Cost Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Heart Failure Across the Spectrum of Ejection Fraction: An Economic Evaluation Based on Pooled, Individual Participant Data From the DELIVER and DAPA-HF Trials.

BACKGROUND: The sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors are guideline-recommended to treat heart failure across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction; however, economic evaluations of adding sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors to standard of care in chronic heart failure across a broad left ventricular ejection fraction range are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a US-based cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin added to standard of care in a chronic heart failure population using pooled, participant data from the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) and DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trials. The 3-state Markov model used estimates of transitional probabilities, effectiveness of dapagliflozin, and utilities from the pooled trials. Costs estimates were obtained from published sources, including published rebates in dapagliflozin cost. Adding dapagliflozin to standard of care was estimated to produce an additional 0.53 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with standard of care alone. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were $85 554/QALY when using the publicly reported full (undiscounted) Medicare cost ($515/month) and $40 081/QALY, at a published nearly 50% rebate ($263/month). The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care would be of at least intermediate value (<$150 000/QALY) at a cost of <$872.58/month, of high value (<$50 000/QALY) at <$317.66/month, and cost saving at <$40.25/month. Dapagliflozin was of at least intermediate value in 92% of simulations when using the full (undiscounted) Medicare list cost in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Cost effectiveness was most sensitive to the dapagliflozin cost and the effect on cardiovascular death. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction was at least of intermediate value at the undiscounted Medicare cost and may be potentially of higher value on the basis of the level of discount, rebates, and price negotiations offered. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01035255 & NCT01920711.

Drug development for major chronic health conditions-aligning with growing public health needs: Proceedings from a multistakeholder think tank.

The global pharmaceutical industry portfolio is skewed towards cancer and rare diseases due to more predictable development pathways and financial incentives. In contrast, drug development for major chronic health conditions that are responsible for a large part of mortality and disability worldwide is stalled. To examine the processes of novel drug development for common chronic health conditions, a multistakeholder Think Tank meeting, including thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, non-profit healthcare organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), payors as well as investors, was convened in July 2022. Herein, we summarize the proceedings of this meeting, including an overview of the current state of drug development for chronic health conditions and key barriers that were identified. Six major action items were formulated to accelerate drug development for chronic diseases, with a focus on improving the efficiency of clinical trials and rapid implementation of evidence into clinical practice.

Cost-Effectiveness of Vericiguat in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: The VICTORIA Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The VICTORIA trial (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction) demonstrated that, in patients with high-risk heart failure, vericiguat reduced the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization relative to placebo. The hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.84-1.07). In a prespecified analysis, treatment effects varied substantially as a function of baseline NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) levels, with survival benefit for vericiguat in the lower NT-proBNP quartiles (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69-0.97]) and no benefit in the highest NT-proBNP quartile (hazard ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.95-1.38]). An economic analysis was a major secondary objective of the VICTORIA research program. METHODS: Medical resource use data were collected for all VICTORIA patients (N=5050). Costs were estimated by applying externally derived US cost weights to resource use counts. Life expectancy was projected from patient-level empirical trial survival results with the use of age-based survival modeling methods. Quality-of-life adjustments were based on prospectively collected EQ-5D-based utilities. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, comparing vericiguat with placebo, assessed from the US health care sector perspective over a lifetime horizon. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using the total VICTORIA cohort, both with and without interaction between treatment and baseline NT-proBNP. RESULTS: Life expectancy modeling results varied according to whether the observed heterogeneity of treatment effect by baseline NT-proBNP values was incorporated into the modeling. Including the interaction term, the vericiguat arm had an estimated quality-adjusted life expectancy of 4.56 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with 4.13 QALYs for placebo (incremental discounted QALY, 0.43). Without the treatment heterogeneity/interaction term, vericiguat had 4.50 QALYs compared with 4.33 QALYs for placebo (incremental discounted QALY, 0.17). Incremental discounted costs (vericiguat minus placebo) were $28 546 with the treatment interaction and $20 948 without it. Corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $66 509 per QALY allowing for treatment heterogeneity and $124 512 without heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Vericiguat use in the VICTORIA trial met criteria for intermediate value, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates were sensitive to whether the analysis accounted for observed NT-proBNP treatment effect heterogeneity. The cost-effectiveness of vericiguat was driven by the projected incremental life expectancy among patients in the lowest 3 quartiles of NT-proBNP. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02861534.

