Understanding faculty perceptions and experiences related to climate, diversity, equity, and inclusion at a college of pharmacy: A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: A climate survey was piloted to obtain an understanding of the perceptions and personal experiences of faculty for intentional planning of future meaningful, effective, and sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts at a college of pharmacy. METHODS: A 48-item, four section, online survey was developed and administered to 69 faculty between October and November 2021. Likert-like five-point scales and free-text items were included to determine an overall assessment of climate, as well as perceptions and/or personal experiences for each domain of DEI, and demographics. RESULTS: Thirty-nine (57%) faculty completed the survey. For climate, every attribute had at least one respondent that observed someone make an insensitive or disparaging remark "rarely," "occasionally," and "frequently." The response pattern was similar for personal experience with insensitive remarks. For participation in diversity activities, "awareness without participation" was selected by 56% of respondents. For perceptions of diversity, "fairly" or "very" was selected by 38% to 54% of respondents. For equity, "attainable for some" to "not attainable" was identified for 15% to 26% of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: These pilot climate survey results inform climate improvement as it relates to DEI and informs survey instrument refinement.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab-chemotherapy as first-line therapy for locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer: a United States payer perspective.

OBJECTIVES: Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, was approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug administration as a first-line systemic therapy for locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer patients. The current study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-chemotherapy combination versus chemotherapy alone as a first-line therapy from a US payer perspective. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted using a partitioned survival model in Microsoft Excel® using data from the CheckMate 649 trial. Three discrete mutually exclusive health states (progression-free, post-progression, and death) were included in the model. The health state occupancy was calculated using the overall survival and progression-free survival curves derived from the CheckMate 649 trial. Cost, resource use, and health utility estimates were estimated from a US payer perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed the uncertainty of the model parameters. RESULTS: Nivolumab-chemotherapy provided additional 0.25 life years compared to chemotherapy alone and the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.701 and 0.561, respectively, producing a gain of 0.140 QALYs and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $574,072/QALY. CONCLUSION: From the US payer perspective, at a willingness to pay threshold of $US150,000/QALY, nivolumab-chemotherapy was not found to be cost-effective as a first-line therapy for locally advanced/metastatic gastric cancer.

The economic value of knowing BRCA status: BRCA testing for optimizing treatment in recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net monetary benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information for recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) patients in a given year and the cumulative savings of yearly hypothetical cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1) 'with BRCA information' and (2) 'without BRCA information.' METHODS: Incremental NMB (INMB) was calculated as the average net monetized benefit of knowing BRCA status. The net monetized value (cumulative INMB) of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible ROC patients in year 2020 and extended for potential ROC patients over 16 yearly hypothetical cohorts of ROC patients. RESULTS: Knowing BRCA information for ROC patients provided an additional monetized value of $3,528 in (payer) and $3,194 (society). Escalated to all ROC patients in the U.S. and future incidence ROC estimates, knowing BRCA information resulted in a lifetime cumulative INMB of $35.6 million (payer) and $32.2 million (society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded an accumulated value of $97.3 million (payer) and $88.0 million (society) over 16 yearly hypothetical cohorts of ROC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The economic value of knowing BRCA status of all U.S. ROC patients provides short-term and long-term evidence for optimizing treatment.

Economic value of knowing BRCA status: BRCA testing for prostate cancer prevention and optimal treatment.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net-monetary-benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information by testing of patients with low-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) in the US and guiding subsequent screening and treatment, and the cumulative savings or losses of yearly cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1)'with BRCA information' and (2)'without BRCA information.' We also estimated the expected value of perfect information. METHODS: The incremental NMB (INMB) quantified the monetized benefit per person of knowing BRCA status. The net-monetized-value of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible population. RESULTS: The INMBs of knowing BRCA information were $43,357 (payer) and $43,487 (society). in payer and societal perspectives, respectively. Escalated to the eligible patients in 2020, knowing BRCA status resulted in net monetized lifetime value of $1.7 billion (payer and society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded accumulated net-monetized-value of $28.0 billion (payer) and $28.1 billion (society) over 16 yearly cohorts of eligible PCa patients. CONCLUSIONS: The economic value of knowing BRCA status for all low-risk localized PCa patients in the US provides short-term and long-term evidence for BRCA testing to screen early and optimize treatment.

