Adherence and discontinuation of prescription cannabidiol for the management of seizure disorders at an integrated care center.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate adherence, discontinuation rates, and reasons for non-adherence and discontinuation of prescription CBD during the 12-months post-initiation period at an integrated care center. METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients prescribed CBD by a neurology clinic provider with initial prescription fulfillment through the center's specialty pharmacy from January 2019 through April 2020. Baseline demographics and reasons for non-adherence and/or discontinuation were collected from the electronic health record and pharmacy claims history was used to calculate adherence using proportion of days covered (PDC). Patients were included in the PDC analysis if they had at least 3 fills during the study period. Non-adherence was defined as a PDC < 0.8. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data with categorical variables represented as frequencies and percentages and continuous variables as medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs). RESULTS: We included 136 patients with a median age of 14 years (IQR 9 - 21). Most patients were white (n = 115, 85%), with a diagnosis of intractable epilepsy (n = 100, 74%). Among the 128 patients with 3 or more fills, the median PDC was 0.99 (IQR 0.95 - 1.00) with non-adherence seen in 6% (n = 8) of patients. The most common reason for non-adherence was side effects (n = 2, 25%). Prescription CBD was discontinued by 23% (n = 31) of patients with a median time to discontinuation of 117 days (IQR 68 - 216). The most common reason for discontinuation was major side effects (n = 12, 39%). The most common side effects leading to discontinuation were agitation/irritability (n = 4), mood changes (n = 4), aggressive behavior (n = 3), and increased seizure frequency (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Adherence to prescription CBD at an integrated care center was high with approximately 94% of patients considered adherent. Providers and pharmacists may improve adherence and discontinuation rates by educating patients on the timeline of response, potential side effects, and potential for dose adjustments.

Insurance Approval Delay of Biologic Therapy Dose Escalation Associated with Disease Activity in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Dose escalation of self-injectable biologic therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases may be required to counteract loss of response and/or low drug levels. Payors often require completion of a prior authorization (PA), which is a complex approval pathway before providing coverage. If the initial PA request is denied, clinic staff must complete a time and resource-intensive process to obtain medication approval. AIMS: This study measured time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval and evaluated impact of approval time on disease activity. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of adult patients with IBD prescribed an escalated dose of biologic therapy at an academic center with an integrated specialty pharmacy team from January to December 2018. Outcomes included time to insurance approval and the association between approval time and follow-up C-reactive protein (CRP) and Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ) scores. Associations were tested using linear regression analyses. RESULTS: 220 patients were included, median age 39, 53% female, and 96% white. Overall median time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval was 7 days [interquartile range (IQR) 1, 14]. Approval time was delayed when an appeal was required [median of 29 days (IQR 17, 43)]. Patients with a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have CRP improvement (p = 0.019). Time to insurance approval did not significantly impact follow-up SIBDQ scores. CONCLUSION: Patients who had a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have improvement in CRP, highlighting the negative clinical impact of a complex dose escalation process.