Assessment of Biomarkers of Myocardial injury, Inflammation, and Renal Function in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: The VICTORIA Biomarker Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Circulating biomarkers may be useful in understanding prognosis and treatment efficacy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In the VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial, vericiguat, a soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, decreased the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We evaluated biomarkers of cardiac injury, inflammation, and renal function for associations with outcomes and vericiguat treatment effect. METHODS AND RESULTS: High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), interleukin-6 (IL-6), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and cystatin C were measured at baseline and 16 weeks. Associations of biomarkers with the primary outcome and its components were estimated. Interaction with study treatment was tested. Changes in biomarkers over time were examined by study treatment. One or more biomarkers were measured in 4652 (92%) of 5050 participants at baseline and 4063 (81%) at 16 weeks. After adjustment, higher values of hs-cTnT, growth differentiation factor-15, and interleukin-6 were associated with the primary outcome, independent of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. Higher hs-cTnT values were associated with a hazard ratio per log standard deviation of 1.21 (95% confidence interval 1.14-1.27). A treatment interaction with vericiguat was evident with hs-cTnT and cardiovascular death (P = .04), but not HF hospitalization (P = .38). All biomarkers except cystatin C decreased over 16 weeks and no relationship between treatment assignment and changes in biomarker levels was observed. CONCLUSIONS: hs-cTnT, growth differentiation factor-15, and interleukin-6 levels were associated with risk of the primary outcome in VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction). Uniquely, lower hs-cTnT was associated with a lower rate of cardiovascular death but not HF hospitalization after treatment with vericiguat.

Assessing Heuristic Bias During Care for Patients Hospitalized for Heart Failure: Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Heuristic biases are increasingly recognized, and potentially modifiable, contributors to patient care and outcomes. Left digit bias is a cognitive bias where continuous variables are categorized by their left-most digit. The impact of this heuristic bias applied to patient age on quality of care in heart failure has not been explored. METHODS: We examined participants admitted from 2005 to 2021 in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry. To create 2 naturally randomized groups, isolating the effect of left digit bias, we dichotomized patients into those discharged within 60 days prior to their 80th birthday (N=4238) and those discharged within 60 days after their 80th birthday (N=4329). We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between discharge date relative to 80th birthday and several in-hospital quality metrics and in-hospital outcomes. Among Medicare participants (N=2759), we performed adjusted Cox regression to analyze the relationship between discharge date and risk of 1-year mortality or readmission. RESULTS: Among 8567 patients, 50.4% were female, 73% were non-Hispanic White, and 42.9% had an ejection fraction ≤40%. Discharge date relative to 80th birthday was not associated with numerous in-hospital quality metrics or in-hospital outcomes on unadjusted or adjusted logistic regression. Among Medicare beneficiaries, there was no association between discharge date and risk of mortality or readmission at 1-year postdischarge (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.95-1.12]; P=0.52). CONCLUSIONS: In a large registry of patients hospitalized for heart failure, we did not detect a left digit bias' with respect to age at discharge, which resulted in differential quality of care or outcomes.

General Anxiety Disorder-7 Questionnaire as a marker of low socioeconomic status and inequity.

BACKGROUND: The General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) questionnaire is a standard tool used for screening and follow-up of patients with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). Although it is generally accepted that anxiety correlates with clinical and psychosocial stressors, precise quantitative data is limited on the relations among GAD-7, traditional biomarkers, and other measures of health. Further research is needed about how GAD-7 relates to race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES) as an assembly. We determined how multiple demographic and socioeconomic data correlate with the participants' GAD-7 results when compared with laboratory, physical function, clinical, and other biological markers. METHODS: The Project Baseline Health Study (BHS) is a prospective cohort of adults representing several populations in the USA. We analyzed a deeply phenotyped group of 2502 participants from that study. Measures of interest included: clinical markers or history of medical diagnoses; physical function markers including gait, grip strength, balance time, daily steps, and echocardiographic parameters; psychometric measurements; activities of daily living; socioeconomic characteristics; and laboratory results. RESULTS: Higher GAD-7 scores were associated with female sex, younger age, and Hispanic ethnicity. Measures of low SES were also associated with higher scores, including unemployment, income ≤$25,000, and ≤12 years of education. After adjustment for 158 demographic, clinical, laboratory, and symptom characteristics, unemployment and overall higher SES risk scores were highly correlated with anxiety scores. Protective factors included Black race and older age. LIMITATIONS: Correlations identified in this cross-sectional study cannot be used to infer causal relationships; further, we were not able to account for possible use of anxiety treatments by study participants. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of understanding anxiety as a biopsychosocial entity. Clinicians and provider organizations need to consider both the physical manifestations of the disorder and their patients' social determinants of health when considering treatment pathways and designing interventions.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Healthcare Worker Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Analysis of the HERO Registry.

