Cost of disease progression among US patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Aim: The objectives were to investigate the differences in per patient per month (PPPM) healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who experience disease progression in 12 months compared with those who don't investigate the impact of progression timing on cumulative healthcare costs. Patients & methods: This claims-based study included patients diagnosed with mBC between 1 January 2013 and 30 April 2020 and received HER2-targeted therapy. Patients were categorized as progressed or nonprogressed. For objective one, monthly HCRU and costs were assessed for up to two lines of therapy (LOTs). Data were summarized descriptively and compared using a generalized linear model (GLM). For objective two, patients with at least 6 months of follow-up were assessed and cumulative healthcare costs were estimated in the 3 years following the start of LOT1 or LOT2 using a GLM and Kaplan-Meier weighting. Results: Among the 4113 patients in the study sample, 3406 had at least 12 months of follow-up (or less if due to death). Compared with nonprogressed patients, progressed patients had higher mean PPPM healthcare costs (LOT1: $22,014 vs $18,372, p < 0.001; LOT2: $19,643 vs $16,863, p = 0.001), and HCRU, including number of emergency room visits and inpatient stays (both p < 0.001) in the 12 months following LOT start. Progressed patients had higher 3-year mean cumulative healthcare costs than nonprogressed patients following LOT1 and LOT2 and this difference was greater for patients who progressed earlier. Conclusion: Disease progression was associated with significant increases in HCRU and costs. Delays in progression were associated with lower cumulative healthcare costs. Earlier use of more clinically effective treatments to delay progression may reduce the economic burden among these patients.

The potential population health impact of treating REDUCE-IT eligible US adults with Icosapent Ethyl.

Objective: To explore the population health impact of treating all US adults eligible for the Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) with icosapent ethyl (IPE), we estimated (1) the number of ASCVD events and healthcare costs that could be prevented; and (2) medication costs. Methods: We derived REDUCE-IT eligible cohorts in (1) the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) 2009-2014 and (2) the Optum Research Database (ORD). Population sizes were obtained from NHANES and observed first event rates (composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, or coronary revascularization) were estimated from the ORD. Hazard ratios from REDUCE-IT USA estimated events prevented with IPE therapy. The National Inpatient Sample estimated event costs (facility and professional) and daily IPE treatment cost was approximated at $4.59. Results: We estimate 3.6 million US adults to be REDUCE-IT eligible, and the observed five-year first event rate without IPE of 19.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.6%-19.5%) could be lowered to 13.1% (95% CI 12.8%-13.5%) with five years of IPE treatment, preventing 212,000 (uncertainty range 163,000-262,000) events. We projected the annual IPE treatment cost for all eligible persons to be $6.0 billion (95% CI $4.7-$7.5 billion), but saving $1.8 billion annually due to first events prevented (net annual cost $4.3 billion). The total five-year event rate (first and recurrent) could be reduced from 42.5% (95% CI 39.6%-45.4%) to 28.9% (95% CI 26.9-30.9%) with five years of IPE therapy, preventing 490,000 (uncertainty range 370,000-609,000) events (net annual cost $2.6 billion). Conclusions: Treating all REDUCE-IT eligible US adults has substantial medication costs but could prevent a substantial number of ASCVD events and associated direct costs. Indirect cost savings by preventing events could outweigh much of the incurred direct costs.

Event Rates and Risk Factors for Recurrent Cardiovascular Events and Mortality in a Contemporary Post Acute Coronary Syndrome Population Representing 239 234 Patients During 2005 to 2018 in the United States.

Background Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are recognized by guidelines as remaining at high risk for adverse outcomes. Evidence from contemporary, representative ACS populations in a clinical practice setting is necessary to identify subgroups and strategies for improving patient outcomes. We aimed to describe event rates and risk factors in an ACS population over prolonged follow-up for cardiovascular end points. Methods and Results We identified 239 234 patients in the Optum Research Database (57.2% men; mean [standard deviation] age, 69.2 [12.2] years) with evidence of an ACS hospitalization (index ACS) during January 1, 2005 through December 30, 2018. Subgroups were based on index ACS event (myocardial infarction/unstable angina and revascularization status) and the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention. The 5-year event rate for the primary end point representing nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular death was 33.4% (95% CI, 33.1%-33.7%; P<0.001). The risk of experiencing the primary end point was ≈6-fold higher immediately after discharge (≈40.9% annualized risk) as compared with the period 1+ years after hospitalization (≈6.4% annualized risk). Among subgroups, the 5-year primary end point event rate was highest for myocardial infarction without revascularization and a Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention ≥4, at 47.9% (95% CI, 47.3%-48.4%; P<0.001) and 56.7% (95% CI, 55.9%-57.4%; P<0.001), respectively. Conclusions Patients with ACS remain at very high risk of experiencing recurrent cardiovascular events, particularly early after discharge, with identifiable subgroups at multifold higher risk of specific clinical end points.

Cost-effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl for High-risk Patients With Hypertriglyceridemia Despite Statin Treatment.