Primary medication nonadherence rates to specialty disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis within a health system specialty pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Assessing primary medication nonadherence, the rate at which a medication is prescribed for a patient but is not obtained or replaced with an alternative medication within a reasonable time period, can provide a better understanding of the frequency and impact of these barriers to medication access. Previous literature has reported high rates of primary medication nonadherence, ranging from approximately 20% to 55% in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with specialty disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The high primary medication nonadherence rate may reflect the difficulties associated with obtaining specialty medications, such as high costs, extended prior authorizations, and pretreatment safety requirements. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate reasons for and rates of primary medication nonadherence to specialty DMARDs in patients with RA referred to an integrated health systems specialty pharmacy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study examining eligible patients with a specialty DMARD referral from a health system rheumatology provider to the health system specialty pharmacy. Initially, pharmacy claims were used to identify primary medication nonadherence, defined as the lack of a fill event within 60 days following the medication referral for patients without a specialty DMARD claim in the 180 days prior. Referrals from July 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021, were eligible. Exclusion criteria included duplicate referrals, use for non-RA indications, switches to clinic-administered therapies, and alternate filling methods. Medical record reviews were conducted to confirm referral outcomes. Outcomes included rate of and reasons for primary medication nonadherence. RESULTS: We included 480 eligible patients, 100 of whom had no documented fill event. After medical record review, 27 patients were removed due to having a non-RA diagnosis and 65 patients were removed due to having alternative fill methods, most due to external prescription routing (83.1%). The final primary medication nonadherence rate was 2.1%. Out of the 8 cases of true primary medication nonadherence, 3 patients held specialty DMARD therapy because of other existing disease states, 3 patients were unreachable, and 2 patients were unable to afford medication. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of primary medication nonadherence to specialty DMARDs were low in patients with RA managed by a health system specialty pharmacy. A total of 8 primary medication nonadherence cases were related to safety concerns in non-RA diseases states, patient unreachability, and affordability. However, the limited number of primary medication nonadherence cases limits the generalizability of reasons for primary medication nonadherence found in this study. Key elements of the health systems specialty pharmacy model that likely contribute to low primary medication nonadherence include dedicated financial assistance navigation services, in-clinic pharmacist availability, and open communication between provider offices.

Optimizing HIV PrEP Persistence: Does Your Pharmacy Matter?

Persistence to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is integral to preventing new HIV infections. Previous studies have shown real-world PrEP persistence is low and insight is needed into PrEP delivery strategies that improve persistence. This single-center, retrospective, cohort study measured persistence in patients filling PrEP through an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) compared to those filling at external pharmacies. The Kaplan-Meier estimates for persistence probability at 6, 12, and 18 months were 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.95), 0.75 (95% CI 0.66-0.86), and 0.64 (95% CI 0.53-0.76) for the HSSP cohort compared to 0.65 (95% CI 0.51-0.83), 0.41 (95% CI 0.28-0.62), and 0.32 (95% CI 0.2-0.53), respectively, for the non-HSSP cohort (log-rank p < 0.001, [Formula: see text] = 11.2). Cox PH modeling showed that patients using a non-HSSP were 2.7 times more likely to be non-persistent than HSSP patients (HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.6-4.7, p < 0.001, [Formula: see text] = 12.61), demonstrating patients were better maintained on PrEP therapy when their prescriptions were filled with the HSSP.

Specialty pharmacy integration and the role of an advanced certified pharmacy technician in prescription cannabidiol access.

BACKGROUND: Insurance requirements that limit access to prescription cannabidiol (CBD), an adjunct therapy for uncontrolled seizure disorders, may lead to treatment initiation delays. Integrated health-system specialty pharmacies (IHSSPs) use pharmacists and advance certified pharmacy technicians (CPhTs) to help navigate prescription CBD access requirements. OBJECTIVE(S): Evaluate time from initial specialty pharmacy referral to prescription CBD shipment. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective analysis of patients prescribed CBD from January 2019 to April 2020 by the outpatient neurology clinic and dispensed by the center's IHSSP. The primary outcome was the time to prescription CBD access, defined as days between the specialty pharmacy completing an initial patient assessment and first medication shipment. Secondary outcomes were percentage of patients requiring financial assistance and days between key steps in the access pathway. Data were collected from electronic health records and the specialty pharmacy patient management database. The CPhT was responsible for completing most portions of the access pathway under supervision of the clinical pharmacist. RESULTS: After screening, 136 patients were included: 50% male, 85% white, 60% insured by Medicaid, and median age 14 years (interquartile range [IQR] 9-21). The most common indication was Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (n = 117, 86%). Of the 129 patients (95%) who required a prior authorization (PA), 92% were approved (n = 119). Median time from initial assessment to first shipment was 7 days (IQR 4-13). Of patients for whom the CPhT helped obtain financial assistance (n = 14, 10%), all had $0 costs after assistance. Median times for secondary outcomes led by the CPhT in days were as follows: initial assessment completion to benefits investigation (BI) = 0 (IQR 0-0), BI to PA submission = 0 (IQR 0-0), and PA denial to appeal submission = 4 (IQR 1-7). CONCLUSION: IHSSP teams, particularly advanced CPhT roles, helped patients afford and initiate prescription CBD quickly.