The economic value of knowing BRCA status: universal BRCA testing for breast cancer prevention.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net monetary benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information by universal genetic testing of all US women without breast cancer turning 40 in a given year, and the cumulative savings or losses of yearly cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1) 'with BRCA information' and (2) 'without BRCA information.' METHODS: Incremental NMB (INMB) was calculated as the monetized benefit per person of knowing BRCA status. The net monetized value (cumulated INMB) of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible population or the year 2020 cohort of US women age 40 and extended for a total of 16 yearly cohorts. RESULTS: Universal testing of the female population at the age of 40 in a given year provided aan INMB of $663/person (payer) and $1,006/person (society).Escalated to the U.S. population of women age 40 , knowing BRCA status resulted in lifetime cumulated INMB of $1.3 billion (payer) and $2.0 billion (society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded accumulated monetized value of $18.3 billion (payer) and $27.6 billion (society) over 16 yearly cohorts of 40-year-old women. CONCLUSIONS: The universal testing for BRCA status of all US women at age 40 provides compelling short-term and long-term economic value.

Cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses of Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, and zanubrutinib have shown improvements in efficacy and safety over conventional chemoimmunotherapy in refractory or relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (R/R MCL). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of the Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKIs) and estimate the expected value of (partial) perfect information (EV[P]PI) in terms of net health benefits (NHBs) and net monetary benefits (NMBs) forgone. METHODS: Using a two-state Markov model (progression-free; progression or death), we estimated in base-case and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) and cost-utility ratios (ICUR) of, respectively, progression-free survival (PFS) life-years (PFLYs) and PFS quality-adjusted LY (PFQALY) gained (g) against 3-year and 5-year time horizons. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/PFQALY was used to assess the probability of being cost-effective in the PSA. EVPI was calculated from the respective NHBs and NMBs. RESULTS: Compared with ibrutinib, acalabrutinib yielded a 3-year ICER of $90,571 (PSA = $88,588)/PFLYg and ICUR of $117,098 ($110,063)/PFQALYg, whereas zanubrutinib yielded a 3-year ICER of $58,422 ($58,907)/PFLYg and ICUR of $73,027 ($73,634)/PFQALYg. The corresponding 5-year estimates were ICER of $73,918 ($74,189)/PFLYg and ICUR of $90,512 ($90,844)/PFQALYg for acalabrutinib and ICER of $48,641 ($48,732)/PFLYg and ICUR of $61,612 ($63,727)/PFQALYg for zanubrutinib. Compared with zanubrutinib, treatment with acalabrutinib yielded a 3-year ICER of $144,633 ($134,964)/PFLYg and ICUR of $197,227 ($166,109)/PFQALYg; the corresponding 5-year estimates were $117,579 ($118,161)/PFLYg and $136,144 ($136,818)/PFQALYg. The EVPI/patient was an NHB of 0.036 PFQALYs and NMB of $3,602 forgone, resulting in a population EVPI of $134,766,957 forgone. The EVPPIs/patient for effectiveness were NHB of 0.015 PFQALYs and NMB of $1,479, with corresponding values of 0.032 and $3,187 for costs and 0.015 and $1,519 for health-related quality of life forgone. CONCLUSIONS: This early cost-effectiveness analysis based on phase I/II clinical trials of BTKIs in R/R MCL suggests an additional PFS benefit for second-generation BTKIs compared with ibrutinib. However, the relative uncertainty due to the lack of direct trial evidence may lead to an opportunity cost or lost health benefits if the current evidence is adopted to compare between these products. Additional evidence is needed to address the relative efficacy of the BTKIs. DISCLOSURES: A. McBride serves on speakers bureaus for Coherus BioSciences and Merck. He is now at Bristol-Myers Squibb in a position unrelated to this study. I. Abraham is joint equity owner in Matrix45. By company policy, owners and employees are prohibited from owning equity in client and sponsor organizations (except through mutual funds or other independently administered collective investment instruments), contracting independently with client and sponsor organizations, or receiving compensation independently from such organizations. Matrix45 provides similar services to biopharmaceutical, diagnostics, and medical device companies on a nonexclusivity basis. Of relevance to this article, Matrix45 has not provided any services to this study. I. Abraham is the quantitative methods editor of JAMA Dermatology and deputy editor-in-chief of the Journal of Medical Economics. The remaining authors have no relevant financial or nonfinancial interests to disclose.

