Does the Effectiveness of a Medicine Copay Voucher Vary by Baseline Medication Out-Of-Pocket Expenses? Insights From ARTEMIS.

Background Persistence to P2Y12 inhibitors after myocardial infarction (MI) remains low. Out-of-pocket cost is cited as a factor affecting medication compliance. We examined whether a copayment intervention affected 1-year persistence to P2Y12 inhibitors and clinical outcomes. Methods and Results In an analysis of ARTEMIS (Affordability and Real-World Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness After Myocardial Infarction Study), patients with MI discharged on a P2Y12 inhibitor were stratified by baseline out-of-pocket medication burden: low ($0-$49 per month), intermediate ($50-$149 per month), and high (≥$150 per month). The impact of the voucher intervention on 1-year P2Y12 inhibitor persistence was examined using a logistic regression model with generalized estimating equations. We assessed the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events among the groups using a Kaplan-Meier estimator. Among 7351 MI-treated patients at 282 hospitals, 54.2% patients were in the low copay group, 32.0% in the middle copay group, and 13.8% in the high copay group. Patients in higher copay groups were more likely to have a history of prior MI, heart failure, and diabetes compared with the low copay group (all P<0.0001). Voucher use was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of 1-year P2Y12 inhibitor persistence regardless of copayment tier (low copay with versus without voucher: adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.44 [95% CI, 1.25-1.66]; middle copay: adjusted OR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.37-1.95]; high copay group: adjusted OR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.05-1.87]; P interaction=0.42). Patients in the high copay group without a voucher had similar risk of 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events compared with patients in the high copay group with a voucher (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.66-1.21]). Conclusions Medication copayment vouchers were associated with higher medication persistence at 1 year following an MI, regardless of out-of-pocket medication burden. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02406677.

Association of Socioeconomic Disadvantage With Long-term Mortality After Myocardial Infarction: The Mass General Brigham YOUNG-MI Registry.

Importance: Socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with poor health outcomes. However, whether socioeconomic factors are associated with post-myocardial infarction (MI) outcomes in younger patient populations is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the association of neighborhood-level socioeconomic disadvantage with long-term outcomes among patients who experienced an MI at a young age. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed patients in the Mass General Brigham YOUNG-MI Registry (at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts) who experienced an MI at or before 50 years of age between January 1, 2000, and April 30, 2016. Each patient's home address was mapped to the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) to capture higher rates of socioeconomic disadvantage. The median follow-up duration was 11.3 years. The dates of analysis were May 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020. Exposures: Patients were assigned an ADI ranking according to their home address and then stratified into 3 groups (least disadvantaged group, middle group, and most disadvantaged group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of interest were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Cause of death was adjudicated from national registries and electronic medical records. Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to evaluate the association of ADI with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Results: The cohort consisted of 2097 patients, of whom 2002 (95.5%) with an ADI ranking were included (median [interquartile range] age, 45 [42-48] years; 1607 male individuals [80.3%]). Patients in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods were more likely to be Black or Hispanic, have public insurance or no insurance, and have higher rates of traditional cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension and diabetes. Among the 1964 patients who survived to hospital discharge, 74 (13.6%) in the most disadvantaged group compared with 88 (12.6%) in the middle group and 41 (5.7%) in the least disadvantaged group died. Even after adjusting for a comprehensive set of clinical covariates, higher neighborhood disadvantage was associated with a 32% higher all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.10-1.60; P = .004) and a 57% higher cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.17-2.10; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that, among patients who experienced an MI at or before age 50 years, socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality even after adjusting for clinical comorbidities. These findings suggest that neighborhood and socioeconomic factors have an important role in long-term post-MI survival.