Droxidopa management by an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy team.

BACKGROUND: Droxidopa, indicated for the treatment of symptomatic neurogenic orthostatic hypotension, can be challenging for patients to access owing to manufacturer and payer restrictions, and requires close monitoring to ensure safety and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: This practice report describes the development and outcomes of an integrated neurology specialty pharmacy team for droxidopa management. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: An integrated health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) connected to an academic institution with integrated specialty pharmacists working in collaboration with the providers in both the neurology and autonomic disfunction clinic. PRACTICE INNOVATION: In May 2017, the integrated HSSP developed droxidopa management services. Based on clinic-identified needs, the specialty pharmacy team completed droxidopa access requirements (insurance approval and affordability), provided comprehensive medication education at droxidopa initiation, and developed and executed droxidopa titration and monitoring plans in collaboration with providers. While patients were on droxidopa therapy, specialty pharmacist staff (pharmacists and technicians) monitored patients for safety and response to therapy and communicated with the health care team through the shared electronic health record. EVALUATION METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of adult patients with at least 3 fills of droxidopa using the integrated specialty pharmacy services from May 2017 to April 2020. Outcomes included persistence (defined as lack of 60-day gap in treatment), adherence (calculated using pharmacy claims and proportion of days covered [PDC]), and number and type of pharmacist interventions after droxidopa initiation. RESULTS: Of the 83 patients reviewed, 60 patients (72%) were persistent on droxidopa therapy over the study period. The median PDC was 0.98 (interquartile range 0.90-1.00). Over 36 months, the specialty pharmacist performed 60 interventions after droxidopa initiation, most related to dose changes, drug-drug interaction management, and medication reconciliation. CONCLUSION: The development of integrated specialty pharmacy services for patients prescribed droxidopa resulted in high droxidopa persistence and adherence. Interventions from the specialty pharmacist ensured droxidopa remained safe and appropriate for patients.

Primary medication nonadherence to oral oncology specialty medications.

BACKGROUND: Patients prescribed specialty oncology medications face logistical and financial challenges to medication procurement, leading to primary medication nonadherence (PMN). Limited research has evaluated rates and reasons for PMN within a specialty oncology population. Addressing PMN is essential to ensuring patient access and uptake and realizing benefits of these therapies. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to compute the rates of and reasons for PMN in patients prescribed oral oncology medications at an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy (IHSSP). METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective analysis of specialty oncology prescriptions electronically prescribed between January and December 2018. Data were extracted from electronic health record (EHR) and pharmacy claims databases. Prescriptions were PMN eligible if none of the following were met: fill of any cancer medication within the previous 180-day lookback window, duplicate prescription, cancellation within 30 days, rerouting to an external pharmacy within 30 days of prescribing, filled through alternate method, or nononcology or hematology condition. PMN was calculated by dividing eligible prescriptions unfilled during the study period by all eligible prescriptions. Reasons for a lack of prescription fulfillment were assessed via EHR review. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We evaluated 4482 prescriptions from 1422 patients, resulting in 861 PMN-eligible prescriptions. Most PMN-eligible prescriptions (n = 668, 78%) were filled within 30 days, leaving 193 prescriptions as potential instances of PMN. After EHR review, 158 prescriptions met the exclusion criteria, resulting in a PMN rate of 4%. Of PMN prescriptions (n = 35), most were caused by clinical reasons (n = 22, 63%); however, 10 prescriptions were unfilled owing to patient decision, 2 owing to unaffordable treatment, and 1 owing to inability to reach the patient. Patients with PMN had a median age of 72 years and were mostly male (60%), with a median Charlson comorbidity index score of 7. CONCLUSION: Low rates of PMN to prescribed anticancer medications were found among electronic prescriptions intended to be filled at an IHSSP.

DrugWAS: Drug-wide Association Studies for COVID-19 Drug Repurposing.

