Comparative effectiveness of pegfilgrastim biosimilars vs originator for prevention of febrile neutropenia: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence on the comparative effectiveness of pegfilgrastim biosimilars compared with the originator product is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) among users of pegfilgrastim biosimilars (pegfilgrastim-jmdb and pegfilgrastim-cbqv) and the originator product. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 2019 IBM MarketScan databases to assess comparative effectiveness of pegfilgrastim originator and biosimilars for prevention of FN among patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Patients with cancer, including breast, lung, colorectal, esophageal and gastric, pancreatic, prostate, ovarian, and non-Hodgkin lymphomas, initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy courses were selected. We further selected patients who used pegfilgrastim originator and biosimilars within 3 days of chemotherapy completion. FN-associated hospitalizations were measured by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. After 1:1 propensity score matching, we used equivalence (with a margin of 6%) hypothesis tests to compare FN-related hospitalization risk in the first cycle and across all cycles between biosimilars and originator users. RESULTS: A total of 2,045 patients were included, of which 445 (21.8%) used pegfilgrastim-jmdb, 636 (31.1%) used pegfilgrastim-cbqv, and 964 (47.1%) used pegfilgrastim originator. After matching, 13 out of 445 originator users and 17 out of 445 pegfilgrastim-jmdb users developed FN after the first chemotherapy cycle (risk difference was 0.9%; P < 0.001 for equivalence test indicating statistical equivalence). After matching, 14 out of 633 originator users and 16 out of 633 pegfilgrastim-cbqv users developed FN (risk difference was 0.32%; P < 0.001 for equivalence test indicating statistical equivalence). Results across all cycles (including the first cycle) were consistent with that in the first cycle. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study of patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, there was no difference in FN risk between patients receiving pegfilgrastim originator and biosimilars in the first cycle and across all cycles. These results add further to the current evidence on pegfilgrastim biosimilars and support wider adoption of pegfilgrastim biosimilars among payers, providers, and patients. Future studies assessing the tolerability, side effects, and other safety issues of pegfilgrastim biosimilars are needed.

Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Aldosterone Antagonists Versus Beta-Blockers as Fourth Agents in Patients With Apparent Resistant Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding long-term effectiveness and safety of aldosterone antagonists (AAs) versus beta blockers (BBs) as fourth-line antihypertensive agents in patients with resistant hypertension (RH). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness and safety of aldosterone AA versus BB. METHODS: We conducted a real-world retrospective cohort study using IBM MarketScan commercial claims and Medicare Supplemental claims (2007-2019). Patients with RH entered the cohort (ie, index date) when they newly initiated either AA or BB. The effectiveness outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events. Safety outcomes were hyperkalemia, gynecomastia, and kidney function deterioration. Potential confounding was addressed by adjustment for baseline characteristics via stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) based on propensity scores. Cox proportional hazards regression with SIPTWs were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% CI comparing risk for outcomes between AA and BB groups. RESULTS: We identified 80 598 patients with RH (mean age: 61 years, 51% males), of which 6626 initiated AA and 73 972 initiated BB as the fourth antihypertensive agent. Among patients with RH, initiation of AA as a fourth-line antihypertensive agent did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular event risk relative to BB initiation (aHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.50-1.19]) but did substantially increase the risk of hyperkalemia (aHR, 3.86 [95% CI, 2.78-5.34]), gynecomastia (aHR, 9.51 [95% CI, 5.69-15.89]), and kidney function deterioration (aHR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.34-1.99]). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical trials powered to assess major adverse cardiovascular events are necessary to understand the risk-benefit trade-off of AA as fourth-line therapy for RH.