Association of low-income subsidy, medicaid dual eligibility, and disability status with high-risk medication use among Medicare Part D beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Low-income subsidy/dual eligibility (LIS/DE) status and disability status may be associated with high-risk medication (HRM) use but are not usually accounted for in medication-use quality measures. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of: 1) LIS/DE status and HRM use; and 2) disability status and HRM use, while controlling for both health plan level effects and patient characteristics for Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug Plans (MA-PD) and stand-alone Prescription Drug Plans (PDP). METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used 2013 Medicare data to determine if LIS/DE status and disability status were independently associated with HRM use (using the Pharmacy Quality Alliance HRM measure) in MA-PDs and PDPs. Multivariable generalized linear mixed models assessed the association of LIS/DE and HRM use, and disability and HRM use, after adjusting for health plan effect and patient-level confounders for MA-PD and PDP beneficiaries. RESULTS: Of 520,019 MA-PD beneficiaries, 88,693 (17.1%) were LIS/DE and 48,997 (9.4%) were disabled. Of 881,264 PDP beneficiaries, 213,096 (24.2%) were LIS/DE, and 83,593 (9.5%) were disabled. LIS/DE beneficiaries had a higher percent of HRM users compared to non-LIS/DE MA-PD (13.3% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001) and PDP (17.1% vs. 13.2%, p < 0.001) beneficiaries. Disabled beneficiaries had a higher percent of HRM users compared to non-disabled MA-PD (17.0% vs. 9.6%, p < 0.001) and PDP (22.9% vs. 13.2%, p < 0.001) beneficiaries. Multivariable analyses showed LIS/DE (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.07; 95% CI = 1.04, 1.10) and disability (AOR = 1.38; 95% CI = 1.34, 1.42) were associated with HRM use among MA-PD and PDP beneficiaries (LIS/DE AOR = 1.14; 95% CI = 1.12, 1.16; disability AOR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.34, 1.40). CONCLUSIONS: The association of LIS/DE and disability with higher HRM use in both MA-PD and PDP beneficiaries, when controlling for health plan effects and patient characteristics, suggests these factors should be considered when comparing health plan performance on HRM measures.

Assessment of Interprofessional Collaborative Practices and Outcomes in Adults With Diabetes and Hypertension in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Interprofessional collaborative practice (ICP), the collaboration of health workers from different professional backgrounds with patients, families, caregivers, and communities, is central to optimal primary care. However, limited evidence exists regarding its association with patient outcomes. Objective: To examine the association of ICP with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels among adults receiving primary care. Data Sources: A literature search of English language journals (January 2013-2018; updated through March 2020) was conducted using MEDLINE; Embase; Ovid IPA; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials: Issue 2 of 12, February 2018; NHS Economic Evaluation Database: Issue 2 of 4, April 2015; Clarivate Analytics WOS Science Citation Index Expanded (1990-2018); EBSCOhost CINAHL Plus With Full Text (1937-2018); Elsevier Scopus; FirstSearch OAIster; AHRQ PCMH Citations Collection; ClinicalTrials.gov; and HSRProj. Study Selection: Studies needed to evaluate the association of ICP (≥3 professions) with HbA1c, SBP, or DBP levels in adults with diabetes and/or hypertension receiving primary care. A dual review was performed for screening and selection. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guideline for data abstractions and Cochrane Collaboration recommendations for bias assessment. Two dual review teams conducted independent data extraction with consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model for meta-analyses and forest plots constructed to report standardized mean differences (SMDs). For high heterogeneity (I2), data were stratified by baseline level and by study design. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes included HbA1c, SBP, and DBP levels as determined before data collection. Results: A total of 3543 titles or abstracts were screened; 170 abstracts or full texts were reviewed. Of 50 articles in the systematic review, 39 (15 randomized clinical trials [RCTs], 24 non-RCTs) were included in the meta-analyses of HbA1c (n = 34), SBP (n = 25), and DBP (n = 24). The sample size ranged from 40 to 20 524, and mean age ranged from 51 to 70 years, with 0% to 100% participants being male. Varied ICP features were reported. The SMD varied by baseline HbA1c, although all SMDs significantly favored ICP (HbA1c <8, SMD = -0.13; P < .001; HbA1c ≥8 to < 9, SMD = -0.24; P = .007; and HbA1c ≥9, SMD = -0.60; P < .001). The SMD for SBP and DBP were -0.31 (95% CI, -0.46 to -0.17); P < .001 and -0.28 (95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14); P < .001, respectively, with effect sizes not associated with baseline levels. Overall I2 was greater than 80% for all outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ICP was associated with reductions in HbA1c regardless of baseline levels as well as with reduced SBP and DBP. However, the greatest reductions were found with HbA1c levels of 9 or higher. The implementation of ICP in primary care may be associated with improvements in patient outcomes in diabetes and hypertension.