This study aimed to systematically investigate if any of the available drugs in the electronic health record (EHR) can be repurposed as potential treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Based on a retrospective cohort analysis of EHR data, drug-wide association studies (DrugWAS) were performed on 9,748 patients with COVID-19 at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC). For each drug study, multivariable logistic regression with overlap weighting using propensity score was applied to estimate the effect of drug exposure on COVID-19 disease outcomes. Patient exposure to a drug between 3-months prior to the pandemic and the COVID-19 diagnosis was chosen as the exposure of interest. All-cause of death was selected as the primary outcome. Hospitalization, admission to the intensive care unit, and need for mechanical ventilation were identified as secondary outcomes. Overall, 17 drugs were significantly associated with decreased COVID-19 severity. Previous exposure to two types of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines, PCV13 (odds ratio (OR), 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.12-0.81 and OR, 0.33, 95% CI, 0.15-0.73), diphtheria toxoid and tetanus toxoid vaccine (OR, 0.38, 95% CI, 0.15-0.93) were significantly associated with a decreased risk of death (primary outcome). Secondary analyses identified several other significant associations showing lower risk for COVID-19 outcomes: acellular pertussis vaccine, 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23), flaxseed extract, ethinyl estradiol, estradiol, turmeric extract, ubidecarenone, azelastine, pseudoephedrine, dextromethorphan, omega-3 fatty acids, fluticasone, and ibuprofen. In conclusion, this cohort study leveraged EHR data to identify a list of drugs that could be repurposed to improve COVID-19 outcomes. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to investigate the efficacy of the proposed drugs.

Adherence and persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) improve symptoms and delay progression of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but adherence is often sub-optimal and many patients change medication (either "switching" to a medication with a different mechanism of action or "cycling" to a medication with the same mechanism of action) during the first year of therapy. Some integrated health-system specialty pharmacies embed pharmacists in clinics to help patients access and adhere to specialty medication. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed DMARD switching, cycling, adherence, and persistence at an outpatient rheumatology clinic with an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with RA, naïve to biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs, who filled ≥ 2 biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD prescriptions within 12 months. Adherence was measured using proportion of days covered (PDC); persistence was computed at 12 months. Univariate analyses compared adherence and persistence between patients with and without a medication change. Ordinal logistic regression examined whether PDC was associated with patient age, gender, race, insurance type, and medication change. RESULTS: We included 772 patients: 79% female/21% male, 89% White/11% non-White, median age 56 years (interquartile range = 48-63). Most patients (84%) did not change medication during the study period, 5% cycled medication one or more times (but did not switch), 9% switched medication one or more times (but did not cycle), and 2% of patients both switched and cycled during the study period. Median PDC of the sample was 0.94 and 73% of patients were persistent. Patients with a medication change had lower PDC than those without (0.89 vs 0.95, P = 0.004), but rate of persistence did not significantly differ between groups (77 vs 72%, P = 0.300). Odds of higher PDC was more likely for men (Odds ratio [OR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-2.48, P < 0.001) and less likely for patients who changed medication (OR = 0.65, CI: 0.47-0.91, P = 0.011); age, race, and insurance type were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RA demonstrated high medication adherence and persistence, and low rates of switching and cycling. Findings support evidence that integrated health-system specialty pharmacies with clinical pharmacists embedded in outpatient clinics help patients overcome barriers to medication adherence to persist on therapy. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi, Inc. James and J. Choi were employed by Sanofi, Inc., at the time of this study. Peter, Zuckerman, DeClercq, L. Choi, and Tanner, received research funding from Sanofi, Inc., for work on this study. Tanner has also received advisory board/speaker bureau fees from Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi-Aventis. This study was presented as a poster at AMCP Nexus in October 2019 at National Harbor, MD.

