Expert consensus on the identification, diagnosis, and treatment of neurotrophic keratopathy.

BACKGROUND: Neurotrophic keratopathy (NK) is a relatively uncommon, underdiagnosed degenerative corneal disease that is caused by damage to the ophthalmic branch of the trigeminal nerve by conditions such as herpes simplex or zoster keratitis, intracranial space-occupying lesions, diabetes, or neurosurgical procedures. Over time, epithelial breakdown, corneal ulceration, corneal melting (thinning), perforation, and loss of vision may occur. The best opportunity to reverse ocular surface damage is in the earliest stage of NK. However, patients typically experience few symptoms and diagnosis is often delayed. Increased awareness of the causes of NK, consensus on when and how to screen for NK, and recommendations for how to treat NK are needed. METHODS: An 11-member expert panel used a validated methodology (a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel) to develop consensus on when to screen for and how best to diagnose and treat NK. Clinicians reviewed literature on the diagnosis and management of NK then rated a detailed set of 735 scenarios. In 646 scenarios, panelists rated whether a test of corneal sensitivity was warranted; in 20 scenarios, they considered the adequacy of specific tests and examinations to diagnose and stage NK; and in 69 scenarios, they rated the appropriateness of treatments for NK. Panelist ratings were used to develop clinical recommendations. RESULTS: There was agreement on 94% of scenarios. Based on this consensus, we present distinct circumstances when we strongly recommend or may consider a test for corneal sensitivity. We also present recommendations on the diagnostic tests to be performed in patients in whom NK is suspected and treatment options for NK. CONCLUSIONS: These expert recommendations should be validated with clinical data. The recommendations represent the consensus of experts, are informed by published literature and experience, and may improve outcomes by helping improve diagnosis and treatment of patients with NK.

United States Patients' Perspective of Living With Migraine: Country-Specific Results From the Global "My Migraine Voice" Survey.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is associated with debilitating symptoms that can affect daily functioning. "My Migraine Voice" was a large, cross-sectional, multi-country online survey aimed at understanding disease burden directly from people with migraine. OBJECTIVE: This study reports on the social and economic impacts of migraine, specifically the impact on activities of daily living and the costs of migraine, from the point of view of people with migraine in the United States. METHODS: The online survey was administered to adults with a self-reported diagnosis of migraine who experienced 4 or more monthly migraine days each month for the previous 3 months. Prespecified screening quotas were used so that 90% of respondents reported current or past use of preventive migraine medication, 80% of whom switched treatment (ie, changed their prescribed preventive medication at least once). The remaining 10% were preventive treatment naïve (ie, never used any prescribed preventive medication). Burden of migraine on activities of daily living and caregivers (eg, functional limitations, fear of next migraine attack, sleep problems) and economic burden (eg, out-of-pocket costs, impact on work productivity using the validated work productivity and activity impairment questionnaire) reported by respondents from the United States are presented. Results are stratified by employment status, migraine frequency (chronic vs episodic migraine), and history of preventive treatment. RESULTS: Thousand hundred and one individuals with migraine from the United States responded to the survey. Respondents reported limitations completing daily activities during all migraine phases, including during the premonitory/aura and postdrome phases. Most (761/1101 (69%)) relied on family, friends, or others for help with daily tasks and reported being helped a median of 9 days (25th percentile 5 days, 75th percentile 15 days) within the last 3 months. Respondents with chronic migraine reported being helped for more days (median 10 days, 25th percentile 5 days, 75th percentile 23 days) in the last 3 months. Almost all (962/1101 (87%)) experienced sleep difficulties and 41% (448/1101) (48% (336/697) of those with 2 or more preventive treatment failures) were very or extremely fearful of a next migraine attack. Median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) monthly out-of-pocket costs of $90.00 ($30.00, $144.00) in doctor's fees (n = 504), $124.00 ($60.00, $234.00) in health insurance (n = 450), $40.00 ($20.00, $100.00) for prescriptions (n = 630), and $50.00 ($0.00, $100.00) for complementary therapies (n = 255) were reported. Those with 2 or more preventive treatment failures reported higher monthly out-of-pocket doctor fees (median $99.00 ($30.00, $150.00), n = 388). Among employed respondents (n = 661), migraine resulted in 22% absenteeism, 60% presenteeism, 65% work productivity loss, and 64% activity impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Migraine impacts individuals' activities of daily living, work-life, and financial status, especially individuals with high needs, namely those with 4 or more monthly migraine days and prior treatment failures. People with migraine are impaired during all migraine phases, experience fear of their next migraine attack and sleep difficulties, and pay substantial monthly out-of-pocket costs for migraine. Burden is even greater among those who have had 2 or more preventive treatment failures. Impacts of migraine extend beyond probands to caregivers who help people with migraine with daily tasks, employers who are affected by employee absenteeism, presenteeism, and reduced productivity, and society which is burdened by lost and reduced economic productivity and healthcare costs.