Association Between Dual Trajectories of Opioid and Gabapentinoid Use and Healthcare Expenditures Among US Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about relationships between opioid- and gabapentinoid-use patterns and healthcare expenditures that may be affected by pain management and risk of adverse outcomes. This study examined the association between patients' opioid and gabapentinoid prescription filling/refilling trajectories and direct medical expenditures in US Medicare. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included a 5% national sample (2011-2016) of fee-for-service beneficiaries with fibromyalgia, low back pain, neuropathy, or osteoarthritis newly initiating opioids or gabapentinoids. Using group-based multitrajectory modeling, this study identified patients' distinct opioid and gabapentinoid (OPI-GABA) dose and duration patterns, based on standardized daily doses, within a year of initiating opioids and/or gabapentinoids. Concurrent direct medical expenditures within the same year were estimated using inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable generalized linear regression, adjusting for sociodemographic and health status factors. RESULTS: Among 67 827 eligible beneficiaries (mean age ± SD = 63.6 ± 14.8 years, female = 65.8%, white = 77.1%), 11 distinct trajectories were identified (3 opioid-only, 4 gabapentinoid-only, and 4 concurrent OPI-GABA trajectories). Compared with opioid-only early discontinuers ($13 830, 95% confidence interval = $13 643-14 019), gabapentinoid-only early discontinuers and consistent low-dose and moderate-dose gabapentinoid-only users were associated with 11% to 23% lower health expenditures (adjusted mean expenditure = $10 607-$11 713). Consistent low-dose opioid-only users, consistent high-dose opioid-only users, consistent low-dose OPI-GABA users, consistent low-dose opioid and high-dose gabapentinoid users, and consistent high-dose opioid and moderate-dose gabapentinoid users were associated with 14% to 106% higher healthcare expenditures (adjusted mean expenditure = $15 721-$28 464). CONCLUSIONS: Dose and duration patterns of concurrent OPI-GABA varied substantially among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries. Consistent opioid-only users and all concurrent OPI-GABA users were associated with higher healthcare expenditures compared to opioid-only discontinuers.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors-associated risk of immune-related hypothyroidism in older patients with advanced melanoma: a real-world analysis of US SEER-Medicare data.

Background: The risk of immune-related(ir)-hypothyroidism in older patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 therapies is poorly understood, especially in the real-world setting.Research design and methods: We identified older patients (≥65 years) diagnosed with advanced melanoma between 2011-2015 and treated with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 agents in the SEER-Medicare database. Applying probability-of-treatment-weighting for confounder adjustment and proportional hazards models, we estimated the risk of ir-hypothyroidism between treatment initiation and up to 90 days from last dose between anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 users.Results: Of 210 older patients with advanced melanoma identified, 164 received anti-CTLA4 (ipilimumab) and 46 anti-PD1 agents (11 nivolumab, 35 pembrolizumab). There was no statistically significant difference in ir-hypothyroidism risk between anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 users (HR=2.15, 95%CI=0.83-5.53). Pairwise medication comparisons showed a lower risk among ipilimumab versus nivolumab (HR=0.15, 95%CI=0.06-0.40) and pembrolizumab versus nivolumab users (HR=0.13, 95%CI=0.03-0.55). Sensitivity analyses using an all-stages melanoma cohort did not show a difference in ir-hypothyroidism risk between medication classes and individual medications.Conclusions:This retrospective claims data analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in ir-hypothyroidism risk between anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 users. However, patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab or pembrolizumab may have a lower ir-hypothyroidism risk compared to nivolumab users.

Nationally Representative Health Care Expenditures of Community-Based Older Adults with Pain in the United States Prescribed Opioids vs Those Not Prescribed Opioids.

OBJECTIVE: To compare health care expenditures between older US adults (≥50 years) with pain who were prescribed opioid medications and those who were not. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Community-based adults in the 2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). SUBJECTS: Nationally representative sample of US adults alive for the calendar year, aged 50 years or older, who reported having pain in the past four weeks. METHODS: Older US adults (≥50 years) with pain in the 2015 MEPS data were identified. The key independent variable was opioid prescription status (prescribed opioid vs not prescribed opioid). Hierarchical linear regression models assessed health care expenditures (inpatient, outpatient, office-based, emergency room, prescription medications, other, and total) in US dollars for opioid prescription status from a community-dwelling US population perspective, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: The 2015 study cohort provided a national estimate of 50,898,592 noninstitutionalized US adults aged ≥50 years with pain in the past four weeks (prescribed opioid N = 16,757,516 [32.9%], not prescribed opioid N = 34,141,076 [67.1%]). After adjusting for covariates, individuals prescribed an opioid had 61% greater outpatient (ß = 0.477, P < 0.0001), 69% greater office-based (ß = 0.524, P < 0.0001), 14% greater emergency room (ß = 0.131, P = 0.0045), 63% greater prescription medication (ß = 0.486, P < 0.0001), 29% greater other (ß = 0.251, P = 0.0002), and 105% greater total (ß = 0.718, P < 0.0001) health care expenditures. There was no difference in opioid prescription status for inpatient expenditures (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study raises awareness of the economic impact associated with opioid use among US older adults with pain. Future research should investigate these variables in greater depth, over longer time periods, and in additional populations.

