Real-World Treatment Persistence Among Advanced Therapy-Naïve or -Experienced Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Initiated on Ustekinumab or Adalimumab.

INTRODUCTION: Persistence on advanced therapies in ulcerative colitis (UC) is a useful real-world treatment performance measure. This study compared real-world persistence during the maintenance phase among advanced therapy-naïve and -experienced patients with UC initiated on ustekinumab or adalimumab. METHODS: Claims data from the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus de-identified database (01/01/2015-06/30/2022) were used to select adult patients with UC treated with ustekinumab or adalimumab based on the agent first initiated (index date) after 10/21/2019. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance cohorts on baseline characteristics. Persistence on the index agent (no gaps in days of supply of > 120 days for ustekinumab or > 60 days for adalimumab), persistence while corticosteroid-free, while on monotherapy, and persistence on the US labeled dose were described and compared during the 12-month period post-index using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models. Outcomes were analyzed separately among advanced therapy-naïve and advanced therapy-experienced patients. RESULTS: At 12 months post-index, advanced therapy-naïve patients receiving ustekinumab (n = 371) had higher persistence on the index agent [83.8% vs. 57.6%, hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 3.09 (2.29-4.16); p < 0.001), persistence while corticosteroid-free [2.00 (1.63-2.45); p < 0.001], persistence while on monotherapy [2.67 (2.07-3.44); p < 0.001], and persistence on the labeled dose [4.21 (2.76-6.44); p < 0.001] versus those receiving adalimumab (n = 1726). At 12 months post-index, advanced therapy-experienced patients receiving ustekinumab (n = 693) had higher persistence on the index agent [78.1% vs. 59.2%, 2.44 (1.82-3.26); p < 0.001], persistence while corticosteroid-free [1.24 (1.01-1.54); p = 0.0447], persistence while on monotherapy [2.53 (2.00-3.21); p < 0.001], and persistence on the labeled dose [4.77 (3.09-7.35); p < 0.001] versus those receiving adalimumab (n = 254). CONCLUSION: This claims-based analysis demonstrated significantly higher treatment persistence, including persistence while corticosteroid-free, persistence while on monotherapy, and persistence on the labeled dose, among both advanced therapy-naïve and advanced therapy-experienced patients with UC initiated on ustekinumab compared to adalimumab.

Comparison of real-world healthcare resource utilization among advanced therapy-naïve and advanced therapy-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis initiated on ustekinumab or vedolizumab.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) among advanced therapy-naïve and advanced therapy-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) initiating ustekinumab or vedolizumab in the United States. METHODS: Claims data from IQVIA PharMetrics Plus de-identified database (01/01/2015-06/30/2022) were used to identify adult patients with UC initiating ustekinumab or vedolizumab (index date) after 10/21/2019. Baseline characteristics were balanced using inverse probability of treatment weighting. All-cause and UC-related HRU (number of inpatient admissions, inpatient days, emergency department visits, and outpatient visits) were described during the post-index period, and Poisson regression models were used to evaluate associations between index therapy and HRU outcomes. Analyses were performed separately among advanced therapy-naïve or advanced therapy-experienced patients. RESULTS: A total of 444 (ustekinumab) and 1,917 (vedolizumab) advanced therapy-naïve patients, and 647 (ustekinumab) and 1,152 (vedolizumab) advanced therapy-experienced patients were identified. In advanced therapy-naïve patients, higher rates of UC-related inpatient days (rate ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.84 [1.15, 3.58]; p = 0.004), emergency department visits (1.39 [1.01, 2.17]; p = 0.044), and outpatient visits (1.81 [1.61, 2.04]; p < 0.001) were observed among patients initiating vedolizumab relative to ustekinumab. In advanced therapy-experienced patients, higher rates of UC-related inpatient admissions (1.47 [1.06, 2.12]; p = 0.012), inpatient days (2.18 (1.44, 3.71); p < 0.001), and outpatient visits (1.50 (1.19, 1.82); p < 0.001) were observed among patients initiating vedolizumab relative to ustekinumab. Results were similar when all-cause HRU was examined. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with UC with and without advanced therapy experience, higher rates of all-cause and UC-related HRU were observed among those treated with vedolizumab relative to ustekinumab.