Inclusion in limited distribution drug network reduces time to dalfampridine access in patients with multiple sclerosis at a health-system specialty pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Dalfampridine improves walking speed in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but accessing specialty medications such as dalfampridine can be hindered by insurance restrictions, high costs, and limited distribution networks (LDNs) imposed by manufacturers. Some integrated health-systems specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) embed pharmacists in clinics and dispense medications from their internal pharmacies if included within the LDN. OBJECTIVE: To assess access to dalfampridine in patients at an HSSP before and after gaining admission to the LDN. METHODS: This study was conducted at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy (VSP), an integrated HSSP at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) with 2 clinical pharmacists embedded in the MS clinic. VSP gained access to the dalfampridine LDN on May 1, 2018, at which time the embedded pharmacists began to manage the comprehensive therapy initiation process. We performed a retrospective review of adult patients with MS who were prescribed dalfampridine from March 2010 to December 2018. Eligible prescriptions were new starts (no previous use) or restarts (after previous use and discontinuation). Prescriptions were classified as pre-VSP and post-VSP, which differentiates before and after VSP gained access to dispense dalfampridine. Study outcomes were insurance approval, initiation of therapy, and time from treatment decision to medication access. We used a proportional odds logistic regression model for time to medication access using the following covariates: pre-VSP versus post-VSP time period, insurance prior authorization (PA) denied versus approved/not needed, and baseline timed 25-foot walk. RESULTS: We included 262 patients and 290 prescriptions (260 pre-VSP and 30 post-VSP). In pre-VSP and post-VSP prescriptions, 97% were approved by insurance, and 93% of patients started therapy. Median time to medication access was 22 days (IQR = 11-45) for pre-VSP prescriptions and 1 day (IQR = 0-3) for post-VSP prescriptions. In the proportional odds logistic regression model, the odds of having a longer medication access time were significantly higher for pre-VSP prescriptions (OR = 83.219, P < 0.001) and prescriptions whose PA was initially denied (OR = 9.50, P < 0.001); 25-foot walk time was not significant (OR = 0.95, P = 0.277). CONCLUSIONS: After obtaining access to dispense dalfampridine, the time to access therapy was reduced, suggesting that LDNs delay patient access to therapy at HSSPs. DISCLOSURES: No funding was provided for this study. The authors have no conflicting interests to disclose. Preliminary results have been previously presented at the American Society of Health-Systems Pharmacy Midyear Meeting in December 2019, the Vanderbilt Health Systems Specialty Pharmacy Outcomes Research Summit in August 2020, and the National Association of Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting in September 2020.

Rheumatoid arthritis medication adherence in a health system specialty pharmacy.

OBJECTIVES: To assess adherence to specialty medications for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) and identify characteristics associated with adherence. STUDY DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Study patients were adults with RA who filled at least 3 prescriptions for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, at an integrated HSSP. Data were collected from pharmacy claims and electronic health records. The primary outcome, adherence, was measured using proportion of days covered (PDC). Proportional odds logistic regression was used to test association between PDC and age, gender, race, insurance type, and out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS: We included 675 patients: 77% were female, 90% were White, 29% were naive to treatment at initial dispensing, 60% held commercial insurance, and the median age was 56 years. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) patient out-of-pocket cost per fill was $1.50 ($0-$5). Median (IQR) PDC was 0.95 (0.84-1.00); 80% of patients achieved PDC of 0.80 or higher. Higher adherence was more likely in patients who were male (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.15-2.18; P = .005], naive to specialty medication treatment (OR, 3.04; 95% CI, 2.21-4.18; P < .001), and older in age (per 10 years: OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.32; P = .008), and adherence had a significant nonlinear association with average cost per fill (P = .006); associations with race and insurance type were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: At an integrated HSSP, patients with RA paid low out-of-pocket costs for bDMARD therapy and achieved high treatment adherence. Data suggest that integrated HSSPs assist patients in removing financial barriers to treatment.

