Incidence rates of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) among adults in United States commercial and Medicare claims databases, 2017-2020.

BACKGROUND: Increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations has been identified in passive surveillance systems. TTS incidence rates (IRs) in the United States (U.S.) are needed to contextualize reports following COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We estimated annual and monthly IRs of overall TTS, common site TTS, and unusual site TTS for adults aged 18-64 years in Carelon Research and MarketScan commercial claims (2017-Oct 2020), CVS Health and Optum commercial claims (2019-Oct 2020), and adults aged ≥ 65 years using CMS Medicare claims (2019-Oct 2020); IRs were stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (CMS Medicare). RESULTS: Across data sources, annual IRs for overall TTS were similar between Jan-Dec 2019 and Jan-Oct 2020. Rates were higher in Medicare (IRs: 370.72 and 365.63 per 100,000 person-years for 2019 and 2020, respectively) than commercial data sources (MarketScan IRs: 24.21 and 24.06 per 100,000 person-years; Optum IRs: 32.60 and 31.29 per 100,000 person-years; Carelon Research IRs: 24.46 and 26.16 per 100,000 person-years; CVS Health IRs: 30.31 and 30.25 per 100,000 person-years). Across years and databases, common site TTS IRs increased with age and were higher among males. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, the common site TTS IR was highest among non-Hispanic black adults. Annual unusual site TTS IRs ranged between 2.02 and 3.04 (commercial) and 12.49 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Dec 2019; IRs ranged between 1.53 and 2.67 (commercial) and 11.57 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Oct 2020. Unusual site TTS IRs were higher in males and increased with age in commercial data sources; among adults aged ≥ 65 years, IRs decreased with age and were highest among non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska native adults. CONCLUSION: TTS IRs were generally similar across years, higher for males, and increased with age. These rates may contribute to surveillance of post-vaccination TTS.

Pragmatic guidance for embedding pragmatic clinical trials in health plans: Large simple trials aren't so simple.

BACKGROUND: There are unique opportunities related to the design and conduct of pragmatic trials embedded in health insurance plans, which have longitudinal data on member/patient demographics, dates of coverage, and reimbursed medical care, including prescription drug dispensings, vaccine administrations, behavioral healthcare encounters, and some laboratory results. Such trials can be large and efficient, using these data to identify trial-eligible patients and to ascertain outcomes. METHODS: We use our experience primarily with the National Institutes of Health Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory Distributed Research Network, which comprises health plans that participate in the US Food & Drug Administration's Sentinel System, to describe lessons learned from the conduct and planning of embedded pragmatic trials. RESULTS: Information is available for research on more than 75 million people with commercial or Medicare Advantage health plans. We describe three studies that have used or plan to use the Network, as well as a single health plan study, from which we glean our lessons learned. CONCLUSIONS: Studies that are conducted in health plans provide much-needed evidence to drive clinically meaningful changes in care. However, there are many unique aspects of these trials that must be considered in the planning, implementation, and analytic phases. The type of trial best suited for studies embedded in health plans will be those that require large sample sizes, simple interventions that could be disseminated through health plans, and where data available to the health plan can be leveraged. These trials hold potential for substantial long-term impact on our ability to generate evidence to improve care and population health.

Background rates of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring in the United States, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative conducts active surveillance of adverse events of special interest (AESI) after COVID-19 vaccination. Historical incidence rates (IRs) of AESI are comparators to evaluate safety. METHODS: We estimated IRs of 17 AESI in six administrative claims databases from January 1, 2019, to December 11, 2020: Medicare claims for adults ≥ 65 years and commercial claims (Blue Health Intelligence®, CVS Health, HealthCore Integrated Research Database, IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Database, Optum pre-adjudicated claims) for adults < 65 years. IRs were estimated by sex, age, race/ethnicity (Medicare), and nursing home residency (Medicare) in 2019 and for specific periods in 2020. RESULTS: The study included >100 million enrollees annually. In 2019, rates of most AESI increased with age. However, compared with commercially insured adults, Medicare enrollees had lower IRs of anaphylaxis (11 vs 12-19 per 100,000 person-years), appendicitis (80 vs 117-155), and narcolepsy (38 vs 41-53). Rates were higher in males than females for most AESI across databases and varied by race/ethnicity and nursing home status (Medicare). Acute myocardial infarction (Medicare) and anaphylaxis (all databases) IRs varied by season. IRs of most AESI were lower during March-May 2020 compared with March-May 2019 but returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. However, rates of Bell's palsy, Guillain-Barré syndrome, narcolepsy, and hemorrhagic/non-hemorrhagic stroke remained lower in multiple databases after May 2020, whereas some AESI (e.g., disseminated intravascular coagulation) exhibited higher rates after May 2020 compared with 2019. CONCLUSION: AESI background rates varied by database and demographics and fluctuated in March-December 2020, but most returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. It is critical to standardize demographics and consider seasonal and other trends when comparing historical rates with post-vaccination AESI rates in the same database to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine safety.

