Discharge status and post-discharge healthcare costs after skeletal-related event hospitalizations among medicare patients with bone metastatic solid tumors or multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have quantified direct inpatient costs of skeletal-related events (SREs); however, costs associated with subsequent post-SRE care have not been examined. METHODS: We identified two study cohorts using 2011-2015 Medicare 20% sample data: patients diagnosed with 1) bone metastases from solid tumors or 2) multiple myeloma (MM), both with SRE-related hospitalization discharge dates January 1, 2011-September 30, 2015. We assessed discharge status and costs from discharge to the earliest of death, end of Medicare enrollment, or December 31, 2015. Discharge status was defined as: skilled nursing facility (SNF), rehabilitation facility, hospice, home health agency (HHA), long-term care (LTC) nursing home, LTC hospital, or rehospitalization within or after 30 days. Percentage, stay duration, and Medicare costs were calculated for each setting. All analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: We identified 7988 bone metastases patients and 4277 MM patients discharged from index SRE-related hospitalizations; corresponding mean ages were 76.9 and 76.6 years. The largest proportion of bone metastases patients were discharged to SNF (32.9%), then HHA (13.7%), hospice (13.5%), and LTC (11.3%); the pattern was similar for MM patients (SNF, 35.9%; HHA, 18.2%; hospice, 7.2%; LTC, 1.5%). Almost 10% of patients in both cohorts were re-hospitalized within 30 days. Mean Medicare cost per patient per facility stay was < $10,000 for hospice, and from $15,517 for LTC nursing home to $49,729 for LTC hospital for MM patients. CONCLUSION: Most elderly cancer patients (>75%) require healthcare facility support after SRE-related hospitalization, with substantial associated costs. Post-discharge management is clinically and economically important.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with multiple myeloma with and without skeletal-related events.

AIM: To compare healthcare resource use and costs between newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients with and without skeletal-related events (SREs). METHODS: Adults newly diagnosed with MM (1 January 2006 and 30 June 2017) with at least 12 months continuous health coverage prior to diagnosis were identified using the IBM MarketScan administrative claims. To control for baseline differences, NDMM patients with SREs were propensity score matched to NDMM patients without SREs. Outcomes included annual HRU and costs during follow-up along with number and type of SREs (SRE cohort only). Patients with SREs were stratified by number of SREs, and annual SRE-related costs were reported. Student's t test and Chi-squared test were used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Before matching, the 6648 patients in the SRE cohort had more comorbidities, were more likely to have MM treatment, and had higher pre-index healthcare costs than the 7458 patients in the non-SRE cohort. After matching, cohorts of 3432 patients were well balanced on baseline characteristics. Patients with SREs (vs. without SREs) had significantly higher inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy HRU. Patients with SREs had significantly higher mean annual all-cause healthcare costs ($213,361 vs. $94,896, p < 0.001) with hospitalization being the leading driver of increased costs (38.7% of total). Among 6648 patients with SREs, the mean annual SRE-related healthcare costs were $39,603, $45,463, and $50,111 for patients with one, two, and three or more events, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NDMM patients with SREs have more than twice the all-cause healthcare costs than matched patients without SREs. Costs increase with the number of SRE events.

Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States.

Aims: Bone complications (also known as skeletal-related events [SREs]) pose significant health and financial burdens on patients with bone metastases. Denosumab demonstrated superiority over zoledronic acid in delaying the time to first SRE. This study examined the lifetime cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid from both US payer and societal perspectives.Methods: This analysis used a lifetime Markov model and included patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors and bone metastases. The societal perspective included direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs associated with denosumab and zoledronic acid; the payer perspective included direct medical costs only. Bone complication rates for each tumor type were estimated from three pivotal phase 3 studies and modified to reflect real-world incidence.Results: From a societal perspective, compared with zoledronic acid, denosumab use resulted in an incremental cost of $9,043, an incremental benefit of 0.128 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), a lifetime cost per QALY of $70,730, and a net monetary benefit (NMB) of $10,135 in favor of denosumab. Direct drug costs for denosumab ($28,352) were higher than zoledronic acid/untreated ($578), but were offset by reduced costs associated with bone complications. From a payer perspective, denosumab use was associated with an incremental cost of $13,396, and an incremental benefit of 0.128 QALYs, for a cost of $104,778 per QALY and an NMB of $5,782 in favor of denosumab.Limitations: Some model inputs had limited information and, given that the results may be sensitive to changes in these inputs, our findings should be interpreted within the context of the data inputs and modeling assumptions used in the analysis.Conclusions: Denosumab is a cost-effective option to prevent bone complications in patients with solid tumors when considering both payer and broader societal perspectives.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with multiple myeloma in four European countries: Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy.