Copayment Reduction Voucher Utilization and Associations With Medication Persistence and Clinical Outcomes: Findings From the ARTEMIS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cost is frequently cited as a barrier to optimal medication use, but the extent to which copayment assistance interventions are used when available, and their impact on evidence-based medication persistence and major adverse cardiovascular events is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ARTEMIS trial (Affordability and Real-World Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness After Myocardial Infarction Study) randomized 301 hospitals to usual care versus the ability to provide patients with vouchers that offset copayment costs when filling P2Y12 inhibitors in the 1 year post-myocardial infarction. In the intervention group, we used multivariable logistic regression to identify patient and medication cost characteristics associated with voucher use. We then used this model to stratify both intervention and usual care patients by likelihood of voucher use, and examined the impact of the voucher intervention on 1-year P2Y12 inhibitor persistence (no gap in pharmacy supply >30 days) and major adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke). Among 10 102 enrolled patients, 6135 patients were treated at hospitals randomized to the copayment intervention. Of these, 1742 (28.4%) never used the voucher, although 1729 (99.2%) voucher never-users filled at least one P2Y12 inhibitor prescription in the 1 year post-myocardial infarction. Characteristics most associated with voucher use included: discharge on ticagrelor, planned 1-year course of P2Y12 inhibitor treatment, white race, commercial insurance, and higher out-of-pocket medication costs (c-statistic 0.74). Applying this propensity model to stratify all enrolled patients by likelihood of voucher use, the intervention improved medication persistence the most in patients with high likelihood of voucher use (adjusted interaction P=0.03, odds ratio, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.48-2.33]). The intervention did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events in any voucher use likelihood group, although the odds ratio was lowest (0.86 [95% CI, 0.56-1.16]) among patients with high likelihood of voucher use (adjusted interaction P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients discharged after myocardial infarction, those with higher copayments and greater out-of-pocket medication costs were more likely to use a copayment assistance voucher, but some classes of patients were less likely to use a copayment assistance voucher. Patients at low likelihood of voucher use benefitted least from copayment assistance, and other interventions may be needed to improve medication-taking behaviors and clinical outcomes in these patients. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02406677.

Impact of a Copayment Reduction Intervention on Medication Persistence and Cardiovascular Events in Hospitals With and Without Prior Medication Financial Assistance Programs.

Background Hospitals commonly provide a short-term supply of free P2Y12 inhibitors at discharge after myocardial infarction, but it is unclear if these programs improve medication persistence and outcomes. The ARTEMIS (Affordability and Real-World Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness After Myocardial Infarction Study) trial randomized hospitals to usual care versus waived P2Y12 inhibitor copayment costs for 1-year post-myocardial infarction. Whether the impact of this intervention differed between hospitals with and without pre-existing medication assistance programs is unknown. Methods and Results In this post hoc analysis of the ARTEMIS trial, we examined the associations of pre-study free medication programs and the randomized copayment voucher intervention with P2Y12 inhibitor persistence (measured by pharmacy fills and patient report) and major adverse cardiovascular events using logistic regression models including a propensity score. Among 262 hospitals, 129 (49%) offered pre-study free medication assistance. One-year P2Y12 inhibitor persistence and major adverse cardiovascular events risks were similar between patients treated at hospitals with and without free medication programs (adjusted odds ratio 0.93, 95% CI, 0.82-1.05 and hazard ratio 0.92, 95% CI, 0.80-1.07, respectively). The randomized copayment voucher intervention improved persistence, assessed by pharmacy fills, in both hospitals with (53.6% versus 44.0%, adjusted odds ratio 1.45, 95% CI, 1.20-1.75) and without (59.0% versus 48.3%, adjusted odds ratio 1.46, 95% CI, 1.25-1.70) free medication programs (Pinteraction=0.71). Differences in patient-reported persistence were not significant after adjustment. Conclusions While hospitals commonly report the ability to provide free short-term P2Y12 inhibitors, we did not find association of this with medication persistence or major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with insurance coverage for prescription medication enrolled in the ARTEMIS trial. An intervention that provided copayment assistance vouchers for 1 year was successful in improving medication persistence in hospitals with and without pre-existing short-term medication programs. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02406677.