Real-World Long-Term Persistence and Surgical Procedure-Free Period Among Bio-naïve Patients with Crohn's Disease and Fistula Initiated on Ustekinumab.

INTRODUCTION: Fistula is a common complication of Crohn's disease (CD). Treatment with biologics has been associated with fistula healing. Long-term persistence is an important factor for a chronic inflammatory process such as fistula. This study described 24-month persistence and time-to-surgery endpoints among bio-naïve patients with CD and intestinal fistula who were initiated on ustekinumab. METHODS: Adults with CD and any enteric or perianal fistula initiated on ustekinumab (index date) between September 23, 2016, and March 2, 2022, were selected from the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database and followed up to 24 months. Persistence on ustekinumab (no gaps in days of supply of > 120 days) and composite endpoints of being persistent while on monotherapy and persistent while corticosteroid free were also assessed. The date of surgery was defined as the date of first claim for any CD-related surgeries. Persistence and time-to-surgery endpoints were assessed from the index date until the earliest of discontinuation (event), immunomodulator or other biologic use (event), corticosteroid use (event), date of surgery (event), 24-month follow-up or data end (censoring) using Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: The sample included 445 patients (mean age: 42.8 years; 56.6% female). The most common type of fistula was anal fistula (36.0%). At 24 months after ustekinumab initiation, 64.2% of patients remained persistent (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.8-71.4). Furthermore, 53.3% of patients were persistent while on monotherapy (95% CI 45.1-60.7), and 45.6% of patients were persistent while being corticosteroid free (95% CI 36.9-53.8). At 24 months, 22.8% (95% CI 17.0-30.3) of patients underwent any CD-related surgery. CONCLUSION: This study quantified long-term persistence on ustekinumab among bio-naïve patients with CD and fistula. Over half of patients initiated on ustekinumab were persistent and persistent while on monotherapy 24 months after initiation. Time-to-surgery estimate was comparable to existing evidence. These findings support ustekinumab as a treatment option for long-term management of CD with fistula.

Understanding profiles of patients with treatment-resistant depression by stringency of health plan prior authorization criteria for approval of esketamine nasal spray.

OBJECTIVES: In the United States (US), prescription drug coverage is subject to prior authorization (PA) criteria, which may vary between health plans and may exceed drug label requirements. This study aimed to characterize profiles and treatment history of patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) who initiated esketamine nasal spray, by stringency of their health plans' PA criteria relative to the esketamine label. METHODS: Adults with evidence of TRD (≥2 antidepressant courses of adequate dose and duration) prior to initiating esketamine were identified using US insurance claims data (03/2016-02/2022). Based on health plan PA criteria for esketamine obtained from Managed Markets Insight & Technology data (05/2020-02/2022), patients were grouped into stringent (PA criteria exceeds label) and non-stringent (PA criteria less stringent or equal to label) cohorts. Patient treatment history before esketamine initiation was compared using Wilcoxon rank sum and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: The stringent cohort included 168 patients (mean age: 45 years, 63% female) and the non-stringent cohort included 400 patients (mean age: 45 years, 70% female). During the ongoing major depressive episode before esketamine initiation, the stringent versus non-stringent cohort completed 3.9 versus 3.8 antidepressant treatment courses, on average (p = 0.217); 94.6% versus 96.8% used augmentation therapy (p = 0.240), including 59.3% versus 58.1% with an antipsychotic (p = 0.844), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of health plan stringency, on average, patients exceeded US label-mandated number of antidepressant trials before esketamine initiation, which questions the need for health insurance plans PA criteria above label.

Comparative analysis of persistence and remission with guselkumab versus secukinumab and ixekizumab in the United States.