Background: The extent to which healthcare worker (HCWs) experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic vary by race or ethnicity after adjustment for confounding factors is not currently known. Methods: We performed an observational prospective cohort study of 24,769 healthcare workers from 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, enrolled between April 10, 2020 and June 30, 2021, and evaluated participant experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, including testing, diagnosis with COVID-19, emotional experiences, burnout, and interest in vaccines and vaccine clinical trials. Findings: After adjustment for professional role, medical history, and community characteristics, Black and Asian participants were less likely to receive SARS-CoV-2 viral testing (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0·82 [0·70, 0·96], p=0·012 and aOR 0·77 [0·67, 0·89], p<0·001 respectively) than White participants. Hispanic participants were more likely to have evidence of COVID-19 infection (aOR 1·23 (1·00, 1·50, p=0·048). Black and Asian participants were less likely to report interest in a COVID-19 vaccine (aOR 0·11 [0·05, 0·25], p<0·001 and aOR 0·48 [0·27, 0·85] p=0·012). Black participants were less likely to report interest in participating in a COVID-19 vaccine trial (aOR = 0·39 [0·28, 0·54], p<0·001). Black participants were also less likely to report 3 or more daily emotional impacts of COVID-19 (aOR = 0·66 [0·53, 0·82], p=<0·001). Black participants were additionally less likely to report burnout (aOR = 0·66 ([0·49, 0·95], p=0·025). Interpretation: In a large, national study of healthcare workers, after adjustment for individual and community characteristics, race/ethnicity disparities in COVID-19 outcomes persist. Future work is urgently needed to understand precise mechanisms behind these disparities and to develop and implement targeted interventions to improve health equity for healthcare workers. Funding: This work was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), Contract # COVID-19-2020-001.

Clinical Outcomes With Metformin and Sulfonylurea Therapies Among Patients With Heart Failure and Diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to characterize associations between initiation of metformin and sulfonylurea therapy and clinical outcomes among patients with comorbid heart failure (HF) and diabetes (overall and by ejection fraction [EF] phenotype). BACKGROUND: Metformin and sulfonylureas are frequently prescribed to patients with diabetes for glycemic control. The impact of these therapies on clinical outcomes among patients with comorbid HF and diabetes is unclear. METHODS: The authors evaluated Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for HF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry between 2006 and 2014 with diabetes and not prescribed metformin or sulfonylurea before admission. In parallel separate analyses for metformin and sulfonylurea, patients with newly prescribed therapy within 90 days of discharge were compared with patients not prescribed therapy. Multivariable models landmarked at 90 days evaluated associations between prescription of therapy, and mortality and hospitalization for HF (HHF) at 12 months. Negative control (falsification) endpoints included hospitalization for urinary tract infection, hospitalization for gastrointestinal bleed, and influenza vaccination. Prespecified subgroup analyses were stratified by EF ≤40% versus >40%. RESULTS: Of 5,852 patients, 454 (7.8%) were newly prescribed metformin and 504 (8.6%) were newly prescribed sulfonylurea. After adjustment, metformin prescription was independently associated with reduced risk of composite mortality/HHF (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67-0.98; P = 0.03), but individual components were not statistically significant. Findings among patients with EF >40% accounted for associations with mortality/HHF (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.52-0.90) and HHF (HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.40-0.85) endpoints (all P for interaction ≤0.04). After adjustment, sulfonylurea initiation was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.00-1.52; P = 0.045) and HHF (HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.00-1.48; P = 0.050) with nominal statistical significance. Associations between sulfonylurea initiation and endpoints were consistent regardless of EF (all P for interaction >0.11). Neither metformin initiation nor sulfonylurea initiation were associated with negative control endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: In this population of older U.S. adults hospitalized for HF with comorbid diabetes, metformin initiation was independently associated with substantial improvements in 12-month clinical outcomes, driven by findings among patients with EF >40%. By contrast, sulfonylurea initiation was associated with excess risk of death and HF hospitalization, regardless of EF.