Pharmacist Interventions to Improve Specialty Medication Adherence: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of specialty medications in complicated clinical conditions depends on adherence to therapy. However, specialty medications pose unique barriers to adherence. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether pharmacist interventions improve specialty medication adherence. METHODS: This is a single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial ongoing since 10 May 2019 at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy. This study evaluates usual care compared with usual care plus patient-tailored adherence interventions. Study design and procedures were informed by focus groups with patients and specialty pharmacists. Patients at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy with a proportion of days covered (PDC) < 90% in the previous 4 months are identified by a daily query of the electronic pharmacy database. A pharmacist reviews these patients' electronic health records to identify and exclude ineligible patients. Eligible patients are randomized evenly to the control or intervention arm and stratified by historical clinic nonadherence rates. Patients randomized to the intervention arm undergo a baseline assessment to clarify reasons for nonadherence and subsequently receive patient-tailored interventions based on their specific reasons. Interventions and follow-up are provided at the discretion of the intervening pharmacist. The primary outcome is PDC calculated at 8 months post-enrollment. Enrollment of 438 participants will provide 90% power to detect a 5% difference in PDC between the two arms within each nonadherence risk stratum. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effect of patient-tailored interventions on specialty medication adherence and will inform how often and why patients are misidentified as nonadherent. REGISTRATION: The trial was deemed a quality improvement initiative by the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board. It was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03709277) on 17 October 2018.

Pharmacist Interventions to Improve Specialty Medication Adherence: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of specialty medications in complicated clinical conditions depends on adherence to therapy. However, specialty medications pose unique barriers to adherence. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether pharmacist interventions improve specialty medication adherence. METHODS: This is a single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial ongoing since 10 May 2019 at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy. This study evaluates usual care compared with usual care plus patient-tailored adherence interventions. Study design and procedures were informed by focus groups with patients and specialty pharmacists. Patients at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy with a proportion of days covered (PDC) < 90% in the previous 4 months are identified by a daily query of the electronic pharmacy database. A pharmacist reviews these patients' electronic health records to identify and exclude ineligible patients. Eligible patients are randomized evenly to the control or intervention arm and stratified by historical clinic nonadherence rates. Patients randomized to the intervention arm undergo a baseline assessment to clarify reasons for nonadherence and subsequently receive patient-tailored interventions based on their specific reasons. Interventions and follow-up are provided at the discretion of the intervening pharmacist. The primary outcome is PDC calculated at 8 months post-enrollment. Enrollment of 438 participants will provide 90% power to detect a 5% difference in PDC between the two arms within each nonadherence risk stratum. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effect of patient-tailored interventions on specialty medication adherence and will inform how often and why patients are misidentified as nonadherent. REGISTRATION: The trial was deemed a quality improvement initiative by the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board. It was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03709277) on 17 October 2018.

Increasing success and evolving barriers in the hepatitis C cascade of care during the direct acting antiviral era.

Barriers remain in the hepatitis C virus (HCV) cascade of care (CoC), limiting the overall impact of direct acting antivirals. This study examines movement between the stages of the HCV CoC and identifies reasons why patients and specific patient populations fail to advance through care in a real world population. We performed a single-center, ambispective cohort study of patients receiving care in an outpatient infectious diseases clinic between October 2015 and September 2016. Patients were followed from treatment referral through sustained virologic response. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors related to completion of each step of the CoC. Of 187 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 120 (64%) completed an evaluation for HCV treatment, 119 (64%) were prescribed treatment, 114 (61%) were approved for treatment, 113 (60%) initiated treatment, 107 (57%) completed treatment, and 100 (53%) achieved a sustained virologic response. In univariate and multivariate analyses, patients with Medicaid insurance were less likely to complete an evaluation and were less likely to be approved for treatment. Treatment completion and SVR rates are much improved from historical CoC reports. However, linkage to care following referral continues to be a formidable challenge for the HCV CoC in the DAA era. Ongoing efforts should focus on linkage to care to capitalize on DAA treatment advances and improving access for patients with Medicaid insurance.

Likelihood approach for evaluating bioequivalence of highly variable drugs.