Identification of pregnancies and infants within a US commercial healthcare administrative claims database.

PURPOSE: Health care insurance claims databases are becoming a more common data source for studies of medication safety during pregnancy. While pregnancies have historically been identified in such databases by pregnancy outcomes, International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) Z3A codes denoting weeks of gestation provide more granular information on pregnancies and pregnancy periods (i.e., start and end dates). The purpose of this study was to develop a process that uses Z3A codes to identify pregnancies, pregnancy periods, and links infants within a commercial health insurance claims database. METHODS: We identified pregnancies, gestation periods, pregnancy outcomes, and linked infants within the US-based Optum Research Database between 2015 and 2020 via a series of algorithms utilizing diagnosis and procedure codes on claims. The diagnosis and procedure codes included ICD-10-CM codes, Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes. RESULTS: We identified 1 030 874 pregnancies among 841 196 women of reproductive age. Of pregnancies with livebirth outcomes, 84% were successfully linked to infants. The prevalence of pregnancy outcomes (livebirth, stillbirth, ectopic, molar, and abortion) was similar to national estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This process provides an opportunity to study drug safety and care patterns during pregnancy and may be replicated in other claims databases containing ICD-10-CM, CPT, and HCPCS codes. Work is underway to validate and refine the various algorithms.

Patterns of Utilization and Expenditure Across Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Therapies: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Claims Data from a Commercially Insured Population in the United States, 2010-2019.

INTRODUCTION: Comparisons of healthcare utilization and expenditure among multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are limited. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study using commercial insurance claims data of a US population (2010-2019), we compared healthcare utilization and costs in MS across different DMTs. We assigned patients to different treatment arms: no DMT (ND), high-efficacy (HE) DMT (alemtuzumab, B cell depletion, cladribine, and natalizumab), and standard-efficacy (SE) DMT (dimethyl fumarate, glatiramer acetate, interferon beta, sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulator, and teriflunomide). We obtained healthcare costs and occurrences of healthcare services: outpatient visits, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, MS-related magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We quantified relapses (based on MS-related hospitalizations, as well as outpatient visits with prescription of high-dose steroids) and medical complexity (based on unique drug classes of prescriptions). We calculated covariate-adjusted incidence rate ratio of healthcare services using negative binomial regression with ND as reference and covariate-adjusted mean cumulative healthcare costs using a generalized linear model with log-link function and gamma distribution. RESULTS: Among the 25,932 patients with MS (mean age 52.8 years, 75.2% women), both HE (mean age 54.0 years, 76.2% women) and SE (mean age 43.9 years, 75.6% women) groups had more non-pharmacy healthcare utilization than ND (mean age 57.6 years, 75.4% women), including overall outpatient doctor visits, neurology visits, and MS-related MRIs as well as relapses and medical complexities. Relative to ND, both HE and SE groups had higher pharmacy costs and overall healthcare costs 12 months after treatment initiation, despite having lower or equivalent non-pharmacy medical costs. In patients on DMT, pharmacy costs accounted for up to 65% of overall healthcare costs with over 85% of pharmacy costs attributable to DMT costs. CONCLUSION: DMT cost is a key driver of the overall healthcare expenditure in MS. Future comparative and cost-effectiveness studies integrating claims and electronic health records data with better balancing of patient characteristics are warranted.

Liraglutide use and evaluation of pancreatic outcomes in a US commercially insured population.