Association of a P2Y12 Inhibitor Copayment Reduction Intervention With Persistence and Adherence With Other Secondary Prevention Medications: A Post Hoc Analysis of the ARTEMIS Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The Affordability and Real-World Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness After Myocardial Infarction Study (ARTEMIS) cluster-randomized trial found that copayment reduction for P2Y12 inhibitors improved 1-year patient persistence in taking that medication. Objective: To assess whether providing copayment reduction for P2Y12 inhibitors increases patient persistence in taking other secondary prevention cardiovascular medications. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc analysis of the ARTEMIS trial includes data from 287 hospitals that enrolled patients between June 2015 and September 2016. Patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction were included. Data analysis occurred from May 2018 through August 2019. Interventions: Hospitals randomized to the intervention provided patients vouchers that waived copayments for P2Y12 inhibitors fills for 1 year. Hospitals randomized to usual care did not provide study vouchers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Persistence in taking ß-blocker, statin, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker medications at 1 year, defined as the absence of a gap in medication supply of 30 or more days by pharmacy fill data in the intervention-arm (intent-to-treat) population. Results: A total of 131 hospitals (with 5109 patients) were randomized to the intervention, and 156 hospitals (with 3264 patients) randomized to the control group. Patients discharged from intervention hospitals had higher persistence in taking statins (2247 [46.1%] vs 1300 [41.9%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.00-1.24]), and ß-blockers (2235 [47.6%] vs 1277 [42.5%]; odds ratio, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.10-1.38]), although the association was smaller than that seen for P2Y12 inhibitors (odds ratio, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.29-1.66]). Persistence in taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II-receptor blockers were also numerically higher among patients in the intervention arm than in the usual-care arm, but this was not significant after risk adjustment (1520 [43.9%] vs 847 [40.5%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.97-1.24]). Patients in the intervention arm reported greater financial burden associated with medication cost than the patients in the usual-care arm at baseline, but these differences were no longer significant at 1 year. Conclusions and Relevance: Reducing patient copayments for 1 medication class increased persistence not only to that therapy class but may also have modestly increased persistence to other post-myocardial infarction secondary prevention medications. These findings have important implications for the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of medication cost-assistance programs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02406677.

Simulation of impact on cardiovascular events due to lipid-lowering therapy intensification in a population with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), guidelines recommend statins as first-line lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) with addition of nonstatin agents in those with persistently elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. METHODS: To estimate the cardiovascular (CV) risk reduction implications of treatment intensification, we used a previously reported simulation model with enhancements. An ASCVD cohort was developed from a US claims database. A Cox model was used to estimate baseline risk of CV events: myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, unstable angina hospitalization, elective coronary revascularization, or cardiovascular death. Patients were sampled with replacement (bootstrapping) and entered the simulation model, which applied stepwise LLT intensification logic, with a goal of achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol less than 70 mg/dL at each step. CV risk reduction assumptions were based on published data. Two treatment intensification scenarios were investigated: ideal and real-world (which accounted for statin intolerance, nonadherence, and payer restrictions). RESULTS: In a cohort of 1,000 patients with ASCVD, approximately 813 (809-818) would require treatment intensification with LLT under an ideal treatment intensification scenario. Before treatment intensification, 183 (179-187) events would be expected to occur over 5 years. With treatment intensification, 40 (34-45) of these events could be avoided. In a real-world scenario, about 818 (813-823) patients require treatment intensification with LLT, resulting in 29 (24-34) events avoided over 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Intensification of LLT in an ASCVD population translates into a substantial number of CV events avoided. This simulation-based model could assist in assessing the potential benefits of various types of population-level LLT interventions.