Development and validation of a claims-based algorithm to identify patients with Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum disorder.

INTRODUCTION: No validated algorithm exists to identify patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) in healthcare claims data. We developed and tested the performance of a healthcare claims-based algorithm to identify patients with NMOSD. METHODS: Using medical record data of 101 adults with NMOSD, multiple sclerosis (MS), or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD), we tested the sensitivity and specificity of claims-based algorithms developed through interviews with neurologists. We tested the best-performing algorithm's face validity using 2016-2019 data from IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases. Demographics and clinical characteristics were reported. RESULTS: Algorithm inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years and (≥1 NMO diagnosis [or ≥ 1 transverse myelitis (TM) and ≥ 1 optic neuritis (ON) diagnosis] and ≥ 1 NMOSD drug) or (≥2 NMO diagnoses ≥90 days apart). Exclusion criteria were MS diagnosis or use of MS-specific drug after last NMO diagnosis or NMOSD drug; sarcoidosis diagnosis after last NMO diagnosis; or use of ≥1 immune checkpoint inhibitor. In medical record billing data of 50 patients with NMOSD, 30 with MS, and 21 with MOGAD, the algorithm had 82.0% sensitivity and 70.6% specificity. When applied to healthcare claims data, demographic and clinical features of the identified cohort were similar to known demographics of NMOSD. CONCLUSIONS: This clinically derived algorithm performed well in medical records. When tested in healthcare claims, demographics and clinical characteristics were consistent with previous clinical findings. This algorithm will enable a more accurate estimation of NMOSD disease burden using insurance claims datasets.

Modified Delphi Panel Consensus Recommendations for Management of Severe Aplastic Anemia.

Severe aplastic anemia (SAA) is a rare hematologic condition for which there is no clear management algorithm. A panel of 11 adult and pediatric experts on aplastic anemia was assembled and, using the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method, evaluated >600 varying patient care scenarios to develop clinical recommendations for the initial and subsequent management of patients of all ages with SAA. Here we present the panel's recommendations to rule out inherited bone marrow failure (IBMF) syndromes, on supportive care prior to and during first-line therapy, and on first-line (initial management) and second-line (subsequent management) therapy of acquired SAA, focusing on when transplant versus medical therapy is most appropriate. These recommendations represent the consensus of 11 experts informed by published literature and experience. They are intended only as general guidance for experienced clinicians who treat patients with SAA and are in no way intended to supersede individual physician and patient decision-making. Current and future research should validate this consensus using clinical data. Once validated, we hope these expert panel recommendations will improve outcomes for patients with SAA.