Purpose: Real-world data comparing long-term performance of interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-17 inhibitors in psoriasis are limited. This study compared treatment persistence and remission among patients initiating guselkumab versus IL-17 inhibitors.Methods: Adults with psoriasis initiating guselkumab, secukinumab, or ixekizumab treatment (index date) were identified from Merative™ MarketScan® Research Databases (01/01/2016-10/31/2021). Persistence was defined as no index biologic supply gaps of twice the labeled maintenance dosing interval. Remission was defined using an exploratory approach as index biologic discontinuation for ≥6 months without psoriasis-related inpatient admissions and treatments.Results: There were 3516 and 6066 patients in the guselkumab versus secukinumab comparison, and 3805 and 4674 patients in guselkumab versus ixekizumab comparison. At 18 months, the guselkumab cohort demonstrated about twice the persistence rate as secukinumab (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.15; p < 0.001) and ixekizumab cohorts (HR = 1.77; p < 0.001). At 6 months after index biologic discontinuation, the guselkumab cohort was 31% and 40% more likely to achieve remission than secukinumab (rate ratio [RR] = 1.31; p < 0.001) and ixekizumab cohorts (RR = 1.40; p < 0.001).Conclusions: Guselkumab was associated with greater persistence and likelihood of remission than IL-17 inhibitors, indicating greater disease control and modification potential.

Treatment Patterns, Acute Healthcare Resource Use, and Costs of Patients with Treatment-Resistant Depression Completing Induction Phase of Esketamine in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to understand treatment patterns, acute healthcare use, and cost patterns among adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) who completed induction treatment with esketamine nasal spray in the United States (US). Per label, induction is defined as administration twice a week for 4 weeks, after which maintenance is started on a weekly basis for 4 weeks, and thereafter, patients are treated weekly or bimonthly. METHODS: Adults with one or more esketamine claim (index date) on or after March 5, 2019 were selected from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database (January 2016-June 2022). Before the index date, patients had evidence of TRD and ≥ 12 months of continuous insurance eligibility (baseline period). Patients with eight or more esketamine treatment sessions were included in the main cohort. A subgroup included patients with one or more baseline mental health (MH)-related inpatient (IP) admission or emergency department (ED) visit (i.e., prior acute healthcare users). Treatment patterns were described during the follow-up period (index date until earliest of end of insurance eligibility or data); acute healthcare (i.e., IP and ED) resource use and costs (2021 US dollars) were reported during the baseline and follow-up periods. RESULTS: Of the 322 patients in the main cohort, 111 comprised the subgroup of prior acute healthcare users. During the follow-up period, mean time from index date to eighth esketamine session was 73.2 days in the main cohort and 78.8 days in the subgroup (per label, 28 days). Further, 75.2% of the main cohort and 73.9% of the subgroup completed four or more esketamine maintenance sessions following induction. In the main cohort, mean all-cause acute healthcare costs per patient per month (PPPM) decreased from baseline ($837) to follow-up ($770). Similar reductions were observed for mean MH-related acute healthcare costs PPPM (baseline $648, follow-up $577). In the subgroup, mean all-cause acute healthcare costs PPPM also decreased (baseline $2323, follow-up $1423), driven by mean MH-related acute healthcare costs PPPM (baseline $1880, follow-up $1139). Mean all-cause acute healthcare use per ten patients per month remained largely stable from baseline to follow-up in the main cohort (IP days: baseline 2.24, follow-up 2.13; ED visits: baseline 1.33, follow-up 1.45) and decreased in the subgroup (IP days: baseline 6.38, follow-up 4.56; ED visits: baseline 2.58, follow-up 2.41). Trends in mean MH-related acute healthcare use were similar. CONCLUSION: Patients generally required more time than label recommendation to complete esketamine induction treatment, and most went on to have 12 or more esketamine sessions. Completion of induction treatment correlated with reductions in mean all-cause and MH-related acute healthcare costs. Larger reductions were seen in the subgroup of prior acute healthcare users.

Real-World Maintenance Phase Persistence on Ustekinumab and Adalimumab in Ulcerative Colitis.