Lifetime cost-effectiveness simulation of once-weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes: A cost-utility analysis based on the EXSCEL trial.

AIMS: The Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial assessed once-weekly exenatide (EQW) vs. placebo, added to usual care in 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01144338). We assessed the lifetime cost-effectiveness of adding EQW vs. usual care alone from a healthcare perspective. METHODS: Medical resource use and EQ-5D utilities were collected throughout the study. Within-trial results were extrapolated to a lifetime horizon using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model version 2 (UKPDS-OM2), predicting predict cardiovascular and microvascular events. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated separately for US and UK settings, with outcomes measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: EQW plus usual care gained 0.162 QALYs at an additional cost of $41,545/patient, compared with usual care in a US setting. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $259,223/QALY. In a UK setting, the QALY gain was 0.151 at an additional cost of £6357: an ICER of £42,589/QALY. Sensitivity analyses ranged between $34,369-$269,571 and £3430-£46,560 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: In a lifetime extrapolation, adding EQW to usual care increased QALYs and costs compared with usual care alone. The base-case ICERs exceeded the commonly-cited cost-effectiveness thresholds of $100,000/QALY and £20,000/QALY. However, ICERs were considerably lower in some subgroups, and in sensitivity analyses.

Diuretic Changes, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Clinical Outcomes for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: From the Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure Registry.

BACKGROUND: Diuretics are a mainstay therapy for the symptomatic treatment of heart failure. However, in contemporary US outpatient practice, the degree to which diuretic dosing changes over time and the associations with clinical outcomes and health care resource utilization are unknown. METHODS: Among 3426 US outpatients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in the Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure registry with complete medication data and who were prescribed a loop diuretic, diuretic dose increase was defined as: (1) change to a total daily dose higher than their previous total daily dose, (2) addition of metolazone to the regimen, (3) change from furosemide to either bumetanide or torsemide, and the change persists for at least 7 days. Adjusted hazard ratios or rate ratios along with 95% CIs were reported for clinical outcomes among patients with an increase in oral diuretic dose versus no increase in diuretic dose. RESULTS: Overall, 796 (23%) had a diuretic dose increase (18 episodes per 100 patient-years). The proportion of patients with dyspnea at rest (38% versus 26%), dyspnea at exertion (79% versus 67%), orthopnea (32% versus 21%), edema (60% versus 43%), and weight gain (40% versus 23%) were significantly (all P <0.001) higher in the diuretic increase group. Baseline angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65-0.87]) use were associated with lower likelihood of diuretic increase over time. Patients with a diuretic dose increase had a significantly higher number of heart failure hospitalizations (rate ratio, 2.53 [95% CI, 2.10-3.05]), emergency department visits (rate ratio, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.56-2.17]), and home health visits (rate ratio, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.39-2.54]), but not all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.89-1.36]). Similarly, greater furosemide dose equivalent increases were associated with greater resource utilization but not with mortality, compared with smaller increases. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary US registry, 1 in 4 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction had outpatient escalation of diuretic therapy over longitudinal follow-up, and these patients were more likely to have sign/symptoms of congestion. Outpatient diuretic dose escalation of any magnitude was associated with heart failure hospitalizations and resource utilization, but not all-cause mortality.

Clinical Effectiveness of Sacubitril/Valsartan Among Patients Hospitalized for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Background Sacubitril/Valsartan has been highly efficacious in randomized trials of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in real-world US practice is unclear. Methods and Results This study included Medicare beneficiaries age ≥65 years who were hospitalized for HFrEF ≤40% in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between October 2015 and December 2018, and eligible for sacubitril/valsartan. Associations between discharge prescription of sacubitril/valsartan and clinical outcomes were assessed after inverse probability of treatment weighting and adjustment for other HFrEF medications. Overall, 1551 (10.9%) patients were discharged on sacubitril/valsartan. Of those not prescribed sacubitril/valsartan, 7857 (62.0%) were prescribed an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker. Over 12-month follow-up, compared with a discharge prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, sacubitril/valsartan was independently associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; P=0.004) but not all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89-1.07; P=0.55) or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.91-1.18; P=0.59). Patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan versus those without a prescription had lower risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79; P<0.001), all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; P=0.02), but not heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82-1.08; P=0.40). Conclusions Among patients hospitalized for HFrEF, prescription of sacubitril/valsartan at discharge was independently associated with reduced postdischarge mortality compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, and reduced mortality and all-cause hospitalization compared with no sacubitril/valsartan. These findings support the use of sacubitril/valsartan to improve postdischarge outcomes among older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in routine US clinical practice.

