Adverse Events and Economic Burden Among Patients Receiving Systemic Treatment for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Limited published real-world data describe adverse events (AEs) among patients treated for mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL). The aim of this retrospective study was to describe treatment patterns, AEs, and associated healthcare costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had two or more claims coded for MCL diagnosis, the first claim date (07/01/2012-05/31/2017) was the index date. Patients with pre-index MCL diagnosis or systemic treatment, or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were excluded. Cohorts by regimen were followed for up to three lines of therapy. RESULTS: Patients (n=395; median age 72 years; 31% female) were observed over a total of 576 lines of therapy, the most common being bendamustine plus rituximab; rituximab monotherapy; R-CHOP; and ibrutinib. The most frequent AEs were hypertension (40.5%), anemia (37.7%), and infection (36.1%). However, hepatotoxicity ($19,645), stroke ($18,893), and renal failure ($9,037) were associated with the highest medical costs per patient per month. CONCLUSION: Among patients receiving common systemic treatments for MCL, AEs occurred frequently; some imposed substantial inpatient care costs.

Adverse event rates and economic burden associated with purine nucleoside analogs in patients with hairy cell leukemia: a US population-retrospective claims analysis.

BACKGROUND: Purine nucleoside analogs (PNAs) are the recommended first-line treatment for patients with hairy cell leukemia (HCL), but they are associated with adverse events (AEs). Due to a lack of real-world evidence regarding AEs that are associated with PNAs, we used commercial data to assess AE rates, AE-related health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs among PNA-treated patients with HCL. Adults aged ≥18 years with ≥2 claims for HCL ≥30 days apart from 1 January 2006 through 31 December 2015 were included. Included patients had ≥1 claim for HCL therapy (cladribine ± rituximab or pentostatin ± rituximab [index date: first claim date]) and continuous enrollment for a ≥ 6-month baseline and ≥ 12-month follow-up period. Patient sub-cohorts were based on the occurrence of myelosuppression and opportunistic infections (OIs). Generalized linear models were used to compare HCRU and costs. RESULTS: In total, 647 PNA-treated patients were identified (mean age: 57.1 years). Myelosuppression and OI incidence were 461 and 42 per 1000 patient-years, respectively. Adjusted results indicated that those with myelosuppression had higher rates of hospitalization (47.4% vs 12.4%; P < .0001) and incurred higher mean inpatient costs ($23,517 vs $12,729; P = .011) and total costs ($57,325 vs $34,733; P = .001) as compared with those without myelosuppression. Similarly, patients with OIs had higher rates of hospitalization (53.8% vs 30.8%; P = .025) and incurred higher mean inpatient costs ($21,494 vs $11,229; P < .0001) as compared with those without OIs. CONCLUSIONS: PNA therapy is highly effective but associated with significant toxicities that increase costs; these findings indicate a need for therapies with improved toxicity profiles and better risk stratification of patients at risk of developing myelosuppression and OIs.

Patient Characteristics and Costs in Recurrent or Refractory Head and Neck Cancer: Retrospective Analysis of a Community Oncology Database.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to describe patient characteristics, health resource utilization (HRU), and costs associated with treating recurrent or refractory head and neck cancer (HNC) among patients with disease progression in the community oncology setting. METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted by using data from the Vector Oncology Data Warehouse. Patients had been diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic (stage III-IVc) HNC between January 1, 2007, and October 1, 2015. Patients also had evidence of at least 1 systemic anticancer therapy regimen following the diagnosis of advanced HNC, with at least 1 disease progression. Costs, treatment patterns, and HRU were evaluated beginning with diagnosis of advanced HNC through 3 lines of therapy. Costs of surgery or radiation were not available for inclusion in the analysis. Total cost for the study period and cost per month were analyzed by using a generalized linear regression model. FINDINGS: The study included 462 patients (median age, 61 years; range, 26-99 years); of these, 81% were male, 77% were white, and 21% were black. At initial diagnosis, the most frequent tumor locations were the hypopharynx/larynx (31%) and the oropharynx (31%). Human papilloma virus testing was most frequent among the oropharynx group (22% tested, 52% positive). Overall, 42% were current tobacco users and 22% were current or past alcohol abusers/excessive users. Platinum-based combination therapies were the most frequently administered chemotherapy in both first (42%) and second (40%) lines of treatment. Through the overall study period (mean, 20.5 months), 74% of patients were hospitalized, 19% had an emergency department visit, and 100% had an office visit. The overall mean (SD) duration of hospital stay was 12.6 days, and the median number of office visits per patient was 35. The mean monthly health care cost for the overall study period was $14,391 (95% CI, 12,739-16,044). Hospitalization costs represented ~57% of the total expenditures. Statistically significant predictors of higher overall cost included primary tumor location in the oral cavity, history of alcohol abuse/excess use, use of cetuximab, and higher comorbidity index. Older age and being stage IV versus other stages of disease at diagnosis were associated with lower overall cost. IMPLICATIONS: These data suggest that costs of care in patients with recurrent or refractory HNC are related to patient characteristics and treatment patterns. Identification of factors contributing to the costs of care in HNC may provide a useful foundation for developing strategies to control rising costs.