Purpose: To describe real-world persistence in bio-naïve and bio-experienced adults with ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with ustekinumab, a recently approved anti-interleukin 12/23 antibody, or adalimumab, an anti-TNF biologic. Methods: This is a descriptive, retrospective cohort study. Patients initiating ustekinumab or adalimumab (index date, between 10/21/2019 and 08/13/2021) were selected from the Komodo Health comprehensive dataset and stratified into bio-naïve and bio-experienced subgroups based on biologic use 12 months pre-index date. Endpoints evaluated at 12-months after maintenance phase start using Kaplan-Meier analysis included 1) persistence; 2) persistence while being corticosteroid-free (<14 consecutive days of corticosteroid supply after day 90 post-index); and, 3) persistence while on monotherapy (no immunomodulators/non-index biologics/advanced therapies). Results: Ustekinumab cohort included 778 patients (236 bio-naïve, 542 bio-experienced) and adalimumab cohort included 1693 patients (1517 bio-naive, 176 bio-experienced). At 12 months after maintenance phase start, 75.5% and 50.5% of bio-naïve patients persisted on ustekinumab and adalimumab and 72.3% and 56.9% of bio-experienced patients persisted on ustekinumab and adalimumab, respectively. Further, 55.1% and 38.2% of bio-naïve patients were persistent and corticosteroid-free with ustekinumab and adalimumab; 43.7% and 33.4% of bio-experienced patients were persistent and corticosteroid-free with ustekinumab and adalimumab, respectively. Moreover, 68.1% and 44.5% of bio-naïve patients were persistent and on monotherapy with ustekinumab and adalimumab; 61.6% and 47.9% of bio-experienced patients were persistent and on monotherapy with ustekinumab and adalimumab, respectively. Conclusion: At 12 months after maintenance phase start, patients with UC treated with ustekinumab had numerically higher persistence, including persistence while corticosteroid-free and persistence while on monotherapy, than patients treated with adalimumab.

Olanzapine-Induced Diabetic Ketoacidosis: A Reversible Etiology Overlooked in Psychiatric Patients.

Background/Objective: Olanzapine is a second-generation antipsychotic medication with increased side effects of weight gain, hyperglycemia, and insulin resistance. Here we describe a case of diabetic ketoacidosis in a patient who started taking olanzapine 12 weeks before she presented. Case Report: A 73-year-old African-American female presented with a 1-week history of confusion, polyuria, and polydipsia. Her past medical history included type 2 diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, and severe depression with psychotic features. Her medications were olanzapine 5 mg, duloxetine 90 mg, and rosuvastatin 5 mg daily. Three weeks prior, she was diagnosed with COVID-19 and treated for a urinary tract infection. Her physical exam upon admission included severely dry mucous membranes and labored respirations. The circulating glucose was 748 mg/dL (70-110), anion gap 39 mmol/L (7-16), and hemoglobin A1c (HgbA1c) 11.8% (105 mmol/mol). Three months prior, her HgbA1c was 6.7% (50 mmol/mol). She was treated with intravenous fluids and continuous insulin infusion followed by subcutaneous basal-bolus glargine and lispro after an anion gap of 13 mmol/L (7-16) was obtained. Two weeks into her hospitalization, olanzapine was discontinued. She was discharged on 10 units of glargine and metformin 500 mg twice daily. Five months after discharge, she indicated not taking any of the prescribed insulin or metformin. At this follow-up, her HgbA1c was 6.7%. Discussion: Olanzapine may impair insulin secretion by causing pancreatic beta-cell apoptosis. Conclusion: Increased awareness of the generalized metabolic effects and risk of diabetic ketoacidosis associated with antipsychotic medications is needed to develop a safe treatment plan for patients.

Fatigue presentation, severity, and related outcomes in a prospective cohort following post-COVID-19 hospitalization in British Columbia, Canada.

Introduction: Increasing evidence on long-term health outcomes following SARS CoV-2 infection shows post-viral symptoms can persist for months. These symptoms are often consistent with those of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS). The aim of the present study was to examine the prevalence and outcome predictors of post-viral fatigue and related symptoms 3- and 6-months following symptom onset. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients hospitalized with Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) (n = 88) were recruited from a Post-COVID-19 Respiratory Clinic (PCRC) in Vancouver, Canada to examine predictors of long-term fatigue and substantial fatigue. Multivariable mixed effects analyses examined the relationship between patient predictors, including pre-existing comorbidities, patient reported outcome measures, and fatigue and substantial fatigue at follow-up. Results: The number of patients experiencing fatigue or substantial fatigue at 3 months post-infection were 58 (67%) and 14 (16%) respectively. At 6 months these numbers declined to 47 (60%) patients experiencing fatigue and 6 (6%) experiencing substantial fatigue. Adjusted analysis, for sex, age, and time, revealed the number of pre-existing comorbidities to be associated with fatigue (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.09-4.49; 0.028) and substantial fatigue (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.06-2.95; 0.033) at 3 months follow-up. Except for shortness of breath, self-care, and follow-up time, all follow-up variables were found to be associated with fatigue and substantial fatigue at 3 months. Conclusion: Fatigue and substantial fatigue are common after COVID-19 infection but often diminish over time. A significant number of patients continue to exhibit long-term fatigue at 6 months follow-up. Further research is needed to clarify the causality of viral infections in the development and severity of fatigue as a symptom and in meeting post-viral fatigue syndrome or ME/CFS diagnostic criteria.