Effect of Medication Co-payment Vouchers on P2Y12 Inhibitor Use and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Myocardial Infarction: The ARTEMIS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite guideline recommendations, many patients discontinue P2Y12 inhibitor therapy earlier than the recommended 1 year after myocardial infarction (MI), and higher-potency P2Y12 inhibitors are underutilized. Cost is frequently cited as an explanation for both of these observations. Objective: To determine whether removing co-payment barriers increases P2Y12 inhibitor persistence and lowers risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized clinical trial among 301 hospitals enrolling adult patients with acute MI (June 5, 2015, through September 30, 2016); patients were followed up for 1 year after discharge (final date of follow-up was October 23, 2017), with blinded adjudication of MACE; choice of P2Y12 inhibitor was per clinician discretion. Interventions: Hospitals randomized to the intervention (n = 131 [6436 patients]) provided patients with co-payment vouchers for clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 1 year (median voucher value for a 30-day supply, $137 [25th-75th percentile, $20-$339]). Hospitals randomized to usual care (n = 156 [4565 patients]) did not provide study vouchers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Independent coprimary outcomes were patient-reported persistence with P2Y12 inhibitor (defined as continued treatment without gap in use ≥30 days) and MACE (death, recurrent MI, or stroke) at 1 year among patients discharged with a prescription for clopidogrel or ticagrelor. Results: Among 11 001 enrolled patients (median age, 62 years; 3459 [31%] women), 10 102 patients were discharged with prescriptions for clopidogrel or ticagrelor (clopidogrel prescribed to 2317 [36.0%] in the intervention group and 2497 [54.7%] in the usual care group), 4393 of 6135 patients (72%) in the intervention group used the voucher, and follow-up data at 1 year were available for 10 802 patients (98.2%). Patient-reported persistence with P2Y12 inhibitors at 1 year was higher in the intervention group than in the control group (unadjusted rates, 5340/6135 [87.0%] vs 3324/3967 [83.8%], respectively; P < .001; adjusted difference, 2.3% [95% CI, 0.4% to 4.1%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.40]). There was no significant difference in MACE at 1 year between intervention and usual care groups (unadjusted cumulative incidence, 10.2% vs 10.6%; P = .65; adjusted difference, 0.66% [95% CI, -0.73% to 2.06%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.25]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with MI, provision of vouchers to offset medication co-payments for P2Y12 inhibitors, compared with no vouchers, resulted in a 3.3% absolute increase in patient-reported persistence with P2Y12 inhibitors and no significant reduction in 1-year MACE outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02406677.

PCSK9 inhibitor valuation: A science-based review of the two recent models.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) has been extensively evaluated. Prospective cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, biology, pathophysiology, genetics, and Mendelian randomization studies, have clearly taught us that LDL-C causes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The newest class of drugs to lower LDL-C, the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies, have been found to safely reduce LDL-C approximately 60% when added to high-intensity statin therapy. Because their cost is much greater than that of the currently available agents, their value has been questioned. In late August, 2017, two groups assessed the value of this class of drugs looking at cost-effectiveness; however, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review and Fonarow and colleagues found disparate results when assessing PCSK9 valuation. Herein, we review the evolution of LDL-C from hypothesis to fact, and then attempt to adjudicate the 2 models, shedding light on the complex modeling process. We find that models of cost-effectiveness are helpful adjuncts to decision making, but that their conclusions depend on many assumptions. Ultimately, clinician judgment regarding their clinical benefit, balanced by some estimation of cost, may be more productive to target the right patients for whom the benefits can be well-justified.

Association of insurance type with receipt of oral anticoagulation in insured patients with atrial fibrillation: A report from the American College of Cardiology NCDR PINNACLE registry.

BACKGROUND: It is poorly understood whether insurance type may be a major contributor to the underuse of oral anticoagulation (OAC) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), particularly for novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort registry study of patients with insurance, AF, CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2, and at least one outpatient encounter recorded in the ACC NCDR's PINNACLE Registry between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014. We used hierarchical regression, adjusting for patient characteristics and clustering by physician, to evaluate the association of insurance type (Private, Military, Medicare, Medicaid, Other) with receipt of OAC (any OAC, warfarin, or NOAC). RESULTS: In 363,309 patients (age 75±10; 48% female), we found a significant difference in proportions of OAC and NOAC prescription across insurance types (OAC: Military 53%, Private 53%, Medicare 52%, Other 41%, Medicaid 41%, P<.001; NOAC: Military 24%, Private 19%, Medicare 17%, Other 17%, Medicaid 8%, P<.001). After adjustment for patient characteristics and facility, private, Medicaid, and other insurance were independently associated with a lower odds of OAC prescription relative to Medicare, but military insured patients were not significantly different. After adjustment, military and private insurance were independently associated with a higher odds of NOAC prescription relative to Medicare, while Medicaid and other insurance were associated with a lower odds of NOAC prescription. CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary US AF population, there was significant variation of OAC prescription across insurance plans, with the highest among private and Medicare insured patients. These differences may indicate that insurance plan, and its associated pharmacy benefits, affect the pace of diffusion of new therapies.