Comprehensive Review on the Clinical Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests for the Management of Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: This review summarizes the published evidence on the clinical impact of using next-generation sequencing (NGS) tests to guide management of patients with cancer in the United States. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature review to identify recent English language publications that presented progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced cancer receiving NGS testing. RESULTS: Among 6,475 publications identified, 31 evaluated PFS and OS among subgroups of patients who received NGS-informed cancer management. PFS and OS were significantly longer among patients who were matched to targeted treatment in 11 and 16 publications across tumor types, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our review indicates that NGS-informed treatment can have an impact on survival across tumor types.

Expert Consensus on the Use of On-Demand Treatments for OFF Episodes in Parkinson's Disease: A Modified Delphi Panel.

Background: On-demand treatments can treat OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease, however, there is limited information regarding when to prescribe them. Objective: Develop expert consensus to determine appropriate clinical factors for considering on-demand treatments. Methods: Using a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method, a panel developed consensus on the use of on-demand treatments for OFF episodes. Results: The panel agreed on-demand treatments were appropriate when OFF episodes were associated with greater functional impact and interfered with basic daily activities. The panel also agreed on-demand treatment may be appropriate for patients with morning akinesia and/or delayed ON of first levodopa dose and >1 type of OFF episode (eg, early morning OFF or wearing OFF regardless of frequency). Conclusions: Experts agreed on-demand treatment is appropriate for many patients with OFF episodes. The greater the functional impact of OFF episodes, the more likely experts agreed that on-demand treatment is appropriate to prescribe.

Using a Modified Delphi Panel to Estimate Health Service Utilization for Patients with Advanced and Non-Advanced Systemic Light Chain Amyloidosis.

Purpose: Patients with diagnosed with systemic light chain (AL) amyloidosis at advanced Mayo stages have greater morbidity and mortality than those diagnosed at non-advanced stages. Estimating service use by severity is difficult because Mayo stage is not available in many secondary databases. We used an expert panel to estimate healthcare utilization among advanced and non-advanced AL amyloidosis patients. Patients and Methods: Using the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi method, expert panelists completed 180 healthcare utilization estimates, consisting of inpatient and outpatient visits, testing, chemotherapy, and procedures by disease severity and organ involvement during two treatment phases (the 1 year after starting first line [1L] therapy and 1 year following treatment [post-1L]). Estimates were also provided for post-1L by hematologic treatment response (complete or very good partial response [CR/VGPR], partial, no response or relapse [PR/NR/R]). Areas of disagreement were discussed during a meeting, after which ratings were completed a second time. Results: During 1L therapy, 55% of advanced patients had ≥1 hospitalization and 38% had ≥2 admissions. Rates of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) in advanced patients were 5%, while pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) placement were 15%. During post-1L therapy, rates of hospitalization in advanced patients remained high (≥1 hospitalization: 20-43%, ≥2 hospitalizations: 10-20%), and up to 10% of advanced patients had a HSCT. Ten percent of these patients underwent pacemaker/ICD placement. Conclusion: Experts estimated advanced patients, who would not be good candidates for HSCT, would have high rates of hospitalization (traditionally the most expensive type of healthcare utilization) and other health service use. The development of new treatment options that can facilitate organ recovery and improve function may lead to decreased utilization.

An Adaptation of the RAND/UCLA Modified Delphi Panel Method in the Time of COVID-19.

The RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method is a formal group consensus process that systematically and quantitatively combines expert opinion and evidence by asking panelists to rate, discuss, then re-rate items. The method has been used to develop medical society guidelines, other clinical practice guidelines, disease classification systems, research agendas, and quality improvement interventions. Traditionally, a group of experts meet in person to discuss results of a first-round survey. After the meeting, experts complete a second-round survey used to develop areas of consensus. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this aspect of the method was not possible. As such, we have adapted the method to conduct virtual RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panels. In this study, we present a targeted literature review to describe and summarize the existing evidence on the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method and outline our adaptation for conducting these panels virtually. Transitioning from in-person to virtual meetings was not without challenges, but there have also been unexpected advantages. The method we describe here can be a cost-effective and efficient alternative for researchers and clinicians.