AIMS: Both acute pancreatitis (AP) and pancreatic cancer (PC) have been areas of focus for studies of incretin drugs. This 5-year prospective cohort study aimed to quantify possible associations between liraglutide and risk of AP and PC as compared to other antidiabetic drugs (ADs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients initiating liraglutide or other ADs who were enrolled in a US health plan (2010-2014) were included. Comparisons of AP and PC incidence rates were made between matched cohorts of liraglutide initiators and initiators of other ADs. Adjudicated AP cases and algorithm-based PC cases were identified. Propensity score-matched intention-to-treat (ITT) and time-on-drug (TOD) analyses were completed using Poisson regression. A latency analysis was performed for PC. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 405 days for AP cohorts (9995 liraglutide, 1:1 matched to all comparators) and 503 days for PC cohorts (35 163 liraglutide, 1:1 matched to all comparators). In the primary AP analysis, "current" use of liraglutide was not significantly associated with elevated risk across comparators (all comparators relative risk [RR] = 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.3). ITT results were similar where, in the primary analysis, no RRs were significantly associated with PC (all comparators RR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.3-1.4); latency and TOD analyses did not alter findings. There was no evidence of a dose-response effect. CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide was not associated with an increased risk of AP or PC, although risk estimates were more variable for AP, and numbers of cases for both outcomes were limited because of the rarity of outcomes.

Assessment of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) for varenicline (Chantix): A multistage patient survey.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) for varenicline by assessing patients' understanding of the varenicline medication guide (MG) at pre-specified time points: 18 months, 3 years, and 7 years after the REMS approval. METHODS: Self-administered surveys were mailed to people who received varenicline based on a pharmacy dispensing. Survey questions assessed understanding of potential risks outlined in the MG: neuropsychiatric symptoms, skin reactions, allergic reactions, and cardiovascular risks. Crude and weighted analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The response to the survey overall was between 18% and 19%. Among responders, approximately 90% recalled receiving the MG, and at least 80% read all or part of it. At least 88% correctly identified neuropsychiatric symptoms as potential medication effects, while 41% did so for skin reactions, 53% for allergic reactions, and 82% for cardiovascular risks. Patients who read the MG had a high proportion of correct responses to the risk comprehension questions. CONCLUSIONS: A large majority of patients who were dispensed varenicline recalled receiving the MG and were able to correctly recall neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular risks in all 3 surveys. The varenicline MG may be an effective tool for patient education.

Effect of Generic Competition on Atorvastatin Prescribing and Patients' Out-of-Pocket Spending.

IMPORTANCE: In November 2011, the cholesterol level-lowering medication atorvastatin calcium became available in the United States as a generic drug. However, only a single generic form (from a manufacturer that qualified for market exclusivity by challenging several of Pfizer's patents) and an authorized generic form (a brand-name drug sold as a generic) were available for the first 180 days. OBJECTIVE: To describe trends in the prescribing of generic atorvastatin after expiration of market exclusivity for the brand-name medication and the effect on patients' out-of-pocket spending. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A US population-based study used commercial claims data from the Optum Clinformatics research database (UnitedHealth Group) from December 1, 2010, to May 31, 2013. Participants were 1 968 709 adults with commercial insurance who had been prescribed 1 or more statins (13 285 223 statin prescriptions). An interrupted times series model was used to examine the effect of limited and full generic competition on brand-name and generic atorvastatin prescriptions. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2010, to May 31, 2013. EXPOSURES: Prescription of brand-name atorvastatin, generic atorvastatin, and authorized generic atorvastatin were distinguished using National Drug Codes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Total number of prescriptions dispensed per month and out-of-pocket expenditures for a typical 30-day supply of 20-mg atorvastatin during the periods of brand-name availability only, limited generic competition (lasting 180 days after market exclusivity ended), and full generic competition. RESULTS: Of the 1 968 709 beneficiaries, 1 483 066 (58.8% male and 41.2% female; mean [SD] age, 55.6 [10.2] years) received a prescription for a single statin and were included in the analysis. The introduction of the first generic competitor was associated with a reduction in monthly brand-name atorvastatin fills by 20 896 prescriptions (level change, P = .001), an 18.1% change compared with the month preceding loss of exclusivity. Full generic competition reduced brand-name fills by 54 944 prescriptions (level change, P < .001), a 47.6% change relative to the month preceding loss of exclusivity. During the first 180 days of generic competition, no meaningful difference in monthly out-of-pocket spending was found between brand-name (median, $16.98; interquartile range [IQR], $8.76-$48.66) and generic (median, $19.98; IQR, $7.50-$54.90) atorvastatin. After full generic competition, estimated monthly out-of-pocket spending for generic atorvastatin (median $5.10; IQR, $3.36-$19.98) or authorized generic atorvastatin (median, $5.52; IQR, $3.48-$19.98) was substantially lower than that for brand-name atorvastatin (median, $30.00; IQR, $15.00-$91.38). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with commercial health insurance, delays in generic uptake and high levels of out-of-pocket spending during the first 180 days after atorvastatin lost market exclusivity slowed changes in drug prescribing and decreases in patients' out-of-pocket costs.