Dual-trajectories of opioid and gabapentinoid use and risk of subsequent drug overdose among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Little is known about opioid and gabapentinoid (OPI-GABA) use duration and dose patterns' associations with adverse outcome risks. We examined associations between OPI-GABA dose and duration trajectories and subsequent drug overdose. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: US Medicare. PARTICIPANTS: Using a 5% sample (2011-16), we identified 71 005 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with fibromyalgia, low back pain, neuropathy and/or osteoarthritis initiating OPIs and/or GABAs [mean age ± standard deviation (SD) = 65.5 ± 14.5 years, female = 68.1%, white = 76.8%]. MEASUREMENTS: Group-based multi-trajectory models identified distinct OPI-GABA use patterns during the year of OPI and/or GABA initiation, based on weekly average standardized daily dose (i.e. OPIs = morphine milligram equivalent, GABAs = minimum effective daily dose). We estimated models with three to 12 trajectories and selected the best model based on Bayesian information criterion (BIC) and Nagin's criteria. We estimated risk of time to first drug overdose diagnosis within 12 months following the index year, adjusting for socio-demographic and health factors using inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS: We identified 10 distinct trajectories (BIC = -1 176 954; OPI-only = 3, GABA-only = 3, OPI-GABA = 4). Compared with OPI-only early discontinuers (40.6% of the cohort), 1-year drug overdose risk varied by trajectory group: consistent low-dose OPI-only users [16.6%; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-1.82], consistent high-dose OPI-only users (1.8%; HR = 4.57, 95% CI = 2.99-6.98), GABA-only early discontinuers (12.5%; HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.09-1.77), consistent low-dose GABA-only users (11.0%; HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.12-1.85), consistent high-dose GABA-only users (3.1%; HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 0.94-2.17), early discontinuation of OPIs and consistent low-dose GABA users (6.9%; HR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.90-1.69), consistent low-dose OPI-GABA users (3.4%; HR = 2.49, 95% CI = 1.76-3.52), consistent low-dose OPI and high-dose GABA users (3.2%; HR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.71-3.53) and consistent high-dose OPI and moderate-dose GABA users (0.9%; HR = 7.22, 95% CI = 4.46-11.69). CONCLUSIONS: Risk of drug overdose varied substantially among US Medicare beneficiaries on different use trajectories of opioids and gabapentinoids. High-dose opioid-only users and all consistent opioid and gabapentinoid users (regardless of doses) had more than double the risk of subsequent drug overdose compared with opioid-only early discontinuers.

Ex Ante Economic Evaluation of Arg389 Genetically Targeted Treatment with Bucindolol versus Empirical Treatment with Carvedilol in NYHA III/IV Heart Failure.

OBJECTIVE: The Beta-Blocker Evaluation Survival Trial showed no survival benefit for bucindolol in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, but subanalyses suggested survival benefits for non-Black subjects and Arg389 homozygotes. We conducted an ex ante economic evaluation of Arg389 targeted treatment with bucindolol versus carvidolol, complementing a previous ex ante economic evaluation of bucindolol preceded by genetic testing for the Arg389 polymorphism, in which genetic testing prevailed economically over no testing. METHODS: A decision tree analysis with an 18-month time horizon was performed to estimate the cost effectiveness/cost utility of trajectories of 100%, 50%, and 0% of patients genetically tested for Arg389 and comparing bucindolol with empirical carvedilol treatment as per prior BEST subanalyses. Incremental cost-effectiveness/cost-utility ratios (ICERs/ICURs) were estimated. RESULTS: Race-based analyses for non-White subjects at 100% testing showed a loss of (0.04) life-years and (0.03) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an incremental cost of $2185, yielding a negative ICER of ($54,625)/life-year and ICUR of ($72,833)/QALY lost; at 50%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.27) life-years and (0.16) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1843, yielding a negative ICER of ($6826)/life-year and ICUR of ($11,519)/QALY lost; at 0%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.33) life-years and (0.30) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1459, yielding a negative ICER of ($4421)/life-year and ICUR of ($4863)/QALY lost. Arg389 homozygote analyses at 100% testing showed incremental gains of 0.02 life-years and 0.02 QALYs at an incremental cost of $378, yielding an ICER of 18,900/life-year and ICUR of $18,900/QALY gained; at 50%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.24) life-years and (0.09) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1039, yielding a negative ICER of ($4329)/life-year and ICUR of ($9336)/QALY lost; at 0%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.33) life-years and (0.30) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1459, yielding a negative ICER of ($4421)/life-year and ICUR of ($4863)/QALY lost. CONCLUSION: This independent ex ante economic evaluation suggests that genetically targeted treatment with bucindolol is unlikely to yield clinicoeconomic benefits over empirical treatment with carvedilol in NYHA III/IV HF.