Patient out-of-pocket and payer costs for pegfilgrastim originator vs biosimilars as primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in the first cycle among a commercially insured population.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether using pegfilgrastim biosimilars is cost saving in a real-world setting. OBJECTIVE: To compare medical costs including pegfilgrastim drug costs and febrile neutropenia (FN) treatment and management costs between pegfilgrastim biosimilars (pegfilgrastim-jmdb, pegfilgrastim-cbqv) and originator users for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using 2019 IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases was conducted in adult patients with cancer initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy courses. At least 2 diagnoses of the same cancer (at least 7 days apart) were required within 30 days of the chemotherapy initiation date. Pegfilgrastim (excluding on-body injector) costs included drug costs only (excluding administration fees). FN-related costs included all FN-related health care utilizations that were defined as having neutropenia, fever, or infection diagnosis. Per-patient per-cycle (PPPC) out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, health plan costs, and total costs were compared between originator (excluding on-body injector) and biosimilars users in the first cycle. A generalized linear model and a 2-part model were used. RESULTS: A total of 1,930 patients were included, of whom 884 (45.8%) used pegfilgrastim originator, 427 (22.1%) used pegfilgrastim-jmdb, and 619 (32.1%) used pegfilgrastim-cbqv. Adjusted PPPC OOP pegfilgrastim costs in the first cycle were significantly lower for the biosimilars vs the originator ($182 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb and $159 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv vs $299 for originator, P < 0.0001 for both comparisons). However, there was no difference in health plan costs ($5,783 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb and $5,845 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv vs $5,618 for originator) and total costs. In addition, no difference was observed for adjusted PPPC FN treatment and management OOP costs, health plan costs, and total costs in the first cycle. FN treatment OOP costs were $192 for originator, $197 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb (P = 0.958), and $240 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv (P = 0.680). FN treatment health plan costs were $2,804 for originator, $2,970 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb (P = 0.692), and $2,745 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv (P = 0.879). CONCLUSIONS: In a commercially insured population, using pegfilgrastim biosimilars in the first cycle for primary prophylaxis of FN led to cost savings for patients but not payers. No difference in FN-related costs was observed.

Health Care Utilization and Costs Associated With Systemic First-Line Metastatic Melanoma Therapies in the United States.

PURPOSE: US Food and Drug Administration approvals of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies revolutionized the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Our aim was to assess health care resource utilization and costs for patients with metastatic melanoma treated with systemic therapies in first line between January 2012 and December 2017. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic melanoma using MarketScan data. We included patients diagnosed with melanoma and secondary malignant neoplasm who used pembrolizumab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, ipilimumab plus nivolumab, BRAF-inhibitor (BRAF-i) plus MEK inhibitor (MEK-i), BRAF-i or MEK-i monotherapy, or chemotherapy in first line. We compared health care utilization and costs per patient per month (PPPM) using two-part and generalized linear models. RESULTS: We identified 1,870 patients, including 185 pembrolizumab, 103 nivolumab, 689 ipilimumab, 185 nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 214 BRAF-i plus MEK-i, 240 BRAF-i or MEK-i monotherapy, and 254 chemotherapy users. Highest PPPM rates of hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and outpatient visits were observed in patients with ipilimumab plus nivolumab therapy (adjusted difference v pembrolizumab [aDiff], 0.18, 0.12, and 0.88, respectively; all P < .001). Ipilimumab monotherapy users (aDiff, 0.07 and 0.93; all P < .001) and chemotherapy users (aDiff, 0.10 and 2.63; all P < .001) showed higher PPPM rates of hospitalizations and outpatient visits compared with pembrolizumab users, respectively. Utilization rates in nivolumab, BRAF-i plus MEK-i, and BRAF-i or MEK-i groups were similar to the pembrolizumab group. Highest PPPM total costs and drug-related costs were observed in the ipilimumab group ($80,139 US dollars [USD] and $70,051 USD; all P < .001), followed by the ipilimumab plus nivolumab ($71,689 USD and $56,217 USD; all P < .001) and the BRAF-i plus MEK-i group ($31,184 USD and $19,648 USD; all P < .001). PPPM costs in the nivolumab group were similar to the pembrolizumab group. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in health care resource utilization and costs were found across first-line metastatic melanoma regimens. Utilization rates were highest in patients using ipilimumab-containing therapies. High drug costs constituted a major fraction of total PPPM health care costs.

