Defining Clinical Meaningfulness in Huntington's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) represents the smallest within-person change on an outcome measure considered meaningful to the patient. Anchor-based MCID methods evaluate the relationship between changes in an outcome measure and the patient-reported clinical importance of that change. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to estimate longitudinal MCID for clinically relevant outcome measures for individuals who have Stages 2 or 3 disease as measured by the Huntington's Disease Integrated Staging System (HD-ISS). METHODS: Data were drawn from Enroll-HD, a large global longitudinal, observational study and clinical research platform for HD family members. We analyzed HD participants (N = 11,070) by staging group using time frames ranging from 12 to 36 months. The anchor was the physical component summary score of the 12-item short-form health survey. HD-relevant motor, cognitive, and functional outcome measures were independent, external criterion outcomes. Complex analysis was conducted using multiple, independent, linear mixed effect regression models with decomposition to calculate MCID for each external criterion by group. RESULTS: MCID estimates varied by progression stage. MCID estimates increased as stage progression increased and as the time frame increased. MCID values for key HD measures are provided. For example, starting in HD-ISS stage 2, meaningful group change over 24 months equals an average increase of 3.6 or more points on the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale Total Motor Score. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine MCID estimation thresholds for HD. The results can be used to improve clinical interpretation of study outcomes and enable treatment recommendations to support clinical decision-making and clinical trial methodology. © 2023 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs in individuals with Huntington's disease by disease stage in a US population.

AIMS: To quantify healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs by disease stage in individuals with Huntington's disease (HD) in a US population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial, Multi-State Medicaid, and Medicare Supplemental Databases between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2018. Individuals with an HD claim between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2017 were selected. Index date was the date of first HD diagnosis. Individuals were required to have continuous enrollment for ≥ 12 months pre-index, 3 months post-index, and have no pre-index HD claims. All-cause HRU and costs per patient per month (PPPM) (overall and stratified by disease stage) were assessed for individuals with HD. RESULTS: A total of 2,669 individuals with HD were identified. Of these, 1,432 (53.7%), 689 (25.8%), and 548 (20.5%) had early-, middle-, and late-stage HD at baseline, respectively. Mean HRU PPPM by post-index HD stage increased with disease stage for outpatient visits, pharmacy claims, and HD-related pharmacy claims (p < 0.05 for all). Mean inpatient visits and emergency room visits PPPM were highest in individuals with middle-stage HD (p <0.05 for all). Mean total all-cause healthcare cost PPPM for individuals with HD was $2,889, and it was significantly higher in middle-stage individuals, at $7,988, compared with early- and late-stage individuals, at $3,726 and $5,125, respectively; p <0.0001. LIMITATIONS: In the absence of disease staging information in administrative claims data, staging was based on the presence of clinical markers in claims. Our evaluations didn't include the indirect costs of HD, which may be substantial as HD typically affects people at their peak earning potential. CONCLUSIONS: HRU and costs of care are high among individuals with HD, particularly among those with middle- and late-stage disease. This indicates that the disease burden in HD increases with disease stage, highlighting the need for interventions that can slow or prevent disease progression.

Health care resource utilization and costs among individuals with vs without Huntington disease in a US population.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying the extent of health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs associated with Huntington disease (HD) is vital for providers, decisionmakers, and payers to understand unmet treatment needs and to ensure limited resources can be used to benefit the maximum number of people with HD. OBJECTIVE: To quantify HCRU and costs for people with HD, overall and by disease stage, and compare these with non-HD controls. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial, Multi-State Medicaid, and Medicare Supplemental Databases from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2018. People with an HD claim between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were selected for this analysis and matched with non-HD controls for comparison. The HD cohort and the non-HD controls were exact matched on their follow-up duration and propensity score matched 1:4 to create the final analytical cohort. Index date was the first HD diagnosis for the HD cohort (proxy index date assigned to controls), and all individuals were required to have continuous enrollment for 12 or more months pre-index (baseline) and 3 or more months post-index. Proportions of all-cause HCRU (ie, outpatient visits, inpatient visits, emergency department visits, pharmacy fills, radiology visits, and physical/occupational therapy visits) in the 6-months post-index and HCRU counts and costs per patient per month (PPPM) over the entire follow-up were calculated for each cohort. RESULTS: A total of 2,473 individuals with HD and 9,522 matched non-HD controls were identified. HCRU in 6 months post-index was significantly greater in people with HD compared with non-HD controls for all health care service categories; P < 0.0001. The mean number of HCRU PPPM for all measured healthcare services was significantly higher in people with HD compared with non-HD controls (P < 0.001). Mean total costs (2018 USD PPPM) for the HD cohort ($2,260 [SD = $4,682]) were twice the total costs in the non-HD cohort ($1,056 [SD = $3,078]) (P < 0.0001) and were highest across all disease stages. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides current comprehensive HCRU and cost estimates in individuals with HD relative to those without the disease, thus demonstrating the high economic burden imposed by HD. DISCLOSURES: Dr Ta: Employment with Genentech (at time of study) and stock options with Roche; Dr To: Employment and stock options/dividends with Genentech; Dr Patel: Employment and stock options with Roche/Genentech; Dr Fuller: Employment with CHDI Management/CHDI Foundation; Mr Surinach: Employment with Genesis Research (which receives consulting fees from Genentech/Roche); Dr Abbass: Employment and stock options with Genentech; Dr Exuzides: Employment and stock options with Roche/Genentech; and Ms Luo: Employment with CHDI Management/CHDI Foundation. This study was funded by Genentech Inc. The authors thank Greg Rowe of Chrysalis Medical Communications for providing medical writing support, which was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP3) guidelines (http://www.ismpp.org/gpp3).

Establishing Equivalence of Electronic Clinician-Reported Outcome Measures.

BACKGROUND: Electronic administration of clinician-reported outcomes (eClinROs) has advantages over paper-based methods, but the mode of administration change has the potential to affect the validity of the scale. The literature on migration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) suggests that there are different levels of modification, which necessitate different approaches to demonstrating mode equivalence. However, little has been written on the migration of ClinROs to electronic administration. METHODS: We propose a method of comparing paper and electronic versions of scales that includes a comparison based on content and a comparison based on format. The determination of whether the eClinRO has undergone minor, moderate, or substantial modification will drive the necessary studies required for validation. RESULTS: The unique characteristics of ClinROs suggest 2 additional types of modifications, including functionality adaptation and adaptation of instructions. CONCLUSIONS: In many respects, the migration of a ClinRO to electronic administration is similar to that of a PRO. This article has explored the ways in which there might be special considerations for ClinROs that have not been elaborated for PROs.