Geographic Variation in the Prevalence of High-Risk Medication Use Among Medicare Part D Beneficiaries by Hospital Referral Region.

BACKGROUND: Understanding geographic patterns of high-risk medication (HRM) prescribed and dispensed among older adults may help the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and their partners develop and tailor prevention strategies. OBJECTIVE: To compare the geographic variation in the prevalence of HRM use among Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2011 to 2013, for Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MA-PD) plans and stand-alone Prescription Drug Plans (PDPs). METHODS: This retrospective study used the data of a 5% national Medicare sample (2011-2013). Beneficiaries were included in the study if they were aged ≥ 65 years, continuously enrolled in MA-PDs or PDPs (~1.3 million each year), and had ≥ 2 prescriptions for the same HRM (e.g., amitriptyline) prescribed and dispensed during the year based on the Pharmacy Quality Alliance's (PQA) quality measures for HRM use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted annual HRM use rates (i.e., adjusted predictions, average marginal predictions, or model-adjusted risk) across 306 Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care hospital referral regions (HRRs), controlling for sociodemographic, health-status, and access-to-care factors. RESULTS: Among eligible beneficiaries each year (1,161,076 in 2011, 1,237,653 in 2012, and 1,402,861 in 2013), nearly 40% were enrolled in MA-PD plans, whereas the remaining 60% were in PDP plans. The adjusted prevalence of HRM use significantly decreased among Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in MA-PD (13.1%-8.4%, P < 0.001) and PDP (16.2%-12.2%, P < 0.001) plans from 2011 to 2013. For MA-PD and PDP beneficiaries, HRM users were more likely to be (all P < 0.001) the following: female (MA-PD: 70.4% vs. 59.9%; PDP: 72.8% vs. 62.5%); White (MA-PD: 84.6% vs. 81.4%; PDP: 86.6% vs. 85.3%); with low-income subsidy or dual eligibility for Medicaid (MA-PD: 22.3% vs. 16.6%; PDP: 29.2% vs. 23.3%); and disabled (MA-PD: 15.6% vs. 8.7%; PDP: 15.4% vs. 8.5%) compared with non-HRM users in 2013. In 2013, significant geographic variation existed, with the ratios of 75th-25th percentiles of HRM use rates across HRRs as 1.42 for MA-PDs and 1.31 for PDPs. For MA-PDs, the top 5 HRRs with the highest HRM use rates in 2013 were Casper, WY (20.4%), Waco, TX (16.7%), Lubbock, TX (15.7%), Santa Barbara, CA (15.2%), and Temple, TX (15.1%); for PDPs, they were Lawton, OK (18.8%), Alexandria, LA (18.8%), Lake Charles, LA (18.6%), Oklahoma City, OK (18.0%), and Slidell, LA (18.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial geographic variation exists in the prevalence of HRM use among older adults in Medicare, regardless of prescription drug plan. Areas with high prevalence of HRM use may benefit from targeted interventions (e.g., medication therapy management monitoring or alternative medication substitutions) to prevent potential adverse consequences. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. This study was presented as a poster at the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Asia Pacific Meeting; September 8-11, 2018; Tokyo, Japan.

Pricing methods in outcome-based contracting: integration analysis of the six dimensions (6 δs).