Trends in Use of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Following Introduction of Biosimilars Among Adults With Cancer and Commercial or Medicare Insurance From 2014 to 2019.

Importance: The introduction of biosimilars and novel delivery devices between 2014 and 2019 may have changed the utilization of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF). Objective: To assess utilization trends of G-CSFs for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN) among patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy with commercial or Medicare insurance. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study assessed G-CSF utilization trends overall and stratified by regimen febrile neutropenia risk level. Associations between patient characteristics and G-CSF use were evaluated. Patients with cancer, including breast, lung, colorectal, esophageal and gastric, pancreatic, prostate, ovarian, and non-Hodgkin lymphomas, initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy courses were included from the 2014 to 2019 commercial insurance and 2014 to 2018 Medicare fee-for-service claims databases. Data were analyzed from March to June 2021. Exposures: Year of chemotherapy initiation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were use and trends of G-CSFs for primary prophylaxis, from completion to 3 days after in the first chemotherapy cycle. Results: In total, 86 731 chemotherapy courses (mean [SD] age, 57.7 [11.5] years; 57 838 [66.7%] women and 28 893 [33.3%] men) were identified from 82 410 patients in the commercial insurance database and 32 398 chemotherapy courses (mean [SD] age, 71.8 [8.3] years; 18 468 [57.0%] women and 13 930 [43.0%] men) were identified from 30 279 patients in the Medicare database. Among the commercially insured population, 39 639 patients (45.7%) received G-CSFs, and 12 562 patients (38.8%) received G-CSFs among Medicare insured patients. Overall G-CSF use increased significantly throughout the study period in both populations, from 45.1% (95% CI, 44.4%-45.7%) of patients in 2014 to 47.5% (95% CI, 46.5%-48.5%) of patients in 2019 (P = .001) in the commercially insured population and from 36.0% (95% CI, 34.2%-38.0%) of patients in 2014 to 39.1% (95% CI, 38.1%-40.1%) of patients in 2018 (P < .001) in the Medicare population. The greatest increases in G-CSF use were observed among patients with high FN risk, from 75.0% (95% CI, 74.1%-76.0%) of patients to 83.2% (95% CI, 82.0%-84.2%) of patients (P < .001) among the commercially insured population and 75.3% (95% CI, 71.8%-78.6%) of patients to 86.2% (95% CI, 84.7%-87.6%) of patients (P < .001) among the Medicare population. Use of G-CSFs decreased in the commercially insured population among patients with intermediate FN risk (from 27.5% [95% CI, 26.4%-28.5%] of patients to 20.4% [95% CI, 19.1%-21.7%] of patients; P < .001) or low FN risk (from 19.3% [95% CI, 18.3%-20.4%] of patients to 16.3% [95% CI, 14.7%-18.0%] of patients; P < .001) and remained stable in the Medicare population (intermediate risk: from 26.4% [95% CI, 23.8%-29.2%] of patients to 28.4% [95% CI, 27.0%-29.8%] of patients; P = .35; low risk: from 19.6% [95% CI, 17.0%-22.4%] of patients to 20.9% [95% CI, 19.6%-22.3%] of patients; P = .58). Factors associated with increased odds of G-CSF use included older age (commercial insurance: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.50 [95% CI, 1.41-1.59]; Medicare: aOR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.08-1.71]), receiving a regimen with high FN risk (commercial insurance: aOR, 16.01 [95% CI, 15.17-16.90]; Medicare: aOR, 17.17 [95% CI, 15.76-18.71]), and history of neutropenia (commercial insurance: 3.90 (3.67-4.15); Medicare: 3.82 (3.50-4.18). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that utilization of G-CSFs increased among patients with cancer with high FN risk in both a commercially and Medicare-insured population, but 14% to 17% of patients still did not receive preventive treatment.