Assessment of North American Clinical Research Site Performance During the Start-up of Large Cardiovascular Clinical Trials.

Importance: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are critical in advancing patient care, yet conducting such large-scale trials requires tremendous resources and coordination. Clinical site start-up performance metrics can provide insight into opportunities for improved trial efficiency but have not been well described. Objective: To measure the start-up time needed to reach prespecified milestones across sites in large cardiovascular RCTs in North America and to evaluate how these metrics vary by time and type of regulatory review process. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated cardiovascular RCTs conducted from July 13, 2004, to February 1, 2017. The RCTs were coordinated by a single academic research organization, the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Nine consecutive trials with completed enrollment and publication of results in their target journal were studied. Data were analyzed from December 4, 2019, to January 11, 2021. Exposures: Year of trial enrollment initiation (2004-2007 vs 2008-2012) and use of a central vs local institutional review board (IRB). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the median start-up time (from study protocol delivery to first participant enrollment) as compared by trial year and type of IRB used. The median start-up time for the top 10% of sites was also reported. Secondary outcomes included time to site regulatory approval, time to contract execution, and time to site activation. Results: For the 9 RCTs included, the median site start-up time shortened only slightly over time from 267 days (interquartile range [IQR], 185-358 days) for 2004-2007 trials to 237 days (IQR, 162-343 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 255 days [IQR, 177-350 days]; P < .001). For the top 10% of sites, median start-up time was 107 days (IQR, 95-121 days) for 2004-2007 trials vs 104 days (IQR, 84-118 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 106 days [IQR, 90-120 days]; P = .04). The median start-up time was shorter among sites using a central IRB (199 days [IQR, 140-292 days]) than those using a local IRB (287 days [IQR, 205-390 days]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of North American research sites in large cardiovascular RCTs found a duration of nearly 9 months from the time of study protocol delivery to the first participant enrollment; this metric was only slightly shortened during the study period but was reduced to less than 4 months for top-performing sites. These findings suggest that the use of central IRBs has the potential to improve RCT efficiency.

Patterns of antidepressant therapy and clinical outcomes among ischaemic stroke survivors.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Depression is common after stroke and is often treated with antidepressant medications (AD). ADs have also been hypothesised to improve stroke recovery, although recent randomised trials were neutral. We investigated the patterns of in-hospital AD initiation after ischaemic stroke and association with clinical and readmission outcomes. METHODS: All Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 or older hospitalised for ischaemic stroke in participating Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals between April and December 2014 were eligible for this analysis. Outcome measures included days alive and not in a healthcare institution (home time), all-cause mortality and readmission within 1-year postdischarge. Propensity score (PS)-adjusted logistic regression models were used to evaluate the associations between AD use and each outcome measure. We also compared outcomes in patients prescribed selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) AD versus those prescribed non-SSRI ADs. RESULTS: Of 21 805 AD naïve patients included in this analysis, 1835 (8.4%) were started on an AD at discharge. Patients started on an AD had higher rates of depression and prior ischaemic stroke, presented with higher admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score and were less likely to be discharged home. Similarly, patients started on an SSRI had lower rates of discharge to home. Adjusting for stroke severity, patients started on an AD had worse all-cause mortality, all-cause readmission, major adverse cardiac events, readmission for depression and decreased home-time. However, AD use was also associated with an increased risk for the sepsis, a falsification endpoint, suggesting the presence of residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ischaemic stroke initiated on AD therapy are at increased risk of poor clinical outcomes and readmission even after PS adjustment, suggesting that poststroke depression requiring medication is a poor prognostic sign. Further research is needed to explore the reasons why depression is associated with worse outcome, and whether AD treatment modifies this risk or not.

Outcomes and cost among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for heart failure assigned to accountable care organizations.