Comparative Effectiveness of Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of carotid artery stenting (CAS) relative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) among Medicare patients has not been established. We compared effectiveness of CAS versus CEA among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS AND RESULTS: We linked Medicare data (2000-2009) to the Society for Vascular Surgery's Vascular Registry (2005-2008) and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's (NCDR) Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy Registry (2006-2008/2009). Medicare patients were followed up from procedure date until death, stroke/transient ischemic attack, periprocedural myocardial infarction, or a composite end point for these outcomes. We derived high-dimensional propensity scores using registry and Medicare data to control for patient factors and adjusted for provider factors in a Cox regression model comparing CAS with CEA. Among 5254 Society for Vascular Surgery's Vascular Registry (1999 CAS; 3255 CEA) and 4055 Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy Registry (2824 CAS; 1231 CEA) Medicare patients, CAS patients had a higher comorbidity burden and were more likely to be at high surgical risk (Society for Vascular Surgery's Vascular Registry: 96.7% versus 44.5%; Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy Registry: 71.3% versus 44.7%). Unadjusted outcome risks were higher for CAS. Mortality risks remained elevated for CAS after adjusting for patient-level factors (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.46). After further adjustment for provider factors, differences between CAS and CEA were attenuated or no longer present (hazard ratio for mortality, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.37). Performance was comparable across subgroups defined by sex and degree of carotid stenosis, but there was a nonsignificant trend suggesting a higher risk of adverse outcomes in older (>80) and symptomatic patients undergoing CAS. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes after CAS and CEA among Medicare beneficiaries were comparable after adjusting for both patient- and provider-level factors.

Trends in direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription contraceptives.

OBJECTIVE: Despite much speculation about the role of direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) in increasing demand for prescription contraceptives in the United States, there is little published research on this topic. We sought to quantify the prevalence and magnitude of DTCA for prescription contraceptives over the last decade. STUDY DESIGN: Using cross-sectional data from January 2005 through December 2014, we performed descriptive analyses on trends in DTCA expenditure for prescription contraceptives. We also quantified the amount of DTCA according to contraceptive method category and individual brand. RESULTS: During the study period, pharmaceutical companies spent a total of US$1.57 billion in the United States on DTCA of prescription contraceptives. Annual expenditure for contraceptive DTCA reached a peak value of US$260 million in 2008, with a progressive decline to a nadir of US$69 million by 2013. Of the contraceptive methods, oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) have been the most heavily promoted, with Yaz (drospirenone/ethinyl estradiol) - the most advertised brand - accounting for US$347 million of cumulative DTCA expenditure. However, DTCA spending on OCPs peaked in 2007 and was overtaken in 2012 by the DTCA of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs), the contraceptive method now receiving the largest amount of DTCA promotion. CONCLUSIONS: DTCA is a major form of promotion for prescription contraceptives. Recent trends in DTCA expenditure indicate a shift from promotion of the OCPs to the LARCs. DTCA's effect on provider and patient utilization of various contraceptive methods has yet to be determined. IMPLICATIONS: This study provides the first quantitative evaluation of DTCA of prescription contraceptive methods and reveals DTCA's importance as a form of promotion. Recent DTCA trends indicate increased promotion of LARCs, coinciding with greater uptake of LARC methods by patients and prescribers.

