Discussing Out-of-Pocket Costs With Patients: Shared Decision Making for Sacubitril-Valsartan in Heart Failure.

Background "Financial toxicity" is a concern for patients, but little is known about how patients consider out-of-pocket cost in decisions. Sacubitril-valsartan provides a contemporary scenario to understand financial toxicity. It is guideline recommended for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, yet out-of-pocket costs can be considerable. Methods and Results Structured interviews were conducted with 49 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction at heart failure clinics and inpatient services. Patient opinions of the drug and its value were solicited after description of benefits using graphical displays. Descriptive quantitative analysis of closed-ended responses was conducted, and qualitative descriptive analysis of text data was performed. Of participants, 92% (45/49) said that they would definitely or probably switch to sacubitril-valsartan if their physician recommended it and out-of-pocket cost was $5 more per month than their current medication. Only 43% (21/49) would do so if out-of-pocket cost was $100 more per month ( P<0.001). At least 40% across all income categories would be unlikely to take sacubitril-valsartan at $100 more per month. Participants exhibited heterogeneous approaches to cost in decision making and varied on their use and interpretation of probabilistic information. Few (20%) participants stated physicians had initiated a conversation about cost in the past year. Conclusions Out-of-pocket cost variation reflective of contemporary cost sharing substantially influenced stated willingness to take sacubitril-valsartan, a guideline-recommended therapy with mortality benefit. These findings suggest a need for cost transparency to promote shared decision making. They also demonstrate the complexity of cost discussion and need to study how to incorporate out-of-pocket cost into clinical decisions.

Association of Health Aging and Body Composition (ABC) Heart Failure score with cardiac structural and functional abnormalities in young individuals.

BACKGROUND: The Health ABC Heart Failure score has recently been shown to predict 5-year risk of incident heart failure in the elderly. We tested whether this risk score is associated with subclinical phenotypes of heart failure in a younger population. METHODS: We stratified participants in the Dallas Heart Study aged 30 to 65 years who had a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and no self-reported history of heart failure or cardiomyopathy into 4 previously defined Health ABC Heart Failure risk groups: low (<5%), average (5%-10%), high (10%-20%), and very high (>20% risk for heart failure within 5 years). We compared left ventricular (LV) structural and functional parameters and levels of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP among the 4 groups. RESULTS: In the study cohort (N = 2,540), the percentage of subjects in the low-, average-, high-, and very high risk groups was 78%, 15%, 6%, and 1%, respectively. Indexed LV mass (80 +/- 15 vs 90 +/- 20 vs 95 +/- 25 vs 116 +/- 41 g/m(2)), concentricity (1.6 +/- 0.3 vs 1.8 +/- 0.4 vs 2.0 +/- 0.5 vs 2.2 +/- 0.7 g/mL), median BNP (2.8 vs 3.7 vs 4.9 vs 7.5 pg/mL) and N-terminal proBNP (26 vs 30 vs 40 vs 58 pg/mL), and prevalent LV systolic dysfunction and LV hypertrophy progressively increased across risk groups (P < .001 for all) independent of gender or method of indexing LV mass. CONCLUSIONS: The Health ABC Heart Failure score was associated with subclinical cardiac structural changes in the general population 30 to 65 years of age, suggesting that it may be a valid tool for identification of young individuals at increased risk for heart failure.