Initiation Patterns of Statins in the 2 Years After Release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Cholesterol Management Guideline in a Large US Health Plan.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to characterize changes in statin utilization patterns in patients newly initiated on therapy in the 2 years following the release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cholesterol management guideline in a large US health plan population. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective, observational study used administrative medical and pharmacy claims data to identify patients newly initiated on statin therapy over 4 quarters prior to and 8 quarters following the release of the guideline (average N/quarter=3596). Patients were divided into the 4 statin benefit groups (SBGs) based on risk factors and laboratory lipid levels as defined in the guideline: SBG1 (with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease [ASCVD]; N=1046/quarter), SBG2 (without ASCVD, with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥190 mg/dL; N=454/quarter), SBG3 (without ASCVD, aged 40-75 years, with diabetes mellitus, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 70-189 mg/dL; N=1391/quarter), SBG4 (no ASCVD or diabetes mellitus, age 40-75 years, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 70-189 mg/dL, estimated 10-year ASCVD risk of ≥7.5%; N=705/quarter). Demographic variables, statin utilization patterns, lipid levels, and comorbidities were analyzed for pre- and postguideline periods. Postguideline, gradually increased high-intensity statin initiation occurred in SBG1, SBG2, and in SBG3 patients with 10-year ASCVD risk ≥7.5%. Moderate- to high-intensity statin initiation gradually increased among SBG4 patients. Recommended-intensity statin choice changed to a greater degree among patients treated by specialty care physicians. Regarding sex, target-intensity statin initiation was lower in women in all groups before and after guideline release. CONCLUSIONS: Prescriber implementation of the guideline recommendations has gradually increased, with the most marked change in the increased initiation of high-intensity statins in patients with ASCVD and in those treated by a specialist.

Effect of Combination Cholesterol-Lowering Therapy and Triglyceride-Lowering Therapy on Medical Costs in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

High triglyceride (TG) levels among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) are associated with higher medical costs. We analyzed the economic impact of TG-lowering therapies and whether the association between medical costs and therapy differed according to TG reduction. We conducted an observational cohort study of 184,932 patients with diabetes mellitus who had a TG measurement between January 2012 and June 2013 and a second TG measurement 3 to 15 months later. We identified 4 therapy groups (statin monotherapy, TG-specific monotherapy, statin/TG-specific combination therapy, or no therapy) and stratified those groups by percent change in TG (increased ≥5%, change of ≤4.9%, decreased 5% to 29%, decreased ≥30%). We compared change in medical costs between the year before and after therapy, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics. Of the 184,932 total patients, 143,549 (77.6%) received statin monotherapy, 900 (0.5%) received TG-specific monotherapy, 1,956 (1.1%) received statin and TG-specific combination therapy, and 38,527 (20.8%) received no prescription lipid agents. After covariate adjustment, statin/TG-specific agent recipients had a mean 1-year total cost reduction of $1,110. The greatest cost reduction was seen among statin/TG-specific combination therapy patients who reduced TG levels by ≥30% (-$2,859). Statin monotherapy patients who reduced TG by ≥30% also had a large reduction in adjusted costs (-$1,079). In conclusion, we found a substantial economic benefit to treating diabetic patients with statin/TG-specific combination lipid therapy compared with monotherapy of either type or no lipid pharmacotherapy. A TG reduction of ≥30% produced a particularly large reduction in 1-year medical costs.

Incremental increases in economic burden parallels cardiometabolic risk factors in the US.