Relationship Between Physician and Hospital Procedure Volume and Mortality After Carotid Artery Stenting Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) relative to carotid endarterectomy when performed by physicians with demonstrated proficiency. It is unclear how CAS performance may be influenced by the diversity in CAS and non-CAS provider volumes in routine clinical practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: We linked Medicare claims to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' CAS Database (2005-2009). We assessed the association between 30-day mortality and past-year physician (0, 1-4, 5-9, 10-19, ≥20) and hospital (<10, 10-19, 20-39, ≥40) CAS volumes and past-year hospital coronary and peripheral stenting volumes (<200, 200-399, 400-849, ≥850) among beneficiaries at least 66 years of age. Unadjusted 30-day mortality risk was 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-2.0) for 19 724 patients undergoing CAS by 2045 physicians in 729 hospitals. Median past-year CAS volume was 9 (interquartile range, 4-19) for physicians and 23 (interquartile range, 12-41) for hospitals. Compared to physicians performing ≥20 CAS in the past year, lower CAS volumes were associated with higher adjusted risks of 30-day morality (P value for trend < 0.05): 1.4 (95% CI, 0.9-2.3) for 0 past-year CAS, 1.3 (95% CI, 0.9-1.8) for 1 to 4, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.8-1.6) for 5 to 9, and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.7-1.4) for 10 to 19. An inverse relationship between 30-day mortality and past-year CAS hospital volume as well as past-year hospital non-CAS volume, past-year hospital non-CAS volume, and 30-day mortality was also noted. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare patients, an inverse relationship exists between physician and hospital CAS volumes and hospital non-CAS stenting volume and 30-day mortality, even after adjusting for all pertinent patient- and hospital-level factors.

Safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in routine care of patients with atrial fibrillation.

The RE-LY study demonstrated the safety and efficacy of dabigatran relative to warfarin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. It is important to further evaluate safety and effectiveness of drugs in routine care. This study used a sequential cohort design with propensity score matching to compare dabigatran with warfarin among patients in two commercial health insurance databases. New users of these anticoagulants were followed from initiation until discontinuation, the end of the study, or the occurrence of a study outcome (primary study outcomes were stroke and major bleeding). Proportional hazards regression was conducted separately within each data source and results were pooled. Among 19,189 matched dabigatran and warfarin initiators (mean age: 68 years, 36 % female), as-treated follow-up (average of 5 months for dabigatran, 4 months for warfarin) identified 62 and 69 strokes, respectively (pooled HR = 0.77; 95 % CI = 0.54 to 1.09), and 354 and 395 major haemorrhages, respectively (HR = 0.75; 0.65 to 0.87). No meaningful heterogeneity was identified across subgroups, but numeric trends suggest more pronounced stroke prevention by dabigatran relative to warfarin among patients age 75+ (HR = 0.57; 0.33 to 0.97) or with < 6 months of use (HR = 0.51; 0.19 to 1.42). Major bleeds were reduced more by dabigatran among patients aged < 55 (HR = 0.51; 0.30 to 0.87) and with CHADS2 < 2 (HR = 0.58; 0.44 to 0.77). In conclusion, in routine care of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, dabigatran treatment resulted in improved health outcomes compared with warfarin.

Real world effectiveness of primary implantable cardioverter defibrillators implanted during hospital admissions for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities: cohort study of older patients with heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of primary implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in elderly patients receiving the device during a hospital admission for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities, with an emphasis on adjustment for early mortality and other factors reflecting healthy candidate bias rather than the effect of the ICD. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Linked data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD registry, nationwide heart failure registry, and Medicare claims data 2004-09. POPULATION: 23,111 patients aged ≥ 66 who were admitted to hospital for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities and eligible for primary ICDs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All cause mortality and sudden cardiac death. Latency analyses with Cox regression were used to derive crude hazard ratios and hazard ratios adjusted for high dimension propensity score for outcomes after 180 days from index implantation or discharge. RESULTS: Patients who received an ICD during a hospital admission had lower crude mortality risk than patients who did not receive an ICD (40% v 60% at three years); however, with conditioning on 180 day survival and with adjustment for high dimension propensity score, the apparent benefit with ICD was no longer evident for sudden cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.17) and had a diminished impact on total mortality (0.91, 0.82 to 1.00). There were trends towards a benefit with ICD in reducing mortality or sudden cardiac death in patients who had had a myocardial infarction more than 40 days previously, left bundle branch block, or low serum B type natriuretic peptide; however, these trends did not reach significance. CONCLUSION: After adjustment for healthy candidate bias and confounding, the benefits of primary ICD therapy seen in pivotal trials were not apparent in patients aged 66 or over who received ICDs during a hospital admission for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities. Future research is warranted to further identify subgroups of elderly patients who are more likely to benefit from ICDs. Recognition of those patients whose dominant risk factors are from decompensated heart failure and non-cardiac co-morbidities will allow better focus on ICDs in those patients for whom the device offers the most benefit and provides meaningful prolonging of life.