Simulation of Lipid-Lowering Therapy Intensification in a Population With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.

Importance: In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), guidelines recommend optimizing statin treatment, and consensus pathways suggest use of ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors in patients with persistently elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels despite use of statins. Recent trials have provided evidence of benefit in reduction of cardiovascular events with these agents. Objective: To estimate the percentage of patients with ASCVD who would require a PCSK9 inhibitor when oral lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) is intensified first. Design, Setting, and Participants: This simulation model study used a large administrative database of US medical and pharmacy claims to identify a cohort of 105 269 patients with ASCVD enrolled from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2013, who met the inclusion criteria (database cohort). Patients were sampled with replacement (bootstrapping) to match the US epidemiologic distribution and entered into a Monte Carlo simulation (simulation cohort) that applied stepwise treatment intensification algorithms in those with LDL-C levels of at least 70 mg/dL. All patients not initially receiving a statin were given atorvastatin, 20 mg, and the following LLT intensification steps were applied: uptitration to atorvastatin, 80 mg; add-on ezetimibe therapy; add-on alirocumab therapy, 75 mg (a PCSK9 inhibitor); and uptitration to alirocumab, 150 mg. Sensitivity analyses included evolocumab as a PCSK9 inhibitor. Efficacy was estimated from published studies and incorporated patient-level variation. Data were analyzed from December 2015 to May 2017. Exposures: Treatment intensification strategies with LLT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Use of LLT among the population with ASCVD and distributions of LDL-C levels under various treatment intensification scenarios. Results: Inclusion criteria were met by 105 269 individuals in the database cohort (57.2% male and 42.8% female; mean [SD] age, 65.1 [12.1] years). In the simulation cohort (1 million patients; 54.8% male and 45.2% female; mean [SD] age, 66.4 [12.2] years), before treatment intensification, 51.5% used statin monotherapy and 1.7% used statins plus ezetimibe. Only 25.2% achieved an LDL-C level of less than 70 mg/dL. After treatment intensification, 99.3% could achieve an LDL-C level of less than 70 mg/dL, including 67.3% with statin monotherapy, 18.7% with statins plus ezetimibe, and 14% with add-on PCSK9 inhibitor. Conclusions and Relevance: Large gaps exist between recommendations and current practice regarding LLT in the population with ASCVD. In our model that assumes no LLT intolerance and full adherence, intensification of oral LLT could achieve an LDL-C level of less than 70 mg/dL in most patients, with only a modest percentage requiring a PCSK9 inhibitor.

Impact of Ezetimibe on the Rate of Cardiovascular-Related Hospitalizations and Associated Costs Among Patients With a Recent Acute Coronary Syndrome: Results From the IMPROVE-IT Trial (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial).