OBJECTIVE: Estimate the economic burden associated with incremental increases in the number of cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) in the US. METHODS: We used the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2010 to 2012 to create a retrospective cohort of people based on the number of CMRFs (one, two, and three or four), and a comparison cohort of people with zero CMRFs. CMRFs included abdominal obesity, elevated blood pressure, elevated triglycerides, and elevated glucose and were defined using diagnostic codes, prescribed medications, and survey responses. Adjusted regression analysis was developed to compare health expenditures, utilization, and lost-productivity differences between the cohorts. Generalized linear regression was used for health care expenditures, and negative binomial regression was used for utilization and productivity, controlling for individual characteristics. RESULTS: The number of CMRFs was associated with significantly more annual utilization, health care expenditures, and reduced productivity. As compared with people with zero CMRFs, people with one, two, and three or four CMRFs had 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06, 1.24), 1.37 (95% CI: 1.25, 1.51), and 1.39 (95% CI: 1.22, 1.57) times higher expected rate of emergency room visits, respectively. Compared with people with zero CMRFs, people with one, two, and three or four CMRFs had increased incremental health care expenditures of US$417 (95% CI: $70, $763), US$2,326 (95% CI: $1,864, $2,788), and US$4,117 (95% CI: $3,428, $4,807), respectively. Those with three or four CMRFs reported employment of 60%, compared with 80% in patients with zero CMRFs. People with three or four CMFRs had 1.75 (95% CI: 1.42, 2.17) times higher expected rate of days missed at work due to illness, compared with people with zero CMRFs. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate a direct association between economic burden and number of CMRFs. Although this was expected, the increase in burden that was independent from the cost of cardiovascular disease was surprising.

Gender Disparities in Lipid-Lowering Therapy in Cardiovascular Disease: Insights from a Managed Care Population.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have documented the strong inverse relationship between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, women are less likely to be screened for hypercholesterolemia, receive lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), and achieve optimal LDL-C levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from a U.S. administrative claims database between January 2008 and December 2012 for patients with established ASCVD. The earliest date of valid LDL-C value was defined as the index date. Patients were followed for ±12 months from the index date and were stratified by gender, by baseline LDL-C level, and whether they were initially treated with a LLT then propensity score matched by gender using demographic and clinical characteristics. Both descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used to explore the association of gender with the frequency of LDL-C monitoring, LLT treatment initiation in initially untreated patients, and prescribing patterns in initially treated patients. RESULTS: A total of 76,414 subjects with established ASCVD were identified; 42% of the sample was women. In the unmatched cohort, 50.3% of men and 32.0% of women were prescribed a preindex statin (p < 0.0001). Among matched patients (n = 51,764), women initially treated with LLT were significantly less likely to receive a prescription for a higher potency LLT. Even among those with LDL-C levels above 160 mg/dL, women were more likely to discontinue LLT, odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 1.8 (1.2-2.3). Female gender and older age were significant predictors of discontinuation, and the potency of the index medication was the strongest predictor of dose titration. Initially untreated women were less likely to initiate LLT treatment than men, irrespective of index LDL-C levels (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The observed disparities further reinforce the need for targeted efforts to reduce the gender gap for secondary prevention in women at high risk of cardiovascular disease.

Frequency of high-risk patients not receiving high-potency statin (from a large managed care database).

We examined trends in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment in high-risk patients and use of high-potency statins (HPS) in a large, managed-care database from 2004 to 2012. The 2013 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology prevention guidelines recommend that subjects with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) should be prescribed HPS therapy, irrespective of LDL-C levels. Previous guidelines recommend an LDL-C target <70 mg/dl. Patients diagnosed with ASCVD based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes with ≥1 LDL-C test from January 2004 to December 2012 were identified in the Optum Insight database. Patients were identified as treated if they received lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) within 90 days of the LDL-C measurement and untreated if they did not receive LLT treatment. LLT treated patients were stratified into HPS users or non-HPS LLT users. There were 45,101 eligible patients in 2004 and 40,846 in 2012. The proportion of high-risk patients who were treated with LLT increased from 61.4% (2004) to 70.5% (2008) then remained relatively constant until 2012 (67.9%). Mean LDL-C values in treated patients decreased from 103.7 ± 32.1 (2004) to 90.8 ± 31.4 mg/dl (2012). The proportion of patients treated with HPS increased from 13% in 2004 to 26% in 2012. Although the proportion of treated high-risk patients who achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dl levels has increased sharply from 2004, approximately 3 of 4 patients still did not meet this target. Only 1/4 of ASCVD patients are on HPS. In conclusion, our findings highlight the need for renewed efforts to support guideline-based LDL-C treatment for high-risk patients.