Bioequivalence (BE) is required for approving a generic drug. The two one-sided tests procedure (TOST, or the 90% confidence interval approach) has been used as the mainstream methodology to test average BE (ABE) on pharmacokinetic parameters such as the area under the blood concentration-time curve and the peak concentration. However, for highly variable drugs (%CV > 30%), it is difficult to demonstrate ABE in a standard cross-over study with the typical number of subjects using the TOST because of lack of power. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency recommended similar but not identical reference-scaled average BE (RSABE) approaches to address this issue. Although the power is improved, the new approaches may not guarantee a high level of confidence for the true difference between two drugs at the ABE boundaries. It is also difficult for these approaches to address the issues of population BE (PBE) and individual BE (IBE). We advocate the use of a likelihood approach for representing and interpreting BE data as evidence. Using example data from a full replicate 2 × 4 cross-over study, we demonstrate how to present evidence using the profile likelihoods for the mean difference and standard deviation ratios of the two drugs for the pharmacokinetic parameters. With this approach, we present evidence for PBE and IBE as well as ABE within a unified framework. Our simulations show that the operating characteristics of the proposed likelihood approach are comparable with the RSABE approaches when the same criteria are applied.

Natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate inhibits oxidant stress and modulates atopic asthma in humans in vivo.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is associated with oxidant stress and diminished antioxidant defenses. Yet, the mechanistic role of oxidant stress and antioxidant supplementation in human asthmatics remains uncertain. We determined the effect of high doses of the antioxidant natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate for 16 weeks on allergen-induced airway oxidant stress, inflammation, and bronchial responsiveness to methacholine and allergen in atopic asthmatics in vivo. METHODS: Thirty-three mild atopic asthmatics underwent bronchoscopy with baseline bronchoalveolar lavage and segmental allergen challenge. The allergen-challenged airway was lavaged 24 h later. At least 3 weeks later, patients underwent inhaled challenges with methacholine and specific allergen. Volunteers took 1500 IU of natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate daily for at least 16 weeks. At the end of the treatment, the two bronchoscopies and inhaled methacholine and allergen challenges were repeated. F(2)-isoprostanes, specific markers of oxidant stress, and selected Th1 and Th2 cytokines were analyzed in the lavage fluid. RESULTS: Following supplementation of natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate, plasma concentrations of α-tocopherol increased and γ-tocopherol decreased. Both baseline and allergen-induced F(2)-isoprostanes significantly decreased, providing biochemical evidence for an antioxidant effect. Natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate reduced allergen-provoked concentrations of interleukin 3 and interleukin 4 and augmented levels of interleukin 12 in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate improved airway responsiveness to methacholine but did not alter airway reactivity to specific allergen. CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of oxidant stress by natural-source d-α-tocopheryl acetate modulates allergic inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness in human atopic asthmatics in vivo. These results need to be confirmed by a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Acarbose, an alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, attenuates postprandial hypotension in autonomic failure.

Postprandial hypotension is an important clinical condition that predisposes to syncope, falls, angina, and cerebrovascular events. The magnitude of the fall in blood pressure after meals depends on enteric glucose availability. We hypothesized that acarbose, an alpha-glucosidase inhibitor that decreases glucose absorption in the small intestine, would attenuate postprandial hypotension. Acarbose or placebo was given 20 minutes before a standardized meal in 13 patients with postprandial hypotension in the setting of autonomic failure (age: 65+/-2.64 years; body mass index: 25+/-1.08 kg/m(2); supine plasma norepinephrine: 110+/-26.6 pg/mL). Four patients were studied in a single-blind protocol and 9 patients in a double-blind, randomized, crossover fashion. Patients were studied supine, and blood pressure, heart rate, and neuroendocrine parameters were obtained at baseline and for 90 minutes after meal intake. After adjusting for potential confounders, acarbose significantly attenuated the postprandial fall in systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 17 mm Hg (95% CI: 7 to 28; P=0.003) and 9 mm Hg (95% CI: 5 to 14; P=0.001), respectively. Furthermore, acarbose effectively reduced plasma levels of insulin, a known vasodilator, by 11 microU/mL (95% CI: 5 to 18; P=0.001) compared with placebo. After adjusting for insulin levels, the attenuation of postprandial hypotension by acarbose remained significant, indicating that additional mechanisms contribute to this effect. In conclusion, 100 mg of acarbose successfully improved postprandial hypotension in patients with severe autonomic failure. This effect is not explained solely by a reduction in insulin levels.