Aim: The approved indication for denosumab (120 mg) was expanded in 2018 to include skeletal-related event (SRE) prevention in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Therefore, a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing denosumab with zoledronic acid (ZA) for SRE prevention in patients with MM from the national healthcare system perspective in a representative sample of European countries: Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy. Methods: The XGEVA global economic model for patients with MM was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for denosumab vs ZA over a lifetime horizon. Clinical inputs were derived from the denosumab vs ZA randomized, phase 3 study ("20090482") in patients newly-diagnosed with MM, and comprised real-world adjusted SRE rates, serious adverse event (SAE) rates, treatment duration, dose intensity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Economic inputs comprised country-specific denosumab and ZA acquisition and administration costs, SRE and SAE management costs, and discount rates. Health utility decrements associated with MM disease progression, SRE and SAE occurrence, and route of administration were included. Results: Estimated ICERs (cost per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) for denosumab vs ZA in Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy were €26,294, €17,737, €6,982, and €27,228, respectively. Using 1-3 times gross domestic product (GDP) per capita per QALY as willingness to pay thresholds, denosumab was 69-94%, 84-96%, 79-96%, and 50-92% likely to be cost-effective vs ZA, respectively. Limitations: Economic inputs were derived from various sources, and time to event inputs were extrapolated from 20090482 study data. Conclusions: Denosumab is cost-effective vs ZA for SRE prevention in patients with MM in Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy, based on often-adopted World Health Organization thresholds. This conclusion is robust to changes in model parameters and assumptions. Cost-effectiveness estimates varied across the four countries, reflecting differences in healthcare costs and national economic evaluation guidelines.

A real-world study assessing the use of bone-targeted agents and their impact on bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer treated in clinical practice in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases (BMs) are common in patients with prostate cancer and can lead to skeletal-related events (SREs), which are associated with increased pain and reduced quality of life (QoL). Bone-targeted agents (BTAs), such as zoledronic acid and denosumab, reduce the incidence of SREs and delay progression of bone pain. METHODS: We evaluated the management of BMs and pain in six European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK) using the Adelphi Prostate Cancer Disease Specific Programme. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were used to assess the impact of BMs on pain and QoL. RESULTS: In total, 358 physicians completed Patient Record Forms, of whom 246 were oncologists and 112 were urologists. Data were collected on 3667 patients with prostate cancer, including 1971 with BMs and 551 with metastases at sites other than bone (non-BMs). PROs were assessed in 573 patients with BMs and 220 with non-BMs. Most patients with BMs (74%) received a BTA and 53% received treatment within 3 months of BM diagnosis. Patients treated by oncologists were more likely than those treated by urologists to receive a BTA (78% vs. 60%) and to have treatment initiated within 3 months of BM diagnosis (56% vs. 43%). For patients who did not receive a BTA, the main reasons for not treating were very recent BM diagnosis and a perceived low risk of bone complications. Data collected by physicians showed that most patients with BMs (97%) were taking analgesics, with 30% receiving strong opioids. Despite this, 70% were currently experiencing bone pain and 28% were experiencing moderate to severe pain. PRO pain measures showed that 70% of patients with BMs were experiencing moderate to extreme pain, suggesting a disparity between pain levels reported by physicians and by patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients with BMs receive a BTA, there remain a proportion of patients who are not receiving adequate treatment to prevent SREs or manage pain. Oncologists are more likely to adhere to clinical guidelines than urologists for the prescription of BTAs. Bone pain is common and undertreated. Increasing awareness of SRE prevention and bone pain management might improve patient care.