Incidence of cardiometabolic outcomes among people living with HIV-1 initiated on integrase strand transfer inhibitor versus non-integrase strand transfer inhibitor antiretroviral therapies: a retrospective analysis of insurance claims in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-containing antiretroviral therapy (ART) has been associated with weight gain, though there is limited information on associations between ART-related weight gain and cardiometabolic outcomes among people living with HIV-1 (PLWH). We, therefore, evaluated risks of incident cardiometabolic outcomes following INSTI versus non-INSTI-based ART initiation in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using IBM MarketScan Research Databases (12 August 2012-31 January 2021). Treatment-naïve PLWH initiating ART (index date) on/after 12 August 2013 (approval date of the first second-generation INSTI, dolutegravir) were included and censored at regimen switch/discontinuation, end of insurance eligibility or end of data availability. We used inverse probability of treatment weights constructed with baseline (12 months pre-index) characteristics to account for differences between INSTI- and non-INSTI-initiating cohorts. Doubly robust hazard ratios (HRs) obtained from weighted multivariable Cox regression were used to compare time to incident cardiometabolic outcomes (congestive heart failure [CHF], coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischemic attack, hypertension, type II diabetes, lipid disorders, lipodystrophy and metabolic syndrome) by INSTI-initiation status. RESULTS: Weighted INSTI (mean age = 39 years, 23% female, 70% commercially insured, 30% Medicaid insured) and non-INSTI (mean age = 39 years, 24% female, 71% commercially insured, 29% Medicaid insured) cohorts included 7059 and 7017 PLWH, respectively. The most common INSTI-containing regimens were elvitegravir-based (43.4%), dolutegravir-based (33.3%) and bictegravir-based (18.4%); the most common non-INSTI-containing regimens were darunavir-based (31.5%), rilpivirine-based (30.4%) and efavirenz-based (28.3%). Mean±standard deviation follow-up periods were 1.5±1.5 and 1.1±1.2 years in INSTI- and non-INSTI-initiating cohorts, respectively. INSTI initiators were at a clinically and significantly increased risk of experiencing incident CHF (HR = 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-4.05; p = 0.036), myocardial infarction (HR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.03-5.65; p = 0.036) and lipid disorders (HR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.04-1.58; p = 0.020); there was no evidence of an increased risk for other individual or composite outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Over a short average follow-up period of <2 years, INSTI use among treatment-naïve PLWH was associated with an increased risk of several cardiometabolic outcomes, such as CHF, myocardial infarction and lipid disorders, compared to non-INSTI use. Further research accounting for additional potential confounders and with longer follow-up is warranted to more accurately and precisely quantify the impact of INSTI-containing ART on long-term cardiometabolic outcomes.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Antipsychotics Among Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Patient affordability is an important nonclinical consideration for treatment access among patients with schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated and measured out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for antipsychotics (APs) among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. METHODS: Adults with a schizophrenia diagnosis, ≥ 1 AP claim, and continuous Medicaid eligibility were identified in the MarketScan® Medicaid Database (1 January 2018-31 December 2018). OOP AP pharmacy costs ($US 2019) were normalized for a 30-day supply. Results were descriptively reported by route of administration [ROA; orals (OAPs), long-acting injectables (LAIs)], generic/branded status within ROAs, and dosing schedule within LAIs. The proportion of total (pharmacy and medical) OOP costs AP-attributable was described. RESULTS: In 2018, 48,656 Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia were identified (mean age 46.7 years, 41.1% female, 43.4% Black). Mean annual total OOP costs were $59.97, $6.65 of which was AP attributable. Overall, 39.2%, 38.3%, and 42.3% of beneficiaries with a corresponding claim had OOP costs > $0 for any AP, OAP, and LAI, respectively. Mean OOP costs per patient per 30-day claim (PPPC) were $0.64 for OAPs and $0.86 for LAIs. By LAI dosing schedule, mean OOP costs PPPC were $0.95, $0.90, $0.57, and $0.39 for twice-monthly, monthly, once-every-2-months, and once-every-3-months LAIs, respectively. Across ROAs and generic/branded status, projected OOP AP costs per-patient-per-year for beneficiaries assumed fully adherent ranged from $4.52 to $13.70, representing < 25% of total OOP costs. CONCLUSION: OOP AP costs for Medicaid beneficiaries represented a small fraction of total OOP costs. LAIs with longer dosing schedules had numerically lower mean OOP costs, which were lowest for once-every-3-months LAIs among all APs.