BACKGROUND: Ezetimibe, when added to simvastatin therapy, reduces cardiovascular events after recent acute coronary syndrome. However, the impact of ezetimibe on cardiovascular-related hospitalizations and associated costs is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used patient-level data from the IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) to examine the impact of simvastatin-ezetimibe versus simvastatin-placebo on cardiovascular-related hospitalizations and related costs (excluding drug costs) over 7 years follow-up. Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Groups were assigned to all cardiovascular hospitalizations. Hospital costs were estimated using Medicare reimbursement rates for 2013. Associated physician costs were estimated as a percentage of hospital costs. The impact of treatment assignment on hospitalization rates and costs was estimated using Poisson and linear regression, respectively. There was a significantly lower cardiovascular hospitalization rate with ezetimibe compared with placebo (risk ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.99; P=0.031), mainly attributable to fewer hospitalizations for percutaneous coronary intervention, angina, and stroke. Consequently, cardiovascular-related hospitalization costs over 7 years were $453 per patient lower with ezetimibe (95% confidence interval, -$38 to -$869; P=0.030). Although all prespecified subgroups had lower cost with ezetimibe therapy, patients with diabetes mellitus, patients aged ≥75 years, and patients at higher predicted risk for recurrent ischemic events had even greater cost offsets. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome leads to reductions in cardiovascular-related hospitalizations and associated costs, with the greatest cost offsets in high-risk patients. These cost reductions may completely offset the cost of the drug once ezetimibe becomes generic, and may lead to cost savings from the perspective of the healthcare system, if treatment with ezetimibe is targeted to high-risk patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT00202878.

Rationale and design of the Affordability and Real-world Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness after Myocardial Infarction Study (ARTEMIS): A multicenter, cluster-randomized trial of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor copayment reduction after myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: The use of oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors after acute myocardial infarction (MI) can reduce risks of subsequent major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of all-cause death, recurrent MI, and stroke), yet medication persistence is suboptimal. Although copayment cost has been implicated as a factor influencing medication persistence, it remains unclear whether reducing or eliminating these costs can improve medication persistence and/or downstream clinical outcomes. DESIGN: ARTEMIS is a multicenter, cluster-randomized clinical trial designed to examine whether eliminating patient copayment for P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy affects medication persistence and clinical outcomes. We will enroll approximately 11,000 patients hospitalized for acute ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation MI at 300 hospitals. Choice and duration of treatment with a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor will be determined by the treating physician. Hospitals randomized to the copayment intervention will provide vouchers to cover patients' copayments for their P2Y12 receptor inhibitor for up to 1 year after discharge. The coprimary end points are 1-year P2Y12 receptor inhibitor persistence and major adverse cardiovascular events. Secondary end points include choice of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, patient-reported outcomes, and postdischarge cost of care. CONCLUSION: ARTEMIS will be the largest randomized assessment of a medication copayment reduction intervention on medication persistence, clinical outcomes, treatment selection, and cost of care after acute MI.

Economic analysis of ticagrelor therapy from a U.S. perspective: results from the PLATO study.

BACKGROUND: Based on results of the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) trial comparing ticagrelor with clopidogrel therapy, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved ticagrelor in 2011 for reducing thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with the proviso that it be taken with low-dose aspirin. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the cost and cost effectiveness of ticagrelor therapy relative to clopidogrel in treating ACS patients from the perspective of the U.S. health care system. METHODS: We estimated within-trial resource use and costs using U.S. low-dose aspirin patients in PLATO (n = 547). Quality-adjusted life expectancy was estimated using the total PLATO population (n = 18,624), combined with baseline risk and long-term survival data from an external ACS patient cohort. Study drugs were valued at current costs. Cost effectiveness was assessed, as was the sensitivity of results to sampling and methodological uncertainties. RESULTS: One year of ticagrelor therapy, relative to that of generic clopidogrel, cost $29,665/quality-adjusted life-year gained, with 99% of bootstrap estimates falling under a $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Results were robust to extensive sensitivity analyses, including variations in clopidogrel cost, exclusion of costs in extended years of life, and a recalibrated estimate of survival reflecting a lower underlying mortality risk in the United States. CONCLUSIONS: For PLATO-eligible ACS patients, a U.S. perspective comparison of the current standard of dual antiplatelet therapy of aspirin with clopidogrel versus aspirin plus ticagrelor showed that the ticagrelor regimen increased life expectancy at an incremental cost well within accepted benchmarks of good value for money. (A Comparison of Ticagrelor [AZD6140] and Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [PLATO]; NCT00391872).