Bone-targeted agent treatment patterns and the impact of bone metastases on patients with advanced breast cancer in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Bone metastases are common among patients with advanced breast cancer, putting patients at increased risk of skeletal-related events (SREs). This study described impact of bone metastases, utilization of bone-targeted agents (BTAs) and physicians' decision processes for BTA use in advanced breast cancer. METHODS: Data were collected using the Adelphi Breast Cancer Disease-Specific Programme in the United States. Physicians completed a detailed record for eligible patients (women ≥18 years, with stage IIIB-IV breast cancer). RESULTS: Data available from 1276 patients with advanced breast cancer included 485 (38%) with bone metastases. Most (80%) reported pain at bone metastasis diagnosis; of those reporting pain, 55% reported moderate to severe pain. Among patients with bone metastasis, 69% received a BTA. Reasons for initiating BTAs were bone pain (32%) and an estimated high risk of SREs (25%). Reasons for not treating with BTAs were very recent diagnosis (37%), poor Karnofsky performance status (14%), perceived low risk of SREs (11%) and short life expectancy (11%). Zoledronic acid (48%) and denosumab (42%) were commonly used BTAs; the main reasons for initiating BTA treatment were long-term safety (28% and 32%, respectively) and efficacy in delaying SREs (15% and 31%, respectively). The analysis was not adjusted for age or other possible confounders. CONCLUSION: Bone pain is a common and sometimes severe symptom of bone metastases in advanced breast cancer and a common reason for initiating BTA treatment. Safety and efficacy were the main factors considered by physicians when selecting BTAs.

Examination of burden of skeletal-related events in patients naive to denosumab and intravenous bisphosphonate therapy in bone metastases from solid tumors population.

OBJECTIVES: Skeletal-related events (SREs), i.e. pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, surgery and radiation to bone, are serious skeletal complications that occur frequently in patients with bone metastases (BMs) from solid tumors (STs). Clinical guidelines recommend treatment with denosumab and intravenous bisphosphonates (IVBPs) to prevent SREs. However, therapy may be delayed by physicians due to perceived low risk of SREs or for other clinical reasons. This study estimated SRE incidence rates in treatment-naive (i.e. no denosumab or IVBPs) patients with BMs from STs in the US. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study adult patients with diagnoses of BM and ST between 1 January 2008 and 31 March 2015 were identified from MarketScan Databases. All patients had ≥6 months of data before the first BM diagnosis date (index date) and were followed for ≥6 months from the index date until the earliest of inpatient death, initiation of denosumab/IVBP therapy or end of data. The Kaplan-Meier curve was used to estimate cumulative incidence of SREs. The incremental healthcare cost of SREs was estimated and compared to propensity score matched non-SRE patients. RESULTS: A total of 47,052 patients met the study criteria. Using the Kaplan-Meier method the cumulative incidences of SREs among treatment-naïve patients were 39.9% (95% confidence internal [CI]: 39.4-40.4), 46.3% (95% CI: 45.8-46.8), 52.5% (95% CI: 51.9-53.2) and 59.4% (95% CI: 58.6-60.3) by month 6, 12, 24 and 48 post index date, respectively. The SRE group was associated with higher all-cause total healthcare cost per-patient-per-year compared to those without SREs ($168,277 vs. $101,020, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half (46.3%) of the treatment-naïve population with BMs from STs experience SREs within 1 year of the first BM diagnosis. SREs were associated with an average $67,257 additional healthcare cost annually. Given the high SRE burden in these patients, early initiation of prophylactic therapy should be considered.

