Real-World Impact of Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Apparent Treatment-Resistant or Difficult-to-Control Hypertension and Stages 3 and 4 Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a common comorbidity in patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH). We assessed clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization events, and costs in patients with aTRH or difficult-to-control hypertension and stage 3-4 CKD with uncontrolled vs. controlled BP. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used linked IQVIA Ambulatory EMR-US and IQVIA PharMetrics Plus claims databases. Adult patients had claims for ≥3 antihypertensive medication classes within 30 days between 01/01/2015 and 06/30/2021, 2 office BP measures recorded 1-90 days apart, ≥1 claim with ICD-9/10-CM diagnosis codes for CKD 3/4, and ≥1 year of continuous enrollment. Baseline BP was defined as uncontrolled (≥130/80 mm Hg) or controlled (<130/80 mm Hg) BP. Outcomes included risk of major adverse cardiovascular events plus (MACE+; stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure hospitalization), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), healthcare resource utilization events, and costs during follow-up. RESULTS: Of 3,966 patients with stage 3-4 CKD using ≥3 antihypertensive medications, 2,479 had uncontrolled BP and 1,487 had controlled BP. After adjusting for baseline differences, patients with uncontrolled vs. controlled BP had a higher risk of MACE+ (HR [95% CI]: 1.18 [1.03-1.36]), ESRD (1.85 [1.44-2.39]), inpatient hospitalization (rate ratio [95% CI]: 1.35 [1.28-1.43]), and outpatient visits (1.12 [1.11-1.12]) and incurred higher total medical and pharmacy costs (mean difference [95% CI]: $10,055 [$6,741-$13,646] per patient per year). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with aTRH and stage 3-4 CKD and uncontrolled BP despite treatment with ≥3 antihypertensive classes had an increased risk of MACE+ and ESRD and incurred greater healthcare resource utilization and medical expenditures compared with patients taking ≥3 antihypertensive classes with controlled BP.

Effectiveness, treatment durability, and treatment costs of canagliflozin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes in the USA.

Introduction: This real-world study compared glycemic effectiveness, treatment durability, and treatment costs with canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the USA. Research design and methods: A retrospective cohort study using administrative claims and laboratory data (1 April 2012 to 28 February 2017) from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database were used to assess mean HbA1c at 3-month intervals, achievement of HbA1c thresholds (<7.0%, <8.0%, <9.0%), and treatment durability (ie, adherence, discontinuation, switching, treatment failure (ie, exceeding threshold (7.0%, 8.0%, 9.0%), having a prescription for a new antihyperglycemic agent)) in adults with T2DM who initiated canagliflozin 300 mg or any dose of a GLP-1 receptor agonist. Medication costs were calculated for adherent patients. Results: There were no significant differences in the primary outcome of HbA1c levels at 3-month intervals (≤12 months) in the canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose GLP-1 receptor agonist cohort. The likelihood of achieving HbA1c<8.0% was not different (p=0.666), the likelihood of achieving HbA1c<7.0% was lower (p=0.016), and the likelihood of achieving HbA1c<9.0% was higher (p=0.020) in the canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose GLP-1 receptor agonist cohort. The likelihood of treatment failure after reaching any HbA1c target was not different between cohorts. A higher proportion of patients were adherent to treatment (p<0.0001) and a lower proportion discontinued (p<0.0001) or switched medication (p=0.023) in the canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose GLP-1 receptor agonist cohort. Over 1 year, medication costs were $1421 (p<0.001) lower with canagliflozin 300 mg than any dose of GLP-1 receptor agonists. Conclusions: This real-world, US-based study found that initiation of canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose of a GLP-1 receptor agonist in patients with T2DM was not associated with significant differences in the primary outcome of HbA1c levels at 3-month intervals for up to 12 months after index, but showed better adherence, less discontinuation, and lower drug acquisition costs compared with initiation of any dose of a GLP-1 receptor agonist.