AIMS: Six Delta is a six-dimensional independent platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The six dimensions have been described separately: (δ1) cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis-based pricing; (δ2) willingness-to-pay-based pricing; (δ3) reference-based pricing; (δ4) safety-based pricing; (δ5) risk of efficacy failure-based pricing; and (δ6) adherence-based pricing. The final step is to integrate the various dimension-specific pricing estimates into a composite estimate termed the All-Dimensional Price (ADP). We describe the methodology for this integration and present a proof-of-concept application to the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation with osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For better accuracy in estimating the ADP, we used the prices generated from the six dimensions at scenario levels, not at the dimension-specific price (DSP) level. We pooled the price estimates and performed Monte Carlo Simulations (MCS) for the price scenarios generated by the six dimensions. We used the results of the proof-of-concept exercise involving osimertinib in NSCLC with EGFR mutation to estimate the ADP in two hypothetical contracts: 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year contract (2019-2021). RESULTS: The average of the 30-day prescription estimates from the six dimensions averaged $10,819 (SD=$8,486) for the 1-year contract and $10,730 (SD=$8,500) for the 2-year contract. MCS yielded for the 1-year contract an ADP of $10,959 (or -25.02% the 2018 WAC price) and an ADP for the 2-year contract was $10,788 (or -26.19% the 2018 WAC price). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the integration of the prices from the six dimensions of the Six Delta platform and market conditions is feasible and yields multidimensional prices estimates to support outcome-based pricing/contracting.

Pricing methods in outcome-based contracting: δ3: reference-based pricing.

AIMS: Six Delta is a six-dimensional independent platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The third dimension (δ3) estimates prices on the basis of international drug price referencing methods. We describe this dimension's methodology and present a proof-of-concept application to the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation with osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The reference-based pricing dimension utilizes a six-step method: (1) selecting foreign countries based on a set of four criteria (drug is available in the foreign country, price information is available in the foreign country, foreign countries are members within the organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, pricing methods in the foreign countries involve value assessment); (2) adjusting for exchange rates; (3) generating reference price (RP) scenarios; (4) adjusting with the medical inflation rate; (5) pooling all generated RP scenarios and calculating average and standard deviation (SD); (6) and Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) to estimate the dimension-specific DSPReference. A proof-of-concept exercise with osimertinib in NSCLC was performed for two hypothetical outcome-based contracts: 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year (2019-2021). RESULTS: The United Kingdom and Canada met the four criteria. For the osimertinib 1-year contract price, the average of eight RP scenarios, adjusted for inflation by 0.44%, was $8,892 (SD = $2,606) for a 30-day prescription. MCS yielded a DSPReference estimate of $9,395 or -35.72% of the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) of $14,616. For the 2-year contract, the average, adjusted for inflation by 0.72%, was $8,928 (SD = $2,610). MCS yielded a DSPReference estimate of $9,442 or -35.40% of the WAC of $14,616. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that international price referencing methods can be integrated into our proposed Six Delta platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting.

Pricing methods in outcome-based contracting: δ2: willingness-to-pay-based pricing.

AIMS: Six Delta is a six-dimensional independent platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The second dimension (δ2) estimates prices on the basis of four willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. We describe this dimension's methodology and present a proof-of-concept application to the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation with osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight WTP scenarios based on four levels of real gross domestic product per capita (<1GDP/capita, 1 × GDP/capita, 3 × GDP/capita, and >3 × GDP/capita) and two market conditions (monopolistic versus competitive) were assumed. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was applied to differently to both markets. In the monopolistic market, assuming no competitors, the cost/QALY ratio for a drug was used; whereas in the competitive market, assuming competitors, the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was applied. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed and predictive equations were specified to estimate the prices of treatment for the resulting eight WTP scenarios; for which subsequently the average and standard deviation were calculated. A gamma distribution was specified and Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) was applied to estimate the dimension-specific price based on WTP (DSPWTP). A proof-of-concept exercise with osimertinib in NSCLC was performed for two hypothetical outcome-based contracts: 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year (2019-2021). The 2018 wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) of $14,616 (30-day prescription) was used to estimate the DSPWTP for each contract. RESULTS: The 1-year estimates averaged $4,654 (SD=$6,462) and the MCS yielded a DSPWTP of $4,547 or -68.89% of the 2018 WAC for a 30-day prescription. The 2-year estimates averaged $4,7667 (SD=$6,480) with the MCS generating a DSPWTP of $4,704 or -67.82% of the WAC. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that WTP-based methods that include various WTP thresholds and market conditions generate price estimates across these thresholds and market conditions that can be integrated into our proposed Six Delta platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting.

Pricing methods in outcome-based contracting: δ4: safety-based pricing.