Healthcare resource use and costs associated with chronic kidney disease in US private insurance patients with multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Within a median 1.2 years after patients have an initial diagnosis with multiple myeloma, up to 61% were diagnosed with renal impairment and 50% were diagnosed with chronic kidney disease. This study estimated economic burden associated with chronic kidney disease in multiple myeloma patients in the US. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients ≥18 years old with ≥1 inpatient or ≥ 2 outpatient multiple myeloma diagnoses between 1 January 2008 and 31 March 2015 were identified from MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Chronic kidney disease patients had ≥1 diagnosis of chronic kidney disease Stages 1-5 (first chronic kidney disease diagnosis date = index date) on or after the first multiple myeloma diagnosis, and were propensity score matched 1:1 to multiple myeloma patients without chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, dialysis, or other type of chronically impaired renal function. All patients had ≥six-month continuous enrollment prior to index date and were followed for ≥one month from index date until the earliest of inpatient death, end of continuous enrollment, or end of the study period (30 September 2015). The per-patient per-year healthcare resource utilization and costs were measured during follow-up. Costs were total reimbursed amount in 2016 US dollars. RESULTS: A total of 2541 multiple myeloma patients with chronic kidney disease stages 1-5 and 2541 matched controls met the study criteria and were respectively 69.3 and 69.6 years, 54.5% and 55.3% men, and had 572.2 and 533.4 mean days of follow up. Compared to controls, chronic kidney disease patients had significantly (all P < 0.001) higher proportions (57.1% vs. 32.1%) and frequency (1.2 vs. 0.5) of inpatient admissions, frequency of emergency room visits (5.1 vs. 3.3), and total costs ($106,634 vs. $71,880). Sensitivity analyses found that patients with chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, or dialysis had $78,455 ( P < 0.001) higher costs (per-patient per-year) than matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden associated with chronic kidney disease in patients with multiple myeloma was estimated to be between $34,754 and $78,455 per-patient per-year. Given its substantial clinical and economic impact, preservation of renal function is important in multiple myeloma patient care.

Bone-targeted agent treatment patterns and the impact of bone metastases on patients with advanced breast cancer in real-world practice in six European countries.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases (BMs) are common in patients with breast cancer and can lead to skeletal-related events (SREs), which are associated with increased pain and reduced quality of life (QoL). Bone-targeted agents (BTAs), like zoledronic acid and denosumab, reduce the incidence of SREs and delay progression of bone pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the management of BMs and pain in six European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and UK) using the Adelphi Breast Cancer Disease Specific Programme, which included a physician survey and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to assess the impact of BMs on pain and QoL. RESULTS: 301 physicians completed patient record forms for 2984 patients with advanced breast cancer; 1408 with BMs and 1136 with metastases at sites other than bone (non-BMs). Most patients with BMs (88%) received a BTA, with 81% receiving treatment during 3 months following BM diagnosis. For those who did not receive a BTA, the main reasons given were: very recent BM diagnosis, perceived low risk of bone complications, and short life expectancy. Most patients with BMs (68%) were experiencing bone pain and, of these, 97% were taking analgesics (including 28% receiving strong opioids). Despite this, moderate to severe pain was reported in 20% of patients who were experiencing pain. PROs were assessed in 766 patients with advanced breast cancer (392 with BMs, 374 with non-BMs). Overall, patients with BMs reported worse pain and QoL outcomes than those with non-BMs, those not receiving a BTA reported worse pain. CONCLUSION: Despite the large proportion of patients receiving BTAs in this study, some patients with BMs are still not receiving early treatment to prevent SREs or to manage pain. Improving physicians' understanding of the role of BTAs and the importance of early treatment following BM diagnosis has the potential to improve patient care.

Chemotherapy Dose Intensity and Overall Survival Among Patients With Advanced Breast or Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The effects of chemotherapy dose intensity on patient outcomes in advanced cancer are not well understood. We studied the association between chemotherapy relative dose intensity (RDI) and overall survival (OS) among patients with advanced breast or ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adults with advanced breast or ovarian cancer who received first-line myelosuppressive chemotherapy (January 2007 to December 2010) in US Oncology Network community practices. Dose delays ≥ 7 days, dose reductions ≥ 15%, and RDI relative to standard regimens were described. OS was measured by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Among 874 patients with advanced breast cancer, 33.2% experienced dose delays ≥ 7 days, 48.7% experienced dose reductions ≥ 15%, and 38.9% had RDI < 85%. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1/2 versus 0 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.82) and triple-negative status (HR = 3.14; 95% CI, 1.15-8.62) were significantly associated with mortality. Among 170 patients with advanced ovarian cancer, 43.5% experienced dose delays ≥ 7 days, 48.2% experienced dose reductions ≥ 15%, and 46.5% had RDI < 85%. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, dose reductions ≥ 15% (HR = 1.94; 95% CI, 1.09-3.46) and other tumor histology (vs. nonserous adenocarcinoma; HR = 3.55; 95% CI, 1.38-9.09) were significantly associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: Dose delays, dose reductions, and reduced RDI were common. In advanced breast cancer, health status and triple-negative disease were significantly associated with mortality. In advanced ovarian cancer, dose reductions and tumor histology were significantly associated with mortality. These results can help identify potential risk factors and characterize the effect of chemotherapy dose modification strategies on mortality.