Persistence with Early-Line Abatacept versus Tumor Necrosis Factor-Inhibitors for Rheumatoid Arthritis Complicated by Poor Prognostic Factors.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by joint swelling and destruction that leads to severe disability. There are no clear guidelines regarding the order of therapies. Gathering data on treatment patterns outside of a clinical trial setting can provide useful context for clinicians. Objectives: To assess real-world treatment persistence in early-line abatacept versus tumor necrosis factor-inhibitors (TNFi) treated patients with RA complicated by poor prognostic factors (including anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies [ACPA] and rheumatoid factor [RF] seropositivity). Methods: We performed a multi-center retrospective medical record review. Adult patients with RA complicated by poor prognostic factors were treated with either abatacept or TNFis as the first biologic treatment at the clinic. Poor prognostic factors included ACPA+, RF+, increased C-reactive protein levels, elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate levels, or presence of joint erosions. We report 12-month treatment persistence, time to discontinuation, reasons for discontinuation, and risk of discontinuation between patients on abatacept versus TNFi. Select results among the subgroup of ACPA+ and/or RF+ patients are presented. Results: Data on 265 patients (100 abatacept, 165 TNFis) were collected. At 12 months, 83% of abatacept patients were persistent versus 66.1% of TNFi patients (P=0.003). Median time to discontinuation was 1423 days for abatacept versus 690 days for TNFis (P=0.014). In adjusted analyses, abatacept patients had a lower risk of discontinuing index treatment due to disease progression (0.3 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1-0.6], P=0.001). Among the subgroup of ACPA+ and/or RF+ patients (55 abatacept, 108 TNFis), unadjusted 12-month treatment persistence was greater (83.6% versus 64.8%, P=0.012) and median time to discontinuation was longer (961 days versus 581 days, P=0.048) in abatacept versus TNFi patients. Discussion: Patients with RA complicated by poor prognostic factors taking abatacept, including the subgroup of patients with ACPA and RF seropositivity, had statistically significantly higher 12-month treatment persistence and a longer time to discontinuation than patients on TNFis. Conclusions: In a real-world setting, RA patients treated with abatacept were more likely to stay on treatment longer and had a lower risk of discontinuation than patients treated with TNFis.

Developing an emergency department order set to treat acute pain in sickle cell disease.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) have many emergency department visits because of painful vaso-occlusive episodes (VOE). Guidelines recommend treatment within 30 minutes of triage, but this is rarely achieved in clinical practice. Our goal was to develop an order set that is being implemented in the ED to facilitate and standardize emergency care for SCD patients in acute pain from VOEs presenting to the emergency department (ED) in New York City (NYC). METHODS: Using a RAND/University of California, Los Angeles modified Delphi panel, we convened a multidisciplinary panel and reviewed evidence on how to best manage SCD pain in the ED. Panelists collaboratively developed then rated 202 items that could be included in an ED order set. RESULTS: A consensus order set, a practical how-to guide for managing SCD pain in the ED, was developed based on items that received high median ratings. CONCLUSIONS: The management of acute pain experienced during VOEs is critical to patients with SCD; ED order sets, such as this one, can help standardize pain management, including at triage, evaluation, discharge, and follow-up care. After implementation in NYC EDs, studies to examine changes in quality care metrics (eg, wait times, readmissions) are planned.

Tapering thrombopoietin receptor agonists in primary immune thrombocytopenia: Expert consensus based on the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method.