The effects of oral anticancer parity laws on out-of-pocket spending and adherence among commercially insured patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 12 years, 43 states and Washington DC have implemented oral anticancer medication parity laws in response to the burden of pharmacy cost sharing. Parity laws are designed to provide equal coverage and cost sharing between orally and parenterally administered anticancer medications for patients in commercial, fully insured health plans (FIHPs). However, there is considerable state-level variation in the requirements to achieve compliance with parity laws, and the clinical and economic effectiveness of parity is not fully known. OBJECTIVES: To (a) understand the impact of parity laws on out-of-pocket (OOP) spending and adherence to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) among commercially insured patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and (b) compare these effects across states with and without per prescription or per 30-day OOP spending limits as part of their parity laws. METHODS: Patients aged 18-64 years with CML, at least 1 pharmacy claim for a TKI, and residence in a state that implemented oral anticancer parity legislation between January 1, 2007, and January 1, 2017, were identified from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database. A propensity score-weighted difference-in-difference approach was used to measure the impact of parity on OOP spending and adherence in the 6 months after the first pharmacy claim for a TKI (index date) for patients enrolled in FIHPs (subject to parity) and self-funded health plans (SFHPs; exempt from parity). OOP spending was standardized to a 30-day equivalent amount and adjusted to 2017 US dollars. Adherence was assessed using the proportion of days covered (PDC), and patients were categorized as adherent with PDC ≥ 0.80. RESULTS: Of 1,887 patients initiating a TKI before or after their state's parity law, 678 (35.9%) were enrolled in FIHPs (480 before vs 198 after parity), and 1,209 (64.1%) were enrolled in SFHPs (688 before vs 521 after parity). Implementation of parity laws was not associated with any changes in mean OOP spending; however, it was associated with a reduced likelihood of paying $0 per 30 days across all states (adjusted difference-in-difference [aDD] OR = 0.662; 95% CI = 0.535-0.820) and states without OOP spending limits (aDD OR = 0.654; 95% CI = 0.508-0.848), but not in states with limits. Nonsignificant but directionally opposite changes at each end of the OOP spending distribution were observed for states with and without OOP spending limits, with increased spending observed at the 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles in states without limits. Mean PDC and adherence showed a nonsignificant increase among FIHP and SFHP patients across all states, states with limits, and states without limits. CONCLUSIONS: Oral anticancer parity laws are not associated with reduced OOP spending or improved adherence in a commercially insured sample of patients with CML. These findings were consistent for states that included OOP spending limits as a component of their parity laws. DISCLOSURES: This study did not receive any external funding. Spargo, Yost, Raju, and Schroader are or were employees of Xcenda, which receives contracts from various industry partners unrelated to this work. There are no other conflicts of interest to disclose.

Priorities for Medical Marijuana Research from the Perspective of Physicians, Dispensary Owners/Staff, and Patients: A Survey Study.

OBJECTIVE: More patients are turning to medical marijuana as an alternative treatment, yet there are apparent knowledge gaps on the risk benefit of medical marijuana for a variety of indications. This study aimed to determine the priorities for medical marijuana research from the perspective of multiple stakeholders including patients, clinicians, and industry representatives. METHODS: An anonymous survey was administered to attendees of the 2019 American Medical Marijuana Physicians Association annual meeting in Orlando, Florida. Respondents completed the survey on paper or smartphone via Qualtrics. The survey included questions on demographics and medical marijuana research priorities under the following broad categories: clinical conditions, safety issues, marijuana types, populations, and others. RESULTS: Forty-six participants (56.5% female, mean age = 51.6 ± 14.1) responded to the survey. A majority were medical marijuana qualified physicians in Florida (56.5%), 30.5% other physicians or clinicians, and 21.7% medical marijuana patients (multiple choices allowed). The top conditions prioritized for research by this group were chronic pain, cancer, and anxiety, and the top priority safety issues were dosing/product choice, complications from smoking/vaping, and drug interactions. Regarding marijuana types, the group prioritized research on THC/CBD ratios, different modes of consumption, and terpenes. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this survey indicate that medical marijuana stakeholders perceived a broad range of research topics as priorities. More research is needed to advance the evidence in these areas and provide guidance to patients, physicians, and the medical marijuana industry.