Economic burden of skeletal-related events in patients with multiple myeloma: analysis of US commercial claims database.

AIMS: To estimate incremental healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with skeletal-related events (SREs) secondary to multiple myeloma (MM), and HRU and cost differences in patients with one vs multiple SREs. METHODS: Adults with MM diagnosis between January 1, 2010-December 31, 2014, with benefits coverage ≥12 months pre- and ≥6 months post-diagnosis were followed to last coverage date or December 31, 2015, excluding patients with prior anti-myeloma treatment or cancers. SREs were identified by diagnosis or procedure codes (pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation, or surgery to the bone). SRE patients (index = first post-diagnosis SRE) were propensity score matched 1:1 to patients without SRE (assigned pseudo-index) using baseline characteristics, and ≥1 month of continuous enrollment after index/pseudo-index date was required. Per-patient-per year (PPPY) HRU and costs (2016 US$) were determined for inpatient, outpatient, emergency department (ED), and outpatient pharmacy services during follow-up. Wilcoxon signed rank for means and McNemar's tests for proportions were used to assess differences. Negative binomial regression and generalized linear regression analyses estimated differences in HRU and costs, respectively, for the comparison of single vs multiple SREs. RESULTS: Each cohort included 848 patients (mean age = 61 - 62 years, 57% male) with no significant differences in pre-index demographic or clinical characteristics between matched cohorts. Versus non-SRE patients, SRE patients had significantly higher PPPY use (p < .0001) of inpatient hospitalizations, ED visits, outpatient pharmacy, and higher direct medical costs ($188,723 vs $108,160, p < .0001). Adjusted PPPY total costs were $209,820 in patients with multiple SREs; $159,797 in patients with one SRE. LIMITATIONS: SRE misclassification and residual confounding are possible. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with MM, average annual costs were substantially higher in patients with SRE compared with matched non-SRE patients. The economic burden of SRE increased further with multiple events.

Utilization of agents to prevent skeletal-related events among patients with multiple myeloma: analysis of real-world data.

PURPOSE: This study examined real-world utilization patterns of bone-targeted agents (BTA) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, adults with an MM diagnosis recorded in 2012-2014 were identified from electronic health records in the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database. Patients received zoledronic acid (ZA) or pamidronate (PA) on/after first MM diagnosis recorded in the study period, had no BTA use in prior 6 months, and were followed through earliest of May 31, 2015 or last clinic visit. Patients with any solid tumor diagnosis were excluded. Time to BTA initiation, compliance (≥ 12 administrations in a year), switching, and non-persistence (switch or ≥ 90-day gap in therapy) were described by agent and follow-up period. RESULTS: Among 9,617 patients with MM, 3,735 (38.8%) received a BTA. Most patients (90.9%) received ZA, with first BTA use generally seen within 3 months of first observed MM diagnosis (ZA 76.1%, PA 75.1%). A minority of ZA (27.4%) and PA (23.0%) patients were compliant in Year 1, with lower compliance in Year 2 (19.8% and 15.6%, respectively). The median time to non-persistence was 16.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.4-17.4) months for ZA and 13.8 (95% CI 11.5-15.4) months for PA. Persistence was 86% at 6 months and 34% at 24 months for ZA, and 77% and 30% for PA, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the possibility of suboptimal prevention of skeletal-related events due to non-compliant dosing and non-persistence after patients initiate BTA therapy.

Renal impairment and use of nephrotoxic agents in patients with multiple myeloma in the clinical practice setting in the United States.