Methodological approaches to evaluate the impact of FDA drug safety communications.

BACKGROUND: When the US FDA approves a new prescription drug there is still a great deal remaining to be learned about the safe and proper use of that product. When new information addressing these topics emerges post-approval, the FDA may issue a Drug Safety Communication (DSC) to alert patients and physicians. The effectiveness of the communication-how drug safety messaging conveyed in FDA DSCs changes patient or prescriber behavior-may depend on multiple factors, including the way physicians and patients learn about the information, their understanding of the issues conveyed, and their perception of the importance of the information. In 2013, the FDA issued two DSCs addressing critical new warnings related to products containing the sedative/hypnotic zolpidem. OBJECTIVE: In this article, we describe a core set of research initiatives that can be used to study how zolpidem-related DSCs affected subsequent physician and patient decision making. METHODS: These research initiatives include analyzing drug utilization patterns and related health outcomes; comparing zolpidem-containing products against a comparator with similar indications [eszopiclone (Lunesta)] not covered by the 2013 DSCs; and surveying patients and qualitatively evaluating the dissemination of information regarding these drugs in traditional and social-media channels. CONCLUSIONS: Using an integrated, multidisciplinary approach, we can obtain information that can be used to optimize regulatory communications by seeking to understand the impact of the information contained in FDA risk communications.

Reductions in Use of Colchicine after FDA Enforcement of Market Exclusivity in a Commercially Insured Population.

BACKGROUND: A brand-name version of colchicine (Colcrys) was introduced after its manufacturer conducted a clinical trial in acute gout patients, leading to higher prices for this drug. OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the impact of the new single-source colchicine product on prescribing and patient health spending as well as incidence rates of potentially dangerous concomitant use of clarithromycin and cyclosporine after formal FDA approval. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of UnitedHealth-affiliated enrollees newly diagnosed with gout or FMF. MAIN MEASURES: Among gout and FMF patients separately, we assessed linear trends in colchicine prescriptions, prescription drug costs, and total health care costs from 2009 to September 2010 (market exclusivity announced) compared to January 2011 (market exclusivity enforced) through 2012. Next, we estimated trends in co-prescription within 15 days of clarithromycin, azithromycin (indicated on the Colcrys label for use in place of clarithromycin), and cyclosporine. KEY RESULTS: Among gout patients, before Colcrys' market exclusivity, the odds of receiving colchicine within 30 days of gout diagnosis increased 1.4 %/month (OR: 1.014, 95 % CI: 1.011-1.018). Following FDA action, the odds decreased by 0.5 %/month (OR: 0.995, 95 % CI: 0.992-0.999) (p < 0.001). Similarly, among FMF patients, odds of initiating colchicine changed from an increase of 2.8 %/month to a decrease by 7.6 %/month (p = 0.01). Patients receiving colchicine experienced increases in average monthly prescription drug costs ($418 vs. $651, p < 0.001) and health care costs ($3,406 vs. $3,534, p < 0.001). Incidence rates of colchicine/clarithromycin co-prescription before and after FDA action did not change, while co-prescription of colchicine/cyclosporine increased after introduction of Colcrys [-0.75 monthly change in patients (95 % CI: -1.07, -0.43) vs. 0.13 (95 % CI: -0.16, 0.42), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: The FDA's actions were associated with a reduction in colchicine initiation and an increase in patient spending. By contrast, we did not observe any association with improvements in avoidance of potentially dangerous co-prescriptions.