BACKGROUND: Thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) are used to treat primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Some patients have discontinued treatment while maintaining a hemostatic platelet count. OBJECTIVES: To develop expert consensus on when it is appropriate to consider tapering TPO-RAs in ITP, how to taper patients off therapy, how to monitor patients after discontinuation, and how to restart therapy. METHODS: We used a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method. Ratings were completed independently by each expert before and after a meeting. Second-round ratings were used to develop the panel's guidance. The panel was double-blinded: The sponsor and nonchair experts did not know each other's identities. RESULTS: Guidance on when it is appropriate to taper TPO-RAs in children and adults was developed based on patient platelet count, history of bleeding, intensification of treatment, trauma risk, and use of anticoagulants/platelet inhibitors. For example, it is appropriate to taper TPO-RAs in patients who have normal/above-normal platelet counts, have no history of major bleeding, and have not required an intensification of treatment in the past 6 months; it is inappropriate to taper TPO-RAs in patients with low platelet counts. Duration of ITP, months on TPO-RA, or timing of platelet response to TPO-RA did not have an impact on the panel's guidance on appropriateness to taper. Guidance on how to taper patients off therapy, how to monitor patients after discontinuation, and how to restart therapy is also provided. CONCLUSION: This guidance could support clinical decision making and the development of clinical trials that prospectively test the safety of tapering TPO-RAs.

The Humanistic and Economic Burden of Pediatric Focal Seizures in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the humanistic and economic burden of focal seizures in children 2-12 years old. METHODS: We conducted a targeted literature review by searching MEDLINE for English-language publications reporting on children 2-12 years old with focal seizures published in the United States since 2008. RESULTS: Thirty-five publications were included. Incidence of focal seizures was 23.2 to 47.1 per 100,000 children per year; prevalence was 2.0 per 1,000 children, and ranged from 1.6 - 2.6 per 1,000 in patients of any age. Life expectancy was 47.3-61.8 years among children 3-12 years old. Patients took several antiepileptic drugs and experienced frequent seizures, sleep disorders, mood disorders, migraine, and seizure-related injuries (eg, bone fractures, sprains, open wounds). Children with focal seizures scored below average on cognitive assessments and up to 42%, 16%, and 19% had depression, anxiety, and attention-deficit disorder, respectively. Patients of any age had about 10 outpatient visits (2 epilepsy-related), 2 inpatient visits (less than 1 epilepsy-related), and 24 procedures (1 epilepsy-related) per year. Medication adherence was low: only half of pediatric patients maintained ≥90% adherence over 6 months. Annual total health care costs among patients of any age ranged from $18,369 - 38,549; first-year total health care costs for children were $19,883. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence and prevalence of focal seizures is high and the humanistic and economic burdens are significant. Future studies focused exclusively on children with focal seizures are needed to more precisely describe the burden. We also suggest further research and implementation of methods to improve medication adherence as an approach to lessen burden on these young patients.

Development of a Severity Classification System for Sickle Cell Disease.

PURPOSE: There is no well-accepted classification system of overall sickle cell disease (SCD) severity. We sought to develop a system that could be tested as a clinical outcome predictor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using validated methodology (RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel), 10 multi-disciplinary expert clinicians collaboratively developed 180 simplified patient histories and rated each on multiple axes (estimated clinician follow-up frequency, risk of complications or death, quality of life, overall disease severity). Using ratings on overall disease severity, we developed a 3-level severity classification system ranging from Class I (least severe) to Class III (most severe). RESULTS: The system defines patients as Class I who are 8-40 years with no end organ damage, no chronic pain, and ≤4 unscheduled acute care visits due to vaso-occlusive crises (VOC) in the last year. Patients <8 or >40 years with no end organ damage, no chronic pain, and <2 unscheduled acute care visits are also considered Class I. Patients any age with ≥5 unscheduled acute care visits and/or with severe damage to bone, retina, heart, lung, kidney, or brain are classified as Class III (except patients ≥25 years with severe retinopathy, no chronic pain, and 0-1 unscheduled acute care visits, who are considered Class II). Patients not meeting these Class I or III definitions are classified as Class II. CONCLUSION: This system consolidates patient characteristics into homogenous groups with respect to disease state to support clinical decision-making. The system is consistent with existing literature that increased unscheduled acute care visits and organ damage translate into clinically significant patient morbidity. Studies to further validate this system are planned.