Lipoprotein(a) for risk assessment in patients with established coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic utility of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] in individuals with coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND: Data regarding an association between Lp(a) and cardiovascular (CV) risk in secondary prevention populations are sparse. METHODS: Plasma Lp(a) was measured in 6,708 subjects with CAD from 3 studies; data were then combined with 8 previously published studies for a total of 18,978 subjects. RESULTS: Across the 3 studies, increasing levels of Lp(a) were not associated with the risk of CV events when modeled as a continuous variable (odds ratio [OR]: 1.03 per log-transformed SD, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96 to 1.11) or by quintile (Q5:Q1 OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.34). When data were combined with previously published studies of Lp(a) in secondary prevention, subjects with Lp(a) levels in the highest quantile were at increased risk of CV events (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.71), but with significant between-study heterogeneity (p = 0.001). When stratified on the basis of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, the association between Lp(a) and CV events was significant in studies in which average LDL cholesterol was ≥130 mg/dl (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.23 to 1.73, p < 0.001), whereas this relationship did not achieve statistical significance for studies with an average LDL cholesterol <130 mg/dl (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.60, p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Lp(a) is significantly associated with the risk of CV events in patients with established CAD; however, there exists marked heterogeneity across trials. In particular, the prognostic value of Lp(a) in patients with low cholesterol levels remains unclear.

Assessment of adiponectin and the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome: observations from the Pravastatin Or atorVastatin Evaluation and Infection Trial-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 22 (PROVE IT-TIMI 22).

BACKGROUND: Adiponectin, an adipocytokine, is secreted by fatty cells and exerts a regulatory role in atherogenesis, modulating foam cell formation and cellular adhesion. In stable atherosclerosis, plasma adiponectin has been reported to be associated with both increased and decreased cardiovascular risk. Recent data have suggested a possible discordant adverse risk relationship in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Therefore, we investigated the association between adiponectin and cardiovascular events in patients with ACS. METHODS: We measured plasma adiponectin in 3,931 patients stabilized following ACS and assessed the relationship with 2-year outcome. Patients were followed for all-cause death and major cardiovascular events. Using multivariable Cox regression, we adjusted for age, sex, race, ACS type, diabetes, smoking status, triglycerides, blood pressure, body mass index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, treatment group (atorvastatin), B-type natriuretic peptide, and C-reactive protein. RESULTS: Adiponectin correlated negatively with age, diabetes, body mass index, and triglycerides (each, P < .001) but showed a positive relationship with the risk of death (P = .01), myocardial infarction (P = .01), and heart failure (P < .001). After adjusting for clinical risk factors, B-type natriuretic peptide, and C-reactive protein, adiponectin greater than the median (4,477 ng/mL) was independently associated with an increased risk of death or myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 1.58, 95% CI 1.10-2.28, P = .013) and congestive heart failure (hazard ratio 2.17, 95% CI 1.21-3.89, P = .010). CONCLUSIONS: Higher adiponectin concentrations early after ACS are independently associated with a higher risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. This finding is directionally opposite to that observed in patients at risk for atherosclerosis and reveals the need for investigation to elucidate differences in the pathobiology of adiponectin in stable versus unstable coronary artery disease.