Renal impairment is a common complication of multiple myeloma and deterioration in renal function or renal failure may complicate clinical management. This retrospective study in patients with multiple myeloma using an electronic medical records database was designed to estimate the prevalence of renal impairment (single occurrence of estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 on or after multiple myeloma diagnosis) and chronic kidney disease (at least two eGFR values <60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 after multiple myeloma diagnosis that had been measured at least 90 days apart), and to describe the use of nephrotoxic agents. Eligible patients had a first diagnosis of multiple myeloma (ICD-9CM: 203.0x) between January 1, 2012 and March 31, 2015 with no prior diagnoses in the previous 6 months. Of 12,370 eligible patients, the prevalence of both renal impairment and chronic kidney disease during the follow-up period was high (61% and 50%, respectively), and developed rapidly following the diagnosis of multiple myeloma (6-month prevalence of 47% and 27%, respectively). Eighty percent of patients with renal impairment developed chronic kidney disease over the follow-up period, demonstrating a continuing course of declining kidney function after multiple myeloma diagnosis. Approximately 40% of patients with renal impairment or chronic kidney disease received nephrotoxic agents, the majority of which were bisphosphonates. As renal dysfunction may impact the clinical management of multiple myeloma and is associated with poor prognosis, the preservation of renal function is critical, warranting non-nephrotoxic alternatives where possible in managing this population.

Determination of mild, moderate, and severe pain interference in patients with cancer.

Effective assessment and management of pain in patients with cancer is strengthened by the patient's report of how much pain interferes with daily functioning. This requires a clear delineation of different levels of pain interference. We derived optimal cutpoints for differentiating between mild, moderate, and severe pain interference assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and describe the prevalence and characteristics of pain-induced functional impairment in patients with cancer. Data were pooled across 3 Phase III pivotal trials. Patient-completed questionnaires included the EuroQol 5 dimensions questionnaire (EQ5D), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Measure (FACT-G), and BPI. Optimal cutpoints for categorizing pain interference into 3 levels were derived using analysis of variance, with different cutpoint sets for BPI total interference (BPI-PITS, the average score of all 7 items), activity-related interference (BPI-WAW, the average score of work, general activity, and walking), and mood-related interference (BPI-REM, the average score of relations with others, enjoyment of life, and mood) as independent variables and EQ5D-visual analog scale and total FACT-G score as dependent variables. To validate the cutpoints, we assessed whether interference categories were in concordance with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) levels. The optimal cutpoints were (2,5) for BPI-PITS, (2,6) for BPI-WAW, and (2,5) for BPI-REM. The mild (<2), moderate (2-5 or 2-6), and severe (>5 or >6) pain interference groups were significantly concordant with ECOG-PS levels (P < 0.0001). We empirically derived patient-reported pain interference categories in relation to clinician-rated performance status. These cutpoints may facilitate the conduct and interpretation of clinical evaluation, symptom epidemiology, and clinical trials.

Longitudinal patterns of bone-targeted agent use among patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States.

PURPOSE: This study examined real-world long-term use of guideline-recommended bone targeted agents (BTA) among patients with metastatic solid tumors. METHODS: Adults with a solid tumor diagnosis followed by a bone metastasis diagnosis in 2012-2014 were identified from electronic medical records in the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database. Patients initiated zoledronic acid (ZA) or denosumab on or after the bone metastasis diagnosis and were followed through last clinic visit by 30 June 2015. We describe time to BTA initiation, compliance (≥12 administrations in a year), switching, and non-persistence (switch or ≥90 day gap in therapy), by agent and follow-up period. RESULTS: The majority of the 14,881 study patients (50% female, 65% age ≥65 years) had breast (33%), prostate (26%), or lung (26%) tumors. Half of all patients initiated on each agent, with denosumab initiations exceeding ZA initiations in 2014. Most (91% denosumab, 93% ZA) initiations occurred within 3 months of bone metastasis diagnosis. At 1, 2, and 3 years post-initiation, denosumab patients were less likely to switch agents (4, 3, and 1% versus 14, 12, and 11%) and more likely to be compliant (50, 37, and 31% versus 41, 26, and 6%). Median time to non-persistence was 25.9 months for denosumab and 17.2 months for ZA, p < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study reporting long-term treatment patterns for the two primary BTAs used in the USA. The greater compliance and longer persistence observed among denosumab patients may improve treatment effectiveness achieved in the real-world setting.

Healthcare resource use and costs associated with renal impairment in US patients with bone metastases from solid tumors.