Surgeon case volume and 30-day mortality after carotid endarterectomy among contemporary medicare beneficiaries: before and after national coverage determination for carotid artery stenting.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: After the 2005 National Coverage Determination to reimburse carotid artery stenting (CAS) for Medicare beneficiaries, the number of CAS procedures increased and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) decreased. We evaluated trends in surgeons' past-year CEA case-volume and 30-day mortality after CEA, and their association before and after the National Coverage Determination. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing CEA (2001-2008) and CAS (2005-2008) using Medicare data, we described yearly trends of CEA and CAS rates, patient characteristics, and 30-day mortality after CEA. We used logistic regression adjusting for patient- and surgeon-level factors to assess the effect of surgeon case volume on 30-day mortality after CEA. RESULTS: We identified 454 717 CEA and 27 943 CAS patients. Patients undergoing CEA in recent years were older and had more comorbidities than earlier years. CEA rates per 10 000 beneficiaries declined from 18.1 in 2002 to 12.7 in 2008, whereas median surgeon past-year case-volume declined from 27 to 21. The CAS rates peaked at 2.3 per 10 000 beneficiaries in 2006 but declined to 1.8 in 2008, resulting in declining overall revascularization procedure rates during 2005 to 2008. Thirty day post-CEA mortality was 1.40% (95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.47) in 2001 to 2002 and 1.17% (1.10-1.24) in 2007 to 2008. Surgeon's past-year case-volume of <10 was associated with higher 30-day mortality consistently during 2001 to 2008. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of CEA procedures decreased substantially during 2001 to 2008, as did surgeon past-year case-volume. The postprocedural mortality in Medicare beneficiaries was high compared with trial patients but somewhat improved over time. Those operated by lower past-year case-volume surgeons had increased mortality.

Outcomes after carotid artery stenting in Medicare beneficiaries, 2005 to 2009.

IMPORTANCE: Despite increased carotid artery stenting (CAS) dissemination following the 2005 National Coverage Determination, to our knowledge, periprocedural and long-term outcomes have not been described among Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence of outcomes during and after the periprocedural period among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing CAS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational study with a mean follow-up time of approximately 2 years among 22,516 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries at least 66 years old undergoing CAS (2005-2009) who were linked to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' CAS database. Database procedure dates were required to fall during a Medicare hospitalization for CAS. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Periprocedural (30-day) and long-term risks of mortality and stroke or transient ischemic attack, as well as periprocedural myocardial infarction. Subgroups were based on sociodemographic, clinical, and center-level factors, as well as the Stenting and Angioplasty With Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) trial or Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST) enrollment criteria. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 76.3 years, 60.5% were male, 93.8% were of white race, 91.2% were at high surgical risk, 47.4% were symptomatic, and 97.4% had carotid stenosis of at least 70%. Crude 30-day mortality, stroke or transient ischemic attack, and myocardial infarction risks were 1.7% (95% CI, 1.5%-1.8%), 3.3% (95% CI, 3.0%-3.5%), and 2.5% (95% CI, 2.3%-2.7%), respectively. Mortality during a mean follow-up time of 2 years was 32.0% (95% CI, 31.0%-33.0%), with rates of 37.3% (95% CI, 35.8%-38.7%) among symptomatic patients and 27.7% (95% CI, 26.4%-28.9%) among asymptomatic patients. Older age, symptomatic carotid stenosis, and nonelective hospital admission were associated with increased adjusted hazards of mortality and stroke or transient ischemic attack during and after the periprocedural period. The presence of a stroke center, government ownership, and a hospital bed capacity of 500 or more were associated with increased adjusted hazards of periprocedural mortality and stroke or transient ischemic attack. Few patients met the SAPPHIRE trial or CREST enrollment criteria primarily because physicians did not meet proficiency requirements either due to exceeding periprocedural complication trial thresholds or not meeting minimum CAS volume requirements. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Competing risks may limit the benefits of CAS in certain Medicare beneficiaries, particularly among older and symptomatic patients who have higher periprocedural and long-term mortality risks. The generalizability of trials like the SAPPHIRE or CREST to the Medicare population may be limited, underscoring the need to evaluate real-world effectiveness of carotid stenosis treatments.

A cross-sectional study of the identification of prevalent asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among initiators of long-acting ß-agonists in health insurance claims data.