The incidence of bradyarrhythmias and clinical bradyarrhythmic events in patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel in the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) trial: results of the continuous electrocardiographic assessment substudy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether ticagrelor increased the risk of ventricular pauses compared with clopidogrel and whether these pauses were associated with any clinical bradycardic events in patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes. BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor, an oral reversibly binding P2Y(12) inhibitor, provides more potent and consistent inhibition of platelet aggregation than clopidogrel but in a phase II study was associated with increased risk for ventricular pauses. A prospective continuous electrocardiographic (cECG) assessment was therefore performed within the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) study comparing ticagrelor and clopidogrel in patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes. METHODS: Patients in the cECG assessment had planned 7-day cECG recording initiated at the time of randomization (week 1), which was within 24 h of symptom onset, and then repeated at 1 month after randomization during the convalescent phase. The principal safety endpoint was the incidence of ventricular pauses lasting at least 3 s. Investigators also reported symptomatic bradycardic adverse events during the entire study duration (median 277 days). RESULTS: A total of 2,908 patients were included in the cECG assessment, of whom 2,866 (98.5%) had week 1 recordings, 1,991 (68.4%) had 1-month recordings, and 1,949 (67.0%) had both. During the first week after randomization, ventricular pauses ≥3 s occurred more frequently in patients receiving ticagrelor than clopidogrel (84 [5.8%] vs. 51 [3.6%]; relative risk: 1.61; p = 0.006). At 1 month, pauses ≥3 s occurred overall less frequently and were similar between treatments (2.1% vs. 1.7%). Most were ventricular pauses, and the greatest excess associated with ticagrelor were asymptomatic, sinoatrial nodal in origin (66%), and nocturnal. There were no differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the incidence of clinically reported bradycardic adverse events, including syncope, pacemaker placement, and cardiac arrest. CONCLUSIONS: In the PLATO cECG assessment, more patients treated with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel had ventricular pauses, which were predominantly asymptomatic, sinoatrial nodal in origin, and nocturnal and occurred most frequently in the acute phase of acute coronary syndromes. There were no apparent clinical consequences related to the excess in ventricular pauses in patients assigned to ticagrelor. (A Comparison of AZD6140 and Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [PLATO]; NCT00391872).

Office-based global cardiometabolic risk assessment: a simple tool incorporating nontraditional markers.

To facilitate comprehensive cardiometabolic risk assessment, we developed a simple 12-point checklist of traditional and emerging risk factors. We recently analyzed data from the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 22 (PROVE IT-TIMI 22) trial of 4162 high-risk patients hospitalized with recent acute coronary syndrome, and found that an increasing cardiometabolic risk factor count was associated with increasing risk of cardiovascular events over the next 2 years. In addition, we observed that the average number of risk factors a given patient had was 5, with some risk factors like obesity having clustering of additional risk factors, suggesting the need to assess the full list of risk factors to be able to provide comprehensive risk factor assessment and modification. We now have developed a 1-page patient encounter sheet to facilitate rapid assessment of these 12 cardiometabolic risk factors in a busy clinical office setting. It is hoped that with the simple risk assessment tool provided, clinicians would be able to comprehensively screen for and treat these traditional and nontraditional risk markers. As such, this could motivate both patients and physicians to work jointly toward reducing global cardiometabolic risk.

Association of insurance status with inpatient treatment for coronary artery disease: findings from the Get With the Guidelines program.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have documented that patients' health insurance status can impact use of guideline-based care as well as acute outcomes for coronary artery disease. Whether insurance status remains a contemporary influence among centers participating in a national quality improvement initiative is unknown. METHODS: We analyzed data from 237,779 admissions with coronary artery disease from 527 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease Program from 2000 to 2008. Insurance status was Medicare (48.8%), Private/Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) (34.9%), Medicaid (8.2%), and No Insurance Documented (NID) (8.2%). Quality of care was measured using standard quality indicators covering acute treatment and discharge measures, utilization of invasive procedures, length of stay, and mortality. Relationship between different insurance types was examined using generalized estimating equation logistic regression and propensity-score matching adjusting for demographics, comorbidities and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: After propensity matching, full compliance with all eligible measures (deficit-free care) relative to Private/HMO was lower for Medicare (P < .0001) and Medicaid (P < .0001) and higher for the NID group (P = .0312). The acute reperfusion times were comparable among the groups. Compared with the Private/HMO group, all three groups had higher generalized estimating equation-adjusted mortality (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.21; P < .001; OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29; P < .001 and OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.25; P = .026), for Medicare, Medicaid, and NID, respectively. After propensity matching, mortality for Medicare was similar (P = .1197) and higher for NID (P = .0015) and Medicaid (P = .0015) groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that among centers participating in a national quality improvement initiative patient insurance status may be associated with differences in cardiovascular care and outcomes.