Esketamine nasal spray for major depressive disorder with acute suicidal ideation or behavior: description of treatment access, utilization, and claims-based outcomes in the United States.

AIMS: To describe real-world esketamine nasal spray access and use as well as healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs among adults with evidence of major depressive disorder (MDD) with suicidal ideation or behavior (MDSI). METHODS: Adults with ≥1 claim for esketamine nasal spray and evidence of MDSI 12 months before/on the date of esketamine initiation (index date) were selected from Clarivate's Real World Data product (01/2016-03/2021). Patients initiated esketamine on/after 03/05/2019 (esketamine approval for treatment-resistant depression; later approved for MDSI on 08/05/2020) were included in the overall cohort. Esketamine access (measured as approved/abandoned/rejected claims) and use were described post-index; HRU and healthcare costs (2021 USD) were described over 6 months pre- and post-index. RESULTS: Among 269 patients in the overall cohort with esketamine pharmacy claims, 46.8% had the first pharmacy claim approved, 38.7% had it rejected, and 14.5% abandoned their claim; 169 patients were initiated on esketamine in the overall cohort (mean age 40.9 years, 62.1% female); 45.0% had ≥8 esketamine treatment sessions (recommended per label) with a mean [median] of 85.0 [58.5] days from index to 8th session (per label 28 days). Among 115 patients with ≥6 months of data post-index, in the 6-month pre- and post-index, respectively, 37.4 and 19.1% had all-cause inpatient admissions, 42.6 and 33.9% had emergency department visits, 92.2 and 81.7% had outpatient visits; mean ± standard deviation all-cause monthly total healthcare costs were $8,371±$15,792 and $6,486±$7,614, respectively. LIMITATIONS: This was a descriptive claims-based analysis; no formal statistical comparisons were performed due to limited sample size as data covered up to 24 months of esketamine use in the US clinical setting. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of patients experience access issues with first esketamine nasal spray treatment session. All-cause HRU and healthcare costs trend lower in the 6 months after relative to 6 months before esketamine initiation.

Major depressive disorder (MDD), or clinical depression, can sometimes be accompanied by preoccupation with suicide along with suicidal behavior. Patients diagnosed with MDD with suicidal ideation or behavior (MDSI) can vary in their reactions to this condition, and some never seek treatment. This study investigated treatment patterns in real-world clinics of a recently approved nasal spray therapy, esketamine, which helps improve depressive symptoms in patients with MDSI. The study results highlight challenges related to esketamine treatment access, particularly for the first treatment session. Still, healthcare resource utilization and healthcare costs trended lower following treatment initiation with esketamine in MDSI, suggesting the potential benefits of esketamine in mitigating the clinical and economic burden of MDSI among those who gain access to the drug. Streamlining the approval process by health plan providers to remove hindrances related to compliance with plan requirements may ensure more timely access to esketamine for MDSI.