Introduction During cancer progression, more than half of patients develop renal insufficiency, including chronic kidney disease. The primary and secondary objectives of this study were to estimate healthcare resource use and costs, respectively, associated with renal impairment in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors in the United States. Methods and materials This was a retrospective, observational cohort study conducted using administrative claims data for individuals with solid tumors and bone metastases. Control patients were matched to renal impairment patients using propensity scores (ratio up to 3:1) based on demographics, clinical characteristics, and baseline costs. Average per-patient per-year healthcare resource utilization and costs (total costs and cost components; 2013 dollars) were reported. Results In total, 2616 renal impairment patients were matched to 7211 control patients. Renal impairment patients had greater healthcare resource use compared with controls, including a greater mean number of hospital admissions (4.4 versus 2.1), longer average stay per hospital admission (7.4 versus 6.5 days), as well as greater mean number of physician office visits (22.9 versus 18.8), emergency department visits (3.1 versus 2.0), and hospital-based outpatient visits (18.8 versus 16.0) compared with control patients. Total costs were > $50,000 higher among renal impairment patients ($142,267 versus $88,839; P < 0.001), with hospital costs accounting for $72,557 for renal impairment patients, and $27,858 for control patients ( P < 0.001). Conclusion The healthcare resource use and costs associated with renal impairment in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors is high; efforts to reduce renal impairment in this population, including the potential avoidance of nephrotoxic agents, are warranted.

The Effectiveness of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Molecular Monitoring Patterns in Newly Diagnosed Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in the Community Setting.

BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treated in clinical trials, including response to therapy, may not be representative of those treated in a community setting. Thus, we sought to determine the real-world effectiveness of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in CML by evaluating response rates, all-cause discontinuation, and adherence. Response monitoring patterns were also analyzed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational study, using the McKesson Specialty Health/US Oncology Network (MSH/USON) iKnowMed electronic health record database and medical charts, identified newly diagnosed CML patients who received first-line imatinib, dasatinib, or nilotinib from July 2007 to March 2011, and were then followed for ≥ 18 months. RESULTS: Three hundred patients met study criteria (222 imatinib-treated, 34 dasatinib-treated, and 44 nilotinib-treated in the first-line). Molecular and cytogenetic response assessments were conducted less frequently than recommended (40% never had cytogenetic or molecular monitoring at any time). Patients treated with either dasatinib or nilotinib experienced higher response rates by 6, 12, and 18 months, faster time to major molecular response, and a significantly lower rate of all-cause treatment discontinuation within 18 months relative to imatinib-treated patients. Approximately 56% of all patients were adherent to tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. CONCLUSION: Dasatinib and nilotinib were more effective than imatinib as first-line therapy for CML in a community setting, as observed in descriptive and univariate analyses. The frequency of cytogenetic and molecular monitoring was lower than that recommended by current guidelines, including patients with no molecular or cytogenetic assessments during the 18-month follow-up. Therefore, MSH/USON is working toward improving compliance with response monitoring guidelines.

Sequencing of Cabazitaxel and Abiraterone Acetate After Docetaxel in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Multicenter Community-Based US Oncology Practices.

BACKGROUND: Optimal sequencing of cabazitaxel (C) and abiraterone acetate (A) after docetaxel (D) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unclear. We assessed treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with mCRPC receiving different sequences of A or C, or both, after administration of D. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted of US Oncology Network iKnowMed (iKM) electronic health record (EHR) data to assess patients with mCRPC who received treatment with D and were subsequently treated with C or A, or both, between April 2011 and May 2012. Patients received 2 or 3 drugs: DA, DC, DAC, or DCA. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method from the start to the end of second-line therapy after administration of D (TTF1) and to the end of combined second- and third-line therapy (TTF2) for 3-drug sequences. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models evaluated the impact of baseline clinical prognostic factors and treatment sequence on OS and TTF. RESULTS: Of 350 patients who were treated with D and subsequent therapies, 183 (52.3%) received DA, 54 (15.4%) received DC, 77 (22.0%) received DCA, and 36 (10.3%) received DAC. In a multivariable analysis, adjusted comparisons suggested that 3-drug sequences were associated with improved OS versus 2-drug sequences (hazard ratio [HR], 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.092-0.476; P = .0002). There were no statistically significant differences in OS and TTF for DC versus DA, and OS was significantly greater for DCA versus DAC (HR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.022-0.733; P = .0210). More cycles of C were administered in DCA than in DAC (median 6 vs. 4; t test P < .0001), whereas the duration of A treatment was similar. CONCLUSION: Administration of 3 agents in the DCA sequence was more optimal for treating mCRPC in this hypothesis-generating study.