The effect of a diabetes collaborative care management program on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical pharmacy services (CPS) in the primary care setting have been shown to help patients attain treatment goals and improve outcomes. However, the availability of CPS in community-based primary care is not widespread. One reason is that current fee-for-service models offer limited reimbursement opportunities for CPS in the community setting. Furthermore, data demonstrating the value of CPS in this setting are limited, making it difficult for providers to determine the feasibility and sustainability of incorporating CPS into primary care practice. OBJECTIVES: To (a) evaluate the association between a pharmacist-led, diabetes collaborative drug therapy management program and patient outcomes, including glycemic control and health care costs, and (b) assess short-term economic outcomes in a primary care setting. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using medical record data. This study was conducted using patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2DM), defined as HbA1c ≥ 7.0%. Outcomes were compared between patients referred to a diabetes collaborative care management (DCCM) intervention from 2009-2012 and patients who did not participate in the DCCM program. To illustrate the difference in HbA1c between the 2 cohorts over the follow-up period, mean time adjusted HbA1c values were estimated using a panel-type random effects regression model, with results plotted at 90-day intervals from index date through the end of the study period. To help control for confounding by other factors, multivariate regression models were run. A difference-in-difference model was employed to estimate the effect of the program on resource utilization and all-cause charges. RESULTS: A total of 303 DCCM and 394 comparison patients were included. Mean (95% CI) age was 57.4 years (55.963, 58.902) versus 59.9 years (58.613, 61.276; P < 0.001) with 48% and 44% female for DCCM and comparison patients, respectively (P = 0.49). Mean baseline HbA1c was higher for DCCM (10.3%; 10.10, 10.53) than comparison patients (8.4%; 8.26, 8.61; P < 0.001). The greatest reduction in HbA1c was seen for both groups at 9 and 12 months post-index date. At these time points, the mean time adjusted difference in HbA1c between groups was no longer significant. Multivariate modeling identified that the DCCM program was associated with a -0.44% (-0.64, -0.25; P < 0.001) lower HbA1c at follow-up relative to the comparison group controlling for potential confounders, including baseline HbA1c. Change in resource utilization from pre- to post-index date did not differ between groups. However, in the difference-in-difference multivariate analysis the difference in mean all-cause charges from the 12-month pre- to post-index periods DCCM patients experienced a smaller average increase in charges ($250) than comparison patients ($1,341; coefficient = -0.423; 95% CI = -0.779, -0.068). CONCLUSIONS: A pharmacist-led diabetes collaborative care management program in a patient-centered primary care setting was associated with significantly better follow-up glycemic control relative to comparison patients. Further, the data suggest that the DCCM program was associated with a less substantial increase in all-cause total costs in patients with uncontrolled T2DM relative to comparison patients, which could translate into reduced costs and improved outcomes to managed care payers.

Assessment of HER2 testing patterns, HER2+ disease, and the utilization of HER2-directed therapy in early breast cancer.

CONTEXT: Determining human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status is critical for the management of early-stage breast cancer (ESBC). An understanding of HER2 testing practices can provide insight into how test results influence the use of HER2-directed therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess HER2 testing, HER2+ disease, and HER2-directed therapy in ESBC at the Huntsman Cancer Institute before and after the 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologist (ASCO/CAP) guidelines on HER2 testing were published. METHODS: Patients were identified from an institutional tumor registry. HER2 testing patterns and results were examined using a chart review of pathology and clinical notes. Patient characteristics, HER2+ rate, and trastuzumab use were evaluated descriptively. Discordance rate with reflex testing (immunohistochemistry [IHC]2+ retested by fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH]) was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1,459 women were included (mean age: 57 years). The rate of HER2+ disease was 17% (number [N] =245). The discordance rate between IHC2+ and FISH was 10%. After the 2007 ASCO/CAP guidelines, fewer tumors were classified as IHC3+ (16% post- versus 21.9% pre-2007), more tumors were characterized as IHC2+ (26.4% post- versus 20.7% pre-2007), and the overall HER2+ rate was decreased (18.7% versus 21.9%), but this was not statistically significant (P=0.519). Most patients with HER2+ ESBC received HER2-targeted therapy (N=185). CONCLUSION: The HER2+ rate was 17% and within the range of the reported rates in the literature. Reflex testing identified additional HER2+ tumors by approximately 10%, and should be considered a potential quality indicator. ASCO/CAP HER2 testing guidelines in 2007 appeared to impact the interpretation and classification of HER2+ tumors.

Real-world evidence in pain research: a review of data sources.

Outcomes research studies use clinical and administrative data generated in the course of patient care or from patient surveys to examine the effectiveness of treatments. Health care providers need to understand the limitations and strengths of the real-world data sources used in outcomes studies to meaningfully use the results. This paper describes five types of databases commonly used in the United States for outcomes research studies, discusses their strengths and limitations, and provides examples of each within the context of pain treatment. The databases specifically discussed are generated from (1) electronic medical records, which are created from patient-provider interactions; (2) administrative claims, which are generated from providers' and patients' transactions with payers; (3) integrated health systems, which are generated by systems that provide both clinical care and insurance benefits and typically represent a combination of electronic medical record and claims data; (4) national surveys, which provide patient-reported responses about their health and behaviors; and (5) patient registries, which are developed to track patients with a given disease or exposure over time for specified purposes, such as population management, safety monitoring, or research.