of observational research.

One-year post-discharge resource utilization and treatment patterns of patients with acute coronary syndrome managed with percutaneous coronary intervention and treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare 1-year real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU), associated charges, and antiplatelet treatment patterns among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel. METHODS: Using the ProMetis-Lx database, adult ACS-PCI patients treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel post-discharge were identified between 1 August 2011 and 31 May 2013 and propensity matched to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Before matching, ticagrelor-treated patients (n = 2991) were older with increased baseline ischemic and bleeding risks compared with prasugrel-treated patients (n = 12,797). After matching, ticagrelor patients had higher all-cause HRU (2.5 vs. 2.4 per patient per month; P = 0.012) and cardiovascular (CV) HRU (0.4 vs. 0.3 per patient per month; P = 0.026), with the difference in CV rehospitalizations (17.7 vs. 15.7 %; P = 0.011) primarily driven by congestive heart failure (CHF) (4.9 vs. 3.8 %; P = 0.02). All-cause charges within 1 year did not significantly differ between groups ($US5456 vs. 4844 per patient per month; P = 0.37), but dyspnea-related total charges were significantly higher with ticagrelor ($US139 vs. 95 per patient per month; P = 0.005). Although infrequent, switching was slightly higher with ticagrelor (8.3 vs. 6.0 %; P < 0.001) at 1 year, and mean persistence was slightly longer with prasugrel (150 vs. 159 days; P = 0.002), with no significant difference in mean adherence (61 vs. 63 %; P = 0.17). CONCLUSION: Overall monthly HRU was slightly lower with prasugrel than with ticagrelor, with no significant difference in bleeding HRU. Prasugrel was associated with slightly higher pharmacy charges, but lower dyspnea charges, resulting in no significant difference in total charges. Patients receiving prasugrel tended to use it for longer than those receiving ticagrelor as less switching occurred. These findings may aid decision making, but must be tempered due to inherent study limitations.

Cost and effectiveness of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa-receptor inhibitors in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who received adjunctive therapy with glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa-receptor inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were studied. Data from a national all-payer database for the period from January 2000 to July 2001 were analyzed to compare in-hospital mortality, complications, incremental costs, and length of stay between AMI patients who did and did not receive a GP IIb/IIIa-receptor inhibitor during PCI. Risk adjustment was performed by logistic regression to account for differences in patient and institutional characteristics. Complications were evaluated as a composite of cardiac, noncardiac, procedural, and nonprocedural complications. Incremental costs and length of stay were analyzed by least-squares regression. A total of 32,529 patients in 99 hospitals were included. Only abciximab had a significant benefit for risk-adjusted mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59-0.92, p = 0.007) and shorter length of stay (0.21 day, 95% CI = 0.09-0.34 day, p = 0.0013) compared with the controls. Eptifibatide was associated with fewer complications (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.75-0.98, p = 0.02), and tirofiban incurred the lowest incremental cost ($644, OR = $252-$1,036, p < 0.0001), but abciximab had the most favorable cost-effectiveness ratio ($14,515 per life-year gained). Information from a large database supported the use of GP IIb/IIIa-receptor inhibitors in patients with AMI undergoing PCI. Treatment with abciximab was associated with favorable differences in survival, cost-effectiveness, and length of stay compared to treatment without a GP IIb/IIIa-receptor inhibitor.

Rapid assessment of well-being: The Short Depression-Happiness Scale (SDHS).

The purpose of this paper was: first, to develop the short six-item form of the Depression-Happiness Scale; and second, to examine evidence of reliability and validity for the short form. Three studies are presented. In the first study, principal components analysis is reported and used to select six items to compose the short form of the scale. In the second study, re-analyses of data from three previous studies are presented which confirm that the short scale has good psychometric properties of internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity. In the third study, the short form is found to have a single component structure and convergent validity with measures of depression, happiness and personality.

Adherence and persistence with prasugrel following acute coronary syndrome with percutaneous coronary intervention.