NMR Studies of Retroviral Genome Packaging.

Nearly all retroviruses selectively package two copies of their unspliced RNA genomes from a cellular milieu that contains a substantial excess of non-viral and spliced viral RNAs. Over the past four decades, combinations of genetic experiments, phylogenetic analyses, nucleotide accessibility mapping, in silico RNA structure predictions, and biophysical experiments were employed to understand how retroviral genomes are selected for packaging. Genetic studies provided early clues regarding the protein and RNA elements required for packaging, and nucleotide accessibility mapping experiments provided insights into the secondary structures of functionally important elements in the genome. Three-dimensional structural determinants of packaging were primarily derived by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. A key advantage of NMR, relative to other methods for determining biomolecular structure (such as X-ray crystallography), is that it is well suited for studies of conformationally dynamic and heterogeneous systems-a hallmark of the retrovirus packaging machinery. Here, we review advances in understanding of the structures, dynamics, and interactions of the proteins and RNA elements involved in retroviral genome selection and packaging that are facilitated by NMR.

Central Nervous System Effects of Oral Propranolol for Infantile Hemangioma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Concerns about the effects of propranolol on the central nervous system (CNS) in the infantile hemangioma (IH) population have been raised. We conducted a meta-analysis of the CNS and sleep-related effects of oral propranolol in IH patients. PubMed, Embase, Cochrance, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for relevant studies. We included clinical trials that compared oral propranolol with other treatments among IH patients under 6 years old and monitored and reported any adverse events. Study characteristics, types and number of adverse events were abstracted. Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess risk of bias. Our main outcomes were CNS and sleep-related effects. Random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled risk ratio. We did not observe statistically significant associations between oral propranolol and CNS or sleep-related effects. Oral propranolol appeared to have a safer profile of CNS effects than corticosteroids (RR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.02⁻3.00), but had an increased risk versus non-corticosteroids (for CNS effect, RR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.86⁻2.27; for sleep-related effects, RR = 1.63, 95% CI 0.88⁻3.03). Despite no statistically significant associations, there were suggestive findings of increased CNS effects and sleep-related risk of propranolol versus non-corticosteroids. In practice, CNS and sleep-related events should be monitored more closely among IH patients treated with oral propranolol.

Risk Factors Associated With 7- Versus 30-Day Readmission Among Patients With Heart Failure Using the Nationwide Readmission Database.

BACKGROUND: The 30-day all-cause readmission for heart failure (HF) is a standard measure to evaluate hospital performance. A recent study found that a shorter period after discharge may be more indicative of hospital quality. OBJECTIVE: To compare risk factors for 7- versus 30-day readmission in patients with HF. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort using the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database. SUBJECTS: Patients 65 years and older with Medicare coverage discharged after HF admission. MEASURES: The 7- or 30-day all-cause readmissions were the outcomes of interest. HF-related readmissions were secondary outcomes. Covariates included patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, and admission-related information. Hierarchical logistic regression evaluated the association between covariates and readmissions. RESULTS: There were N=15,039 all-cause readmissions within 7 days after discharge and N=47,896 within 30 days. Surgical service was a risk factor for 30-day but not 7-day all-cause readmission (odds ratio=1.10, 95% confidence interval=1.05-1.16). Depression, rheumatoid arthritis, liver disease, drug abuse, lymphoma, and psychosis were associated with an increased risk of 30-day all-cause readmission but not 7-day. Longer lengths of stay also had a higher likelihood of all-cause readmission within 30 days compared with 7 days. In contrast, smaller hospital bed size was associated with an increased risk of 7-day all-cause readmission (odds ratio=1.06, confidence interval=1.01-1.12) but not 30-day. Sensitivity analysis with using a 3-day readmission interval showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for hospital readmission are slightly different dependent on the measurement interval. In general, hospital-related factors were associated with shorter readmissions intervals while patient factors were more associated with longer intervals.