First-Line and Sequential Use of Pazopanib Followed by Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitor Therapy Among Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in a US Community Oncology Setting.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated that pazopanib prolongs progression-free survival (PFS), with an acceptable safety profile, for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). The efficacy of second-line mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors in pazopanib-treated patients has also been evaluated in clinical trials; however, few studies have evaluated first-line pazopanib or second-line mTOR inhibitors in real-world settings. The present study evaluated the outcomes of first-line pazopanib, and pazopanib followed by mTOR inhibitors, in a community oncology setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present study was a retrospective analysis of eligible patients in US Oncology's iKnowMed electronic health records database who had been treated for aRCC from November 1, 2009 to August 31, 2012. The patients received first-line therapy with pazopanib (cohort 1), followed by second-line therapy with either everolimus or temsirolimus (cohort 2). The key outcomes included overall survival (OS), PFS, adverse events (AEs), treatment patterns, and healthcare resource use. RESULTS: The median OS in cohort 1 (n = 177) was 22 months, and the median PFS was 8.5 months. The most common AEs were fatigue (56%), diarrhea (52%), vomiting (44%), and nausea (40%). The median persistence was 151 days with pazopanib. The median OS in cohort 2 (n = 35) was 16 months; the median PFS was 5.7 months. The most common AEs were fatigue (51%) and nausea (34%). The median persistence was 93 days with everolimus and 49 days with temsirolimus. CONCLUSION: The outcomes for the patients treated with first-line pazopanib in the community setting were consistent with those reported by previous prospective and retrospective studies. Although the second-line cohort was small, the results of mTOR inhibitors after pazopanib were also consistent with those of previous observations.

Risk of manic switch associated with antidepressant therapy in pediatric bipolar depression.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the risk of manic switch associated with antidepressants in Medicaid-enrolled pediatric patients with bipolar depression. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved 2003-2007 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data from four geographically diverse states. The study sample included children and adolescents (ages 6-18 years) who had received a diagnosis of bipolar disorder on two or more separate occasions or during a hospital discharge, followed by a diagnosis of depression. According to the pharmacotherapy received by these patients in the 30 days around the index bipolar depression diagnosis, patients were categorized into five mutually exclusive groups. Manic switch was defined as having received a diagnosis of mania within 6 weeks after the initiation of bipolar depression treatment. Relative risks of manic switch between antidepressant monotherapy/polytherapy and their alternatives were assessed using Cox proportional hazards model. The robustness of the conventional Cox proportional hazards model toward possible bias caused by unobserved confounders was tested using instrumental variable analysis, and the uncertainty regarding manic switch definition was tested by altering the duration of follow-up. RESULTS: After applying all the selection criteria, 179 antidepressant monotherapy, 1047 second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) monotherapy, 570 mood stabilizer monotherapy, 445 antidepressant polytherapy, and 1906 SGA-mood stabilizer polytherapy users were identified. In Cox proportional hazard analyses, both antidepressant monotherapy and polytherapy exhibited higher risk of manic switch than their alternatives (antidepressant monotherapy vs. SGA monotherapy, hazard ratio [HR]=2.87 [95% CI: 1.10-7.49]; antidepressant monotherapy vs. mood stabilizer monotherapy, HR=1.41 [95% CI: 0.52-3.80); antidepressant polytherapy vs. SGA-mood stabilizer polytherapy, HR=1.61 [95% CI: 0.90-2.89]). However, only the comparison between antidepressant monotherapy and SGA monotherapy was statistically significant. The instrumental variable analysis did not detect endogeneity of the treatment variables. Extending the follow-up period from 6 weeks to 8 and 12 weeks generated findings consistent with the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings indicated a higher risk of manic switch associated with antidepressant monotherapy than with SGA monotherapy in pediatric patients with bipolar depression. The finding supported the clinical practice of cautious prescribing of antidepressants for brief periods.