Little is known about the impact of accountable care organizations (ACO) on hospitalized heart failure (HF) patients, a high-cost and high-risk population. OBJECTIVE: We linked Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2013 to 2015 with data from American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-HF registry to compare HF care, post-discharge outcomes, and total annual Medicare spending by ACO status at discharge. METHODS: Using adjusted Cox models and accounting for competing risks of death, we compared all-cause mortality and readmission at 1 year by ACO status with reporting of hazard ratios (HR) and 99% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The study included 45,259 HF patients from 300 hospitals, with 21.1% assigned to an ACO. Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups with a few exceptions. The ACO patients lived in geographic areas with higher median income ($54400 [IQR $48600-65900] vs $52300 [$45900-61200], P < .0001). Compliance with four HF-specific quality measures was modestly higher in the ACO group (80% vs 76%, P < .0001). In adjusted analysis, ACO status was associated with similar all-cause readmission (HR: 1.03; 99% CI: 0.99, 1.07) but lower risk of 1-year mortality (HR: 0.85; 99% CI: 0.85, 0.90) compared with non-ACO status. Median Medicare spending in the calendar year of hospitalization was similar (ACO $42,737 [IQR $23,011-72,667] vs non-ACO $42,586 [$22,896-72,518], P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare patients hospitalized for HF, participation in an ACO was associated with similar rates of all-cause readmission and no associated cost reductions compared with non-ACO status. There was a lower risk of 1-year mortality associated with ACO participation, which warrants further evaluation.

Testing for Coronary Artery Disease in Older Patients With New-Onset Heart Failure: Findings From Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend evaluation for underlying heart disease and reversible conditions for patients with new-onset heart failure (HF). There are limited data on contemporary testing for coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with new-onset HF. METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study using the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry linked to Medicare claims. All patients were aged ≥65 and hospitalized for new-onset HF from 2009 to 2015. We collected left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), prior HF history, and in-hospital CAD testing from the registry, as well as testing for CAD using claims from 90 days before to 90 days after index HF hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 17 185 patients with new-onset HF, 6672 (39%) received testing for CAD, including 3997 (23%) during the index hospitalization. Testing for CAD differed by LVEF: 53% in HF with reduced EF (LVEF ≤40%), 42% in HF with borderline EF (LVEF, 41%-49%), and 31% in HF with preserved EF (LVEF ≥50%). After multivariable adjustment, patients who received testing for CAD, compared with those who did not, were younger and more likely to be male, have a smoking history, have hyperlipidemia, and have HF with reduced ejection fraction or HF with borderline ejection fraction (all P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients hospitalized for new-onset HF did not receive testing for CAD either during the hospitalization or in the 90 days before and after. The rates of testing for CAD were higher in patients with LVEF ≤40% though remained low. These data highlight an opportunity to improve care by identifying appropriate candidates for optimal CAD medical therapy and revascularization.

Generating comparative evidence on new drugs and devices after approval.

Certain limitations of evidence available on drugs and devices at the time of market approval often persist in the post-marketing period. Often, post-marketing research landscape is fragmented. When regulatory agencies require pharmaceutical and device manufacturers to conduct studies in the post-marketing period, these studies might remain incomplete many years after approval. Even when completed, many post-marketing studies lack meaningful active comparators, have observational designs, and might not collect patient-relevant outcomes. Regulators, in collaboration with the industry and patients, ought to ensure that the key questions unanswered at the time of drug and device approval are resolved in a timely fashion during the post-marketing phase. We propose a set of seven key guiding principles that we believe will provide the necessary incentives for pharmaceutical and device manufacturers to generate comparative data in the post-marketing period. First, regulators (for drugs and devices), notified bodies (for devices in Europe), health technology assessment organisations, and payers should develop customised evidence generation plans, ensuring that future post-approval studies address any limitations of the data available at the time of market entry impacting the benefit-risk profiles of drugs and devices. Second, post-marketing studies should be designed hierarchically: priority should be given to efforts aimed at evaluating a product's net clinical benefit in randomised trials compared with current known effective therapy, whenever possible, to address common decisional dilemmas. Third, post-marketing studies should incorporate active comparators as appropriate. Fourth, use of non-randomised studies for the evaluation of clinical benefit in the post-marketing period should be limited to instances when the magnitude of effect is deemed to be large or when it is possible to reasonably infer the comparative benefits or risks in settings, in which doing a randomised trial is not feasible. Fifth, efficiency of randomised trials should be improved by streamlining patient recruitment and data collection through innovative design elements. Sixth, governments should directly support and facilitate the production of comparative post-marketing data by investing in the development of collaborative research networks and data systems that reduce the complexity, cost, and waste of rigorous post-marketing research efforts. Last, financial incentives and penalties should be developed or more actively reinforced.