Comparison of prostate-specific antigen response in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer initiated on apalutamide or abiraterone acetate: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Deep prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥90% reduction in PSA [PSA90]) is an important early response indicator of radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). This study compared PSA90 responses by 6 months between patients with mCSPC at first use of apalutamide or abiraterone acetate, both androgen receptor signaling inhibitors. METHODS: Clinical data from 77 community urology practices in the United States were analyzed. Patients with mCSPC were classified into treatment cohorts based on their first filled prescription (index date) for apalutamide or abiraterone acetate on or after September 17, 2019 (approval date of apalutamide for mCSPC). Patients were followed from the index date until the earliest of index treatment discontinuation, treatment switch, end of clinical activity, or end of data availability (September 17, 2021). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to ensure similarity in distribution of baseline characteristics between cohorts. PSA90 was defined as the earliest attainment of ≥90% reduction in PSA relative to baseline (most recent value within 13 weeks pre-index). Time to PSA90 between cohorts was compared by weighted Kaplan-Meier analysis and with Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients treated with apalutamide and 147 treated with abiraterone acetate met the study criteria. Patient characteristics were well balanced after IPTW. By 6 months post-index, patients initiated on apalutamide were 53% more likely to achieve PSA90 than those initiated on abiraterone acetate (P = 0.016). Similar results were observed by 9 and 12 months post-index (both P ≤ 0.019). The median time to PSA90 was 3.5 months for the apalutamide cohort and not reached for the abiraterone acetate cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world patients with mCSPC, significantly more patients achieved PSA90 with apalutamide than with abiraterone acetate, and this response was achieved earlier with apalutamide.

Post-COVID dyspnea: prevalence, predictors, and outcomes in a longitudinal, prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology, evolution, and associated outcomes of post-COVID dyspnea remain unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence, severity, and predictors of dyspnea 12 months following hospitalization for COVID-19, and to describe the respiratory, cardiac, and patient-reported outcomes in patients with post-COVID dyspnea. METHODS: We enrolled a prospective cohort of all adult patients admitted to 2 academic hospitals in Vancouver, Canada with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 during the first wave of COVID between March and June 2020. Dyspnea was measured 3, 6, and 12 months after initial symptom onset using the University of California San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients were included. Clinically meaningful dyspnea (baseline score > 10 points) was present in 49% of patients at 3 months and 46% at 12 months following COVID-19. Between 3 and 12 months post-COVID-19, 24% patients had a clinically meaningful worsening in their dyspnea, 49% had no meaningful change, and 28% had a clinically meaningful improvement in their dyspnea. There was worse sleep, mood, quality of life, and frailty in patients with clinically meaningful dyspnea at 12 months post-COVID infection compared to patients without dyspnea. There was no difference in PFT findings, troponin, or BNP comparing patients with and without clinically meaningful dyspnea at 12 months. Severity of dyspnea and depressive symptoms at 3 months predicted severity of dyspnea at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Post-COVID dyspnea is common, persistent, and negatively impacts quality of life. Mood abnormalities may play a causative role in post-COVID dyspnea in addition to potential cardiorespiratory abnormalities. Dyspnea and depression at initial follow-up predict longer-term post-COVID dyspnea, emphasizing that standardized dyspnea and mood assessment following COVID-19 may identify patients at high risk of post-COVID dyspnea and facilitating early and effective management.

Treatment patterns, healthcare utilization, and costs of patients with treatment-resistant depression initiated on esketamine intranasal spray and covered by US commercial health plans.