Relative Clinical and Cost Burden of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Hospitalizations in Older Adults in the United States-A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

The relative burden of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in older adults (≥65 years old) compared to other serious diseases is important to prioritize preventive treatment. A retrospective analysis was conducted using the 2014 National Readmission Database to evaluate the length of stay, inpatient mortality, 30-day readmissions, and costs of CAP compared to diabetes mellitus (DM), myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. 275,790 hospitalizations were analyzed and represented a national estimate of 616,300 hospitalizations, including 269,961 for CAP, 71,284 for DM, 126,946 for MI, and 148,109 for stroke. The mean length of stay in CAP was 5.2 days, which was higher than DM (4.6) and MI (4.3) but similar to stroke (5.6). The inpatient mortality risk was lower for DM (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.29⁻0.46) but higher for MI (RR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.50⁻1.85) and stroke (RR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.51⁻1.83). The median costs for CAP ($7282) were higher compared to DM ($6217) but lower compared to MI ($14,802) and stroke ($8772). The 30-day readmission rate was 17% in CAP, which was higher compared to MI (15%) and stroke (11.5%) and lower compared to DM (20.3%). In patients with CAP, disease burden is on par with other serious diseases. CAP should be prioritized for prevention in older adults with strategies such as vaccination and smoking cessation.

A Review of Interventions to Increase Vena Cava Filter Retrieval Rates.

BACKGROUND: Inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) are indicated for therapeutic and prophylactic treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients when anticoagulation has failed or is contraindicated. Retrievable IVCFs are not always retrieved despite clinical recommendations. The purpose of this review is to compare results in the literature regarding interventions and to improve IVCF retrieval rates. METHODS: Articles were identified via the search terms "vena cava filters" and "inferior vena cava filters" in conjunction with "retrieval." Searches were repeated in MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. Exclusion criteria included duplicates, misidentified subject matter, study period before 2008, and lack of control group. Two independent reviewers screened key elements in the identified manuscripts, including the targeted intervention population, study design, IVCF retrieval rates, and other outcomes. A third reviewer corroborated results and consolidated findings. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were identified for review. Of these, 12 were physician-targeted interventions, and 8 were patient-targeted interventions (3 studies included both). IVCF retrieval rates varied substantially for each study, but all reviewed studies reported improvement in retrieval rate following intervention. Only 5 studies reported decreased IVCF indwell times in intervention groups. Reported complication rates from IVCF retrievals were low, ranging from 0 to 2%. CONCLUSIONS: IVCF retrieval rates were improved by all interventions in the reviewed studies. Findings suggest that IVCF retrieval rates can be best improved by tracking patients typically lost to follow-up. Literature suggests that successful tracking requires an individual or team of individuals who have been assigned dedicated clinical responsibility for coordinating care following IVCF placement.

Risk Stratification for Bleeding Complications in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism: Application of the HAS-BLED Bleeding Score During the First 6 Months of Anticoagulant Treatment.

