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.

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.

Development, implementation, and evaluation of a health outcomes and research program at an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy.

PURPOSE: Health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) provide high-quality, efficient, and collaborative care to patients receiving specialty therapy. Despite proven benefits of the integrated model, manufacturer and payer restrictions challenge the viability and utility of HSSPs. Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy developed a health outcomes and research program to measure and communicate the value of this model, drive improvement in patient care delivery, and advocate for recognition of HSSP pharmacists' role in patient care. The purpose of this descriptive report is to describe the development and results of this program. SUMMARY: The health outcomes and research program began as an initiative for pharmacists to evaluate and convey the benefits they provide to patients, providers, and the health system. Early outcomes data proved useful in communicating the value of an integrated model to key stakeholders and highlighted the need to further develop research efforts. The department leadership invested resources to build a research program with dedicated personnel, engaged research experts to train pharmacists, and fostered internal and external collaborations to facilitate research efforts. As of March 2021, the health outcomes and research program team has published 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts, presented 88 posters and 7 podium presentations at national conferences, and received 4 monetary research awards. Further, the program team engages other HSSP teams to initiate and expand their own health outcomes research in an effort to empower all HSSPs in demonstrating their value. CONCLUSIONS: The health outcomes and research program described has pioneered outcomes research among HSSPs nationwide and has proven valuable to specialty pharmacists, the health system, and key specialty pharmacy stakeholders.

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.

Risk Factors for Medication Nonadherence to Self-Injectable Biologic Therapy in Adult Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: In inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), nonadherence to biologic therapy increases risk of disease flare. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for nonadherence. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study evaluating patients with IBD treated at a tertiary care center and prescribed self-injectable biologic therapy using the center's specialty pharmacy. Adherence was defined using medication possession ratio (MPR). Nonadherence was defined as MPR <0.86. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty patients (n = 393 with CD and n = 67 with UC) were evaluated with mean MPR (interquartile range) equaling 0.89 (0.48-1). Overall, 69% of patients were adherent (defined as MPR ≥0.86), 66% of patients with CD and 87% of patients with UC. In univariate analysis, several factors increased risk of nonadherence: CD diagnosis, insurance type, psychiatric history, smoking, prior biologic use, and narcotic use (P < 0.05). In multivariable analysis, Medicaid insurance (odds ratio [OR], 5.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.85-15.6) and CD diagnosis (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.3-6.0) increased risk of nonadherence. In CD, as the number of risk factors increased (narcotic use, psychiatric history, prior biologic use, and smoking), the probability of nonadherence increased. Adherence was 72% in patients with 0-1 risk factors, decreasing to 62%, 61%, and 42% in patients with 2, 3, and 4 risk factors, respectively (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified risk factors for nonadherence to biologic therapy. In patients with CD, the probability of nonadherence increased as the number of risk factors increased.

Development of quality measures for use of self-injectable biologic therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: An integrated specialty pharmacy initiative.

PURPOSE: The development of a tool to measure medication safety, therapeutic efficacy, and other quality outcomes in patients receiving self-injectable biologic therapy for the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) at a health-system specialty pharmacy is described. SUMMARY: Through a collaborative initiative by pharmacists, gastro-enterologists, and representatives of a pharmacy benefit manager and a pharmaceutical company, a set of clinical and specialty pharmacy quality measures was developed. The clinical measures are intended for use in assessing patient safety, disease status, treatment efficacy, and healthcare resource utilization during 3 assessments (pre-treatment, on-treatment, and longitudinal). The specialty pharmacy measures can be used to assess medication adherence, medication persistence, specialty pharmacy accreditation, and patient satisfaction. The proposed quality measures provide a foundation for evaluating the quality of IBD care and improving patient outcomes within a health-system specialty pharmacy. Future efforts to validate and implement the tool in clinical practice are planned. CONCLUSION: The proposed quality measures provide a foundation for future inquiry regarding the appropriateness and feasibility of integrating the measures into clinical care. Further work is needed to implement and validate these quality measures and determine their impact in optimizing health outcomes.