PURPOSE: To measure the adherence and persistence of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) initiating prasugrel after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Using the Thomson Reuters MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental database, a retrospective cohort study identified patients initiating prasugrel following ACS-PCI hospitalization in 2009-2011. Prasugrel adherence over 12 months was measured using the medication possession ratio (MPR); predictors of adherence were identified using a logistic regression model. Persistence was defined as time on continuous therapy; a Cox model identified predictors of prasugrel discontinuation. RESULTS: Among 1,340 patients, the mean age was 57 years; 79.5 % were male. Median prasugrel MPR was 93.2 %; 69.0 % of patients had an MPR ≥80 %. Predictors of adherence <80 % included prior PCI [odds ratio (OR) 0.60; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.40-0.90], prior depression (OR 0.37; 95 % CI 0.16-0.84), prior bleeding (OR 0.41; 95 % CI 0.19-0.86), and baseline anticoagulant use (OR 0.13; 95 % CI 0.03-0.55). Baseline statin use predicted higher adherence (OR 1.56; 95 % CI 1.21-2.02). The median duration of prasugrel therapy was 259 days. Predictors of discontinuation included prior anemia [hazard ratio (HR) 1.63; 95 % CI 1.21-2.21], prior cardiomyopathy (HR 2.72; 95 % CI 1.44-5.13), and prior ischemic heart disease (HR 1.15; 95 % CI 1.00-1.32); baseline statin use predicted reduced risk of discontinuation (HR 0.85; 95 % CI 0.75-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Although adherence to prasugrel was generally high, the duration of therapy was frequently below recommendations. An awareness of risk factors for low adherence or early discontinuation can point to appropriate targets for intervention.

Adherence and dosing frequency of common medications for cardiovascular patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare adherence between once-daily (QD) and twice-daily (BID) dosing with chronic-use prescription medications used by patients with cardiovascular disease. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort database analysis. METHODS: Analysis consisted of 1,077,474 patients aged >18 years with a prescription index date from January 1 to December 31, 2007, for an antidiabetic, antihyperlipidemic, antiplatelet, or cardiac agent with QD or BID dosing. Adherence (medication possession ratio [MPR]) was the number of days of medication supplied between the first prescription fill date and the subsequent 365 days divided by 365 days. Overall mean MPR and comparisons between dosing frequency groups were assessed with a generalized estimating equation. Covariates included age at index date, gender, Charlson comorbidity index, therapeutic class, dosing frequency, and the interaction between therapeutic class and dosing frequency group. RESULTS: Overall, the adjusted mean MPR ± standard error (SE) value for QD agents was 13.6% greater than BID agents (0.66 ± 0.0006 vs 0.57 ± 0.0016; P <.01). The adjusted mean MPR value for QD agents was 2.9%, 17.5%, and 29.4% greater than BID agents in the antidiabetic, antihyperlipidemic, and antiplatelet therapeutic classes, respectively. For cardiac agents, the adjusted mean MPR value was similar between QD and BID agents. Carvedilol represented approximately 80% of the cardiac agents in the BID group. The adjusted mean MPR ± SE for carvedilol phosphate QD was 0.73 ± 0.0024 and 0.65 ± 0.0027 for carvedilol BID (11% difference; P <.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this large analysis, the QD dosing regimen was related to greater adherence versus a BID regimen.

Opportunities for pharmacotherapy at the intersection of metabolic syndrome and hemostasis.

Hemostatic balance is regulated by many factors that may become perturbed by cardio-metabolic abnormalities. Indeed, patients with multiple components of the metabolic syndrome have increased risk of atherosclerosis, hemostatic disorders and thrombotic events. This review focuses on the interrelationship between the metabolic syndrome components and thrombotic and thromboembolic events, the potential underlying mechanisms that lead to metabolic and hemostatic disorders in metabolic syndrome patients, the existing therapeutics aimed at reducing major cardiovascular events, and new therapeutic approaches to address pro-coagulant states.