BACKGROUND: The Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding, Labile International Normalized Ratio (INR), Elderly, Drugs or alcohol use (HAS-BLED) score has strong predictive validity for major bleeding complications, but limited validation has been conducted in venous thromboembolism (VTE). This study evaluates the HAS-BLED score in a large cohort of VTE patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective cohort of adults ≥18 years with primary diagnosis of VTE between January 1, 2010 and November 31, 2013 were identified in an insurance claims database. Patients were tracked until death, any bleed event, or end of study period. HAS-BLED score and components were evaluated via proportional hazard models. Cumulative incidence functions were reported at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days. N=132 280 patients with a VTE were identified, with 73.8% having HAS-BLED scores of 0 to 2, 3.6% score ≥4, and 4789 bleeding events (3.6% all patients). A 1-point HAS-BLED score increase was associated with 20% to 30% bleeding rate increase overall, but in a cancer cohort only the increase from 3- to 4-points was significant for all bleeds (csHR=1.41, 95% CI: 1.17-1.69; sdHR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.17-1.69) and major bleeds (csHR=1.66, 95% CI: 1.26-2.20; sdHR=1.66, 95% CI: 1.25-2.19). Adding cancer to the model as an independent covariate provided the strongest association among all covariates, with csHR=2.25 (95% CI: 1.98-2.56) and sdHR=2.11 (95% CI: 1.85-2.41) in the model for major bleeds. CONCLUSIONS: The HAS-BLED score has good predictive validity for bleeding risks in patients with VTE. The addition of cancer as an independent bleeding risk factor merits consideration, possibly as part of the "B" criterion ("bleeding tendency or predisposition").

Statin use and venous thromboembolism in cancer: A large, active comparator, propensity score matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Statins have been shown to have a protective effect for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the general population. This study sought to assess the association between statins and the risk for cancer-associated deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed cancer were followed for up to one year in a healthcare claims database (2010-2013). Three treatment groups included statin users, non-statin cholesterol lowering medication users, and an untreated group with pre-existing indications for statin therapy (hyperlipidemia, diabetes, or heart disease). Propensity score matched groups were compared using competing risks survival models for DVT and PE outcomes reporting the hazard ratios (HR) between the treatment groups. Sensitivity analyses assessed the influence of age and individual medications. RESULTS: The total cohort included 170,459 patients, which, after matching, were similar on baseline characteristics. The overall model showed a statistically significant protective effect for statins compared to no treatment attributed only to leukemia for DVT (HR=0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.99) and colorectal cancers for PE (HR=0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.99) in stratified analyses. There were generally no differences in outcomes between statins and non-statins and no individual statin use showed results different from the class effect. CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity score matched sample of patients with cancer, statins were shown to have a small protective effect in some cancers for DVT or PE compared to no treatment and little difference compared to an active control group. The lack of effect was consistent across statins and was also not found for any of the sensitivity analyses included.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibition and the Prevalence of Autoimmune Disorders Among Patients With Lung and Renal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibition reactivates the immune response against cancer cells in multiple tissue types and has been shown to induce durable responses. However, for patients with autoimmune disorders, their conditions can worsen with this reactivation. We sought to identify, among patients with lung and renal cancer, how many harbor a comorbid autoimmune condition and may be at risk of worsening their condition while on immune checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab. METHODS: An administrative health care claims database, Truven MarketScan, was used to identify patients diagnosed with lung and renal cancer from 2010 to 2013. We assessed patients for diagnosis of autoimmune diseases 1 year prior to or after diagnosis of cancer using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes for 41 autoimmune diseases. Baseline characteristics and other comorbid conditions were recorded. RESULTS: More than 25% of patients with both lung and renal cancer had a comorbid autoimmune condition between 2010 and 2013 and were more likely to be women, older, and have more baseline comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: This population presents a dilemma to physicians when deciding to treat with immune checkpoint inhibitors and risk immune-related adverse events. Future evaluation of real-world use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer with autoimmune diseases will be needed.

Epidemiologic Analysis Along the Mevalonate Pathway Reveals Improved Cancer Survival in Patients Who Receive Statins Alone and in Combination With Bisphosphonates.