AIMS: To describe real-world use of esketamine (ESK) intranasal spray and healthcare outcomes among patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in the United States (US). METHODS: Adults with TRD initiated on ESK (index date) between 5 March 2019 (US approval date for TRD) and 31 October 2020 were sampled from IBM MarketScan Research Databases. TRD was defined as claims for ≥2 unique antidepressants during the same major depressive episode. Subgroups of the TRD cohort with comorbid cardiometabolic conditions, pain, anxiety disorder, and substance use disorder (SUD) were identified. Patients had ≥6 months of continuous health plan eligibility pre- and post-index. RESULTS: The TRD cohort comprised 269 patients; comorbidity subgroups included 123 (cardiometabolic), 144 (pain), 189 (anxiety disorder), and 58 (SUD) patients. Proportion of patients completing ≥8 ESK sessions (number of sessions in induction phase) was 61.3% in the TRD cohort and ranged from 60.2% (cardiometabolic subgroup) to 72.4% (SUD subgroup) in subgroups. Median frequency of induction sessions was every 5-8 days among the TRD cohort and subgroups. Mean mental health-related inpatient costs reduced from pre- to post-index periods in the TRD cohort (mean ± standard deviation [median] costs per-patient-per-6-months: $3,480 ± $13,328 [$0] pre-ESK initiation; $3,262 ± $16,666 [$0] post-ESK initiation; mean difference: -$218) and subgroups (largest decrease in cardiometabolic subgroup: $4,864 ± $14,271 [$0]; $2,792 ± $15,757 [$0]; -$2,072). Mean mental health-related emergency department (ED) costs decreased in the TRD cohort ($608 ± $2,525 [$0]; $269 ± $1,143 [$0]; -$339) and subgroups (largest decrease in the SUD subgroup: $1,403 ± $3,752 [$0]; $351 ± $868 [$0]; -$1,052). LIMITATIONS: This is a descriptive analysis; sample size for some comorbidity subgroups is small. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients completed ESK induction phase, and most dosing intervals were longer than the label recommendation. In this descriptive analysis, mental health-related inpatient and ED costs trended lower post-ESK initiation.

Long-Term Psoriasis Control with Guselkumab, Adalimumab, Secukinumab, or Ixekizumab in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Biologics have revolutionized the management of psoriasis, but response to treatment varies. Loss of treatment efficacy may occur over time, requiring treatment switching or escalation. Claims data on persistence may be informative of real-world treatment outcome. This analysis described persistence and rates of remission of patients with psoriasis initiated on current biologics. METHODS: Adults with psoriasis initiated (index date) on guselkumab, adalimumab, secukinumab, or ixekizumab between 07/13/2017 and 07/31/2020 were identified in the IBM MarketScan Databases. Discontinuation (or end of persistence) was defined as gaps in index biologic supply of more than twice the labelled dosing interval or mode days of supply (> 120 days for guselkumab and > 60 days for adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab). The proportion of patients reinitiating index therapy post-discontinuation and the proportion achieving remission (proxy definition: no claims for psoriasis-related treatment post-discontinuation among patients with ≥ 6 months of follow-up post-discontinuation) were assessed. RESULTS: There were 3408 patients in the guselkumab (mean age: 47.9 years old; female: 47.1%), 8017 in the adalimumab (47.4 years old; 54.1%), 6123 in the secukinumab (49.4 years old; 54.2%), and 3728 in the ixekizumab cohorts (49.1 years old; 50.3%). The median time to discontinuation was 26.2 months in the guselkumab cohort and 9.9, 12.4, and 12.5 months in adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab cohorts, respectively. Among those who discontinued index therapy, 22.9% in the guselkumab cohort and 21.1%, 31.9%, and 32.0% in the adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab cohorts reinitiated it. Remission rates were 17.2% in the guselkumab cohort and 12.4%, 10.5%, and 9.0% in adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on guselkumab showed trends toward better persistence and higher remission rates relative to other biologics. Finding patients who may be in remission suggests potential disease modification with current agents.

Synergetic effect of Azacitidine and Sorafenib in treatment of a case of myeloid neoplasm with sole chromosomal abnormality t(8;22)(p11.2;q11.2)/BCR-FGFR1 rearrangement.

The sole t(8;22)(p11.2;q11.2)/BCR- FGFR1 chromosomal abnormality formerly known as aCML is an extremely rare disease entity with a history of rapid progression. Though patients resemble phenotypically chronic myeloid leukemia, the treatment of patients with sole BCR-FGFR1 rearrangement are still challenging for clinicians due to rapid progressive nature and unavailability of uniform treatment guidelines. In present case study, we describe a case of myeloid neoplasm with sole chromosomal abnormality of t(8;22)(p11.2;q11.2)/BCR-FGFR1 rearrangement which is successfully managed by Sorafenib with Azacitidine. Hence our case report suggests that combination of Sorafenib and Azacitidine treatment is effective in sole BCR-FGFR1 rearrangement, however this combination therapy should be studied in large clinical trials.