AIMS: Six Delta is a six-dimensional independent platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The fourth dimension (δ4) estimates prices on the basis of assessments of the safety of the drug using an ex ante analysis based on clinical trial data. We describe this dimension's methodology and present a proof-of-concept application to the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation with osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The safety-based pricing dimension utilizes a four-step method: 1) pooling adverse events (AE), standardizing, estimating 95%Cis, and adjusting for time; 2) estimating correction factors and corrected probabilities of AEs; 3) estimating the probability of at least one adverse event (AE) occurring and leading to treatment discontinuation; and 4) estimating ranges for payback percentages and performing Monte Carlo Simulation to estimate a DSPSafety. A proof-of-concept exercise with osimertinib in NSCLC was performed for two hypothetical outcome-based contracts: 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year (2019-2021). We estimated the DSPSafety based on the grade 3/4 AEs observed for osimertinib and standard of care. The 2018 wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) of osimertinib at $14,616 for a 30-day prescription was used. RESULTS: AEs3/4 were retrieved from the FLAURA trial. In the 1-year contract, the DSPSafety of osimertinib was estimated at $14,627 (or +0.08% the 2018 WAC) for a 30-day prescription. In the 2-year contract, the DSPSafety of osimertinib was estimated at $14,516 (or -0.68% the 2018 WAC) for a 30-day prescription. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that ex ante pricing methods-based paybacks for safety issues leading to treatment discontinuation can be integrated into our proposed Six Delta platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting.

Pricing methods in outcome-based contracting: δ5: risk of efficacy failure-based pricing.

AIMS: Six Delta is a six-dimensional independent platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The fifth dimension (δ5) estimates prices on the basis of the risk of efficacy failure of a drug. We describe this dimension's methodology and present a proof-of-concept application to the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation with osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The risk of efficacy failure pricing dimension utilizes a seven-step method: (1) defining risk; (2) extracting data; (3) predicting models; (4) performing Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) to estimate risk of efficacy failure; 5) estimating ranges for a payback; (6) adjusting for medical inflation; and (7) performing Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) to estimate the DSPRisk of efficacy failure. A proof-of-concept exercise with osimertinib in NSCLC was performed for two hypothetical outcome-based contracts: 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year (2019-2021). We estimated the risk of efficacy failure for osimertinib in terms of overall and progression-free survival versus standard of care. We used the estimated risk to estimate the price reduction on the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) for the two hypothetical contracts: a 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year contract (2019-2021). From this we estimated the DSPRisk of efficacy failure. RESULTS: Based on the risk of OS and PFS efficacy failure for osimertinib in OS and PFS, in the 1-year contract, the DSPRisk of efficacy failure was estimated at $12,652 (or -13.44% the 2018 WAC) for a 30-day prescription. For the 2-year contract (2019-2021), the DSPRisk of efficacy failure was estimated at $13,019 (or -10.93% the 2018 WAC). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that pricing methods based on risk of efficacy failure methods can be integrated into our proposed Six Delta platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting.

Pricing methods in outcome-based contracting: δ6: adherence-based pricing.

AIMS: Six Delta is a six-dimensional independent platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The sixth dimension (δ6) estimates prices on the basis of adherence to the prescribed regimen, whereby manufacturers provide payers with adherence-enhancing programs and whereby payers implement these programs and provide adherence data to the manufacturer. We describe this dimension's methodology and present a proof-of-concept application to the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutation with osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We propose two paybacks based on adherence: in-advance (based on clinical trial data) and in-arrear (based on real-world data). The risk of efficacy failure pricing dimension utilizes a 7-step method: 1) defining efficacy endpoints; 2) extracting data; 3) predicting models; 4) estimating in-advance and in-arrear paybacks; 5) suggesting ranges for in-advance and in-arrear paybacks; 6) adjusting for medical inflation; and 7) performing Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) to estimate the DSPAdherence. A proof-of-concept exercise with osimertinib in NSCLC was performed for two hypothetical outcome-based contracts: 1-year (2019-2020) and 2-year (2019-2021). The 2018 wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) for a 30-day prescription was used and inflated as needed. Herein, the DSPAdherence is estimated exclusively in terms of in-advance payback because real-world data about osimertinib are not yet available and thus the in-arrear payback cannot yet be estimated. RESULTS: For the 1-year contract, the average price for osimertinib was $13,798 (SD=$1,265) and the DSPAdherence was $13,785 (or -5.69% of the 2018 WAC) for a 30-day prescription. For the 2-year contract, the average price was $12,555 (SD=$2,847) and the DSPAdherence was $12,582 (or -13.92% of the 2018 WAC). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that adherence-based pricing methods can be integrated into our proposed Six Delta platform for outcome-based pricing/contracting. The proof-of-concept exercise needs to be expanded with the in-arrear pricing method based on real world data to be secured.