PURPOSE: Cohort studies report associations between statin use and improved survival in patients with cancer. We used pharmacoepidemiologic methods to evaluate the survival of patients with cancer who received statins alone or in ostensibly synergistic drug combinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with cancer who were diagnosed from 2010 to 2013 were identified in a large health care claims database. The rate of all-cause death up to 1 year after diagnosis was compared by Cox proportional hazard regression. Sensitivity analyses included age stratification, statin type and intensity, and comparison with or without bisphosphonates and dipyridamole. RESULTS: Among 312,907 identified patients with cancer, treatment groups included statin users (n = 65,440), nonstatin users who received medications that block cholesterol absorption (n = 9,289), and nonusers (n = 226,007). Statin use before diagnosis was associated with improved overall survival compared with no treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.91) and specifically in patients with leukemia, lung, or renal cancers. Nonstatin users had increased overall survival compared with no treatment (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.85); when stratified, this difference held true only for pancreatic cancer and leukemia. No differences were observed between statin and nonstatin groups. Bisphosphonate use alone had no effect (n = 4,528), but patients who used both statins and bisphosphonates (n = 4,090) had increased survival compared with no treatment (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.81). The effect of the combination of dipyridamole and statin use (n = 651) was not significant compared with no treatment. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the combination of statins with drugs that affect isoprenylation, such as bisphosphonates, improves survival in patients with cancer. Consideration of pathway-specific pharmacology allows for hypotheses testing with the pharmacoepidemiologic approach. Prospective evaluation of these findings warrants clinical investigation and preclinical mechanistic studies.

Hospital Variation and Patient Characteristics Associated With Vena Cava Filter Utilization.

INTRODUCTION: There is a wide variation in the use of vena cava filter (VCF). OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the hospital and patient characteristics associated with VCF use in deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: Inpatient discharge data from all acute care hospitals with DVT/PE during 2008-2014 in Kentucky were used. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationships of study variables with VCF use. RESULTS: During the study period, 81,922 discharges for DVT/PE were observed and 10.5% of these received a VCF. This included 12,083 cases of PE+DVT, 18,571 cases of PE only, and 51,268 cases of DVT only. VCF use among these groups was 22.7%, 6.0%, and 7.8%, respectively. In adjusted analyses, VCF use was associated with increasing age, indicating that those over age 65 were twice as likely to receive a filter compared with the reference (21-25 y old) group. Significant comorbidities associated with VCF use included cancer, liver disease, cerebrovascular disease, atrial fibrillation, anemia, and concurrent bleeding. Lower extremity, proximal DVTs, and patients receiving thrombolytic therapy or embolectomy, those having surgery, and those who were unstable or had trauma, were also more likely to receive a filter. Among cancer types, brain and metastatic tumors were significantly associated with VCF use. Between-hospital variation after controlling for all covariates was 7.1%. CONCLUSIONS: There was high variation in the use of VCFs. Several high-risk subgroups were more likely to use VCFs including older adults and those with cancer and concurrent bleeding.

Impact of Time-Varying Treatment Exposures on the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Multiple Myeloma.

Multiple myeloma (MM) has one of the highest risks of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of all cancers due to pathologic changes and treatment-related exposures. This study assessed the one-year incidence of VTE in newly diagnosed MM and to determine the baseline and time-varying treatment-related factors associated with VTE risk in a U.S.-based cohort. MM patients were identified and age, gender, and baseline comorbidities were determined. Treatment-related exposures included thalidomide derivatives (IMIDs), proteasome inhibitors, cytotoxic chemotherapy, steroids, erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs), stem cell transplants (SCT), hospitalizations, infection, and central venous catheters (CVC). Multiple statistical models were used including a baseline competing risks model, a time-varying exposure Cox proportional hazard (CPH) model, and a case-time-control analysis. The overall incidence of VTE was 107.2 per 1000 person-years with one-half of the VTEs occurring in the first 90 days. The baseline model showed that increasing age, heart failure, and hypertension were associated with one-year incidence of VTE. MM-specific IMID treatment had lower than expected associations with VTE based on prior literature. Instead, exposure to ESAs, SCT, CVC, and infection had higher associations. Based on these results, VTE risk in MM may be less straightforward than considering only chemotherapy exposures, and other treatment-related exposures should be considered to determine patient risk.