BACKGROUND: Claims data are potentially useful for identifying long-acting ß-agonist (LABA) use by patients with asthma, a practice that is associated with increased mortality. We evaluated the accuracy of claims data for classifying prevalent asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) among initiators of LABAs. METHODS: This study included adult LABA initiators during 2005-2008 in a US commercial health plan. Diagnosis codes from the 6 months before LABA initiation identified potential asthma or COPD and a physician adjudicated case status using abstracted medical records. We estimated the positive predictive value (PPV) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of covariate patterns for identifying asthma and COPD. RESULTS: We sought 520 medical records at random from 225,079 LABA initiators and received 370 (71%). The PPV for at least one asthma claim was 74% (CI 63-82), and decreased as age increased. Having at least one COPD claim resulted in a PPV of 82% (CI 72-89), and of over 90% among older patients, men, and recipients of inhaled anticholinergic drugs. Only 2% (CI 0.2-7.6) of patients with a claim for COPD alone were found to have both COPD and asthma, while 9% (CI 4-16) had asthma only. Twenty-one percent (CI 14-30) of patients with claims for both diagnoses had both conditions. Among patients with no asthma or COPD claims, 62% (CI 50-72) had no confirmed diagnosis and 29% (CI 19-39) had confirmed asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Subsets of patients with asthma, COPD, and both conditions can be identified and differentiated using claims data, although categorization of the remaining patients is infeasible. Safety surveillance for off-label use of LABAs must account for this limitation.

Patterns of opioid utilization in pregnancy in a large cohort of commercial insurance beneficiaries in the United States.

BACKGROUND: There are few data regarding the utilization of opioids during pregnancy. The objective of this study was to define the prevalence and patterns of opioid use in a large cohort of pregnant women who were commercial insurance beneficiaries. METHODS: Data for the study were derived from a deidentified research database of women from across the United States who had both medical and prescription benefits. By using diagnostic codes, the authors defined a cohort of 534,500 women with completed pregnancies who were enrolled in a commercial insurance plan from 6 months before pregnancy through delivery. RESULTS: Overall, 76,742 women (14.4%) were dispensed an opioid at some point during pregnancy. There were 30,566 women (5.7%) dispensed an opioid during the first trimester, 30,434 women (5.7%) during the second trimester, and 34,906 women (6.5%) during the third trimester. Of these, 11,747 women (2.2%) were dispensed opioids three or more times during pregnancy. The most commonly dispensed opioids during pregnancy were hydrocodone (6.8%), codeine (6.1%), and oxycodone (2.0%). The prevalence of exposure at anytime during pregnancy decreased slightly during the study period from 14.9% for pregnancies that delivered in 2005 to 12.9% in 2011. The prevalence of exposure varied significantly by region and was lowest in the Northeast and highest in the South. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that opioids are very common exposures during pregnancy. Given the small and inconsistent body of literature on their safety in pregnancy, these findings suggest a need for research in this area.

Trends in insulin initiation and treatment intensification among patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with type 2 diabetes eventually require insulin, yet little is known about the patterns and quality of pharmacologic care received following insulin initiation. Guidelines from the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes recommend that insulin secretagogues such as sulfonylureas be discontinued at the time of insulin initiation to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia, and that treatment be intensified if HbA1c levels remain above-target 3 months after insulin initiation. OBJECTIVE: To describe pharmacologic treatment patterns over time among adults initiating insulin and/or intensifying insulin treatment. DESIGN: Observational study. SUBJECTS: A large commercially insured population of adult patients without recorded type 1 diabetes who initiated insulin. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated changes in non-insulin antidiabetic medication use during the 120 days immediately following insulin initiation, rates of increase in insulin dose and/or dosing frequency during the 270 days following an insulin initiation treatment period of 90 days, and rates of insulin discontinuation. KEY RESULTS: Seven thousand, nine hundred and thirty-two patients initiated insulin during 2003-2008, with the majority (61 %) initiating basal insulin only. Metformin (55 %), sulfonylureas (39 %), and thiazolidinediones (30 %) were commonly used prior to insulin initiation. Metformin was continued by 64 % of patients following mixed or mealtime insulin initiation; the continuation rate was nearly as high for sulfonylureas (58 %). Insulin dose and/or dosing frequency increased among 22.9 % of patients. Insulin was discontinued by 27 % of patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of substantial departures from guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy. Insulin secretagogues were frequently co-prescribed with insulin. The majority of patients had no evidence of treatment intensification following insulin initiation, although this finding is difficult to interpret without HbA1c levels. While each patient's care should be individualized, our data suggest that the quality of care following insulin initiation can be improved.