Importance: The Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) demonstrated the efficacy of icosapent ethyl (IPE) for high-risk patients with hypertriglyceridemia and known cardiovascular disease or diabetes and at least 1 other risk factor who were treated with statins. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of IPE compared with standard care for high-risk patients with hypertriglyceridemia despite statin treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: An in-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using patient-level study data from REDUCE-IT, and a lifetime analysis was performed using a microsimulation model and data from published literature. The study included 8179 patients with hypertriglyceridemia despite stable statin therapy recruited between November 21, 2011, and May 31, 2018. Analyses were performed from a US health care sector perspective. Statistical analysis was performed from March 1, 2018, to October 31, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to IPE, 4 g/d, or placebo and were followed up for a median of 4.9 years (IQR, 3.5-5.3 years). The cost of IPE was $4.16 per day after rebates using SSR Health net cost (SSR cost) and $9.28 per day with wholesale acquisition cost (WAC). Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total direct health care costs (2019 US dollars), and cost-effectiveness. Results: A total of 4089 patients (2927 men [71.6%]; median age, 64.0 years [IQR, 57.0-69.0 years]) were randomly assigned to receive IPE, and 4090 patients (2895 men [70.8%]; median age, 64.0 years [IQR, 57.0-69.0 years]) were randomly assigned to receive standard care. Treatment with IPE yielded more QALYs than standard care both in trial (3.34 vs 3.27; mean difference, 0.07 [95% CI, 0.01-0.12]) and over a lifetime projection (10.59 vs 10.35; mean difference, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.15-0.33]). In-trial, total health care costs were higher with IPE using either SSR cost ($18 786) or WAC ($24 544) than with standard care ($17 273; mean difference from SSR cost, $1513 [95% CI, $155-$2870]; mean difference from WAC, $7271 [95% CI, $5911-$8630]). Icosapent ethyl cost $22 311 per QALY gained using SSR cost and $107 218 per QALY gained using WAC. Over a lifetime, IPE was projected to be cost saving when using SSR cost ($195 276) compared with standard care ($197 064; mean difference, -$1788 [95% CI, -$9735 to $6159]) but to have higher costs when using WAC ($202 830) compared with standard care (mean difference, $5766 [95% CI, $1094-$10 438]). Compared with standard care, IPE had a 58.4% lifetime probability of costing less and being more effective when using SSR cost and an 89.4% probability of costing less than $50 000 per QALY gained when using SSR cost and a 72.5% probability of costing less than $50 000 per QALY gained when using WAC. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that, both in-trial and over the lifetime, IPE offers better cardiovascular outcomes than standard care in REDUCE-IT participants at common willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Racial and ethnic disparity in clinical outcomes among patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection in a large US electronic health record database.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic minority groups have been disproportionately affected by the US coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, nationwide data on COVID-19 outcomes stratified by race/ethnicity and adjusted for clinical characteristics are sparse. This study analyzed the impacts of race/ethnicity on outcomes among US patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis in the electronic health record from 01 February 2020 through 14 September 2020. Index encounter site, hospitalization, and mortality were assessed by race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black [Black], non-Hispanic White [White], non-Hispanic Asian [Asian], or Other/unknown). Associations between racial/ethnic categories and study outcomes adjusted for patient characteristics were evaluated using logistic regression. FINDINGS: Among 202,908 patients with confirmed COVID-19, patients from racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely than White patients to be hospitalized on initial presentation (Hispanic: adjusted odds ratio 1·690, 95% CI 1·620-1·763; Black: 1·810, 1·743-1·880; Asian: 1·503, 1·381-1·636) and during follow-up (Hispanic: 1·700, 1·638-1·764; Black: 1·578, 1·526-1·633; Asian: 1·391, 1·288-1·501). Among hospitalized patients, adjusted mortality risk was lower for Black patients (0·881, 0·809-0·959) but higher for Asian patients (1·205, 1·000-1·452). INTERPRETATION: Racial/ethnic minority patients with COVID-19 had more severe disease on initial presentation than White patients. Increased mortality risk was attenuated by hospitalization among Black patients but not Asian patients, indicating that outcome disparities may be mediated by distinct factors for different groups. In addition to enacting policies to facilitate equitable access to COVID-19-related care, further analyses of disaggregated population-level COVID-19 data are needed.

Resolution of organ dysfunction as a predictor of long-term survival in necrotizing soft tissue infections: Analysis of the AB103 Clinical Composite Endpoint Study in Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections trial and a retrospective claims database-linked chart study.

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are an acute surgical condition with high morbidity and mortality. Timely identification, resuscitation, and aggressive surgical management have significantly decreased inpatient mortality. However, reduced inpatient mortality has shifted the burden of disease to long-term mortality associated with persistent organ dysfunction. METHODS: We performed a combined analysis of NSTI patients from the AB103 Clinical Composite Endpoint Study in Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections randomized-controlled interventional trial (ATB-202) and comprehensive administrative database (ATB-204) to determine the association of persistent organ dysfunction on inpatient and long-term outcomes. Persistent organ dysfunction was defined as a modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) score of 2 or greater at Day 14 (D14) after NSTI diagnosis, and resolution of organ dysfunction defined as mSOFA score of 1 or less. RESULTS: The analysis included 506 hospitalized NSTI patients requiring surgical debridement, including 247 from ATB-202, and 259 from ATB-204. In both study cohorts, age and comorbidity burden were higher in the D14 mSOFA ≥2 group. Patients with D14 mSOFA score of 1 or less had significantly lower 90-day mortality than those with mSOFA score of 2 or higher in both ATB-202 (2.4% vs. 21.5%; p < 0.001) and ATB-204 (6% vs. 16%: p = 0.008) studies. In addition, in an adjusted covariate analysis of the combined study data sets D14 mSOFA score of 1 or lesss was an independent predictor of lower 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.53; p = 0.001). In both studies, D14 mSOFA score of 1 or less was associated with more favorable discharge status and decreased resource utilization. CONCLUSION: For patients with NSTI undergoing surgical management, persistent organ dysfunction at 14 days, strongly predicts higher resource utilization, poor discharge disposition, and higher long-term mortality. Promoting the resolution of acute organ dysfunction after NSTI should be considered as a target for investigational therapies to improve long-term outcomes after NSTI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiology study, level III.

Second-line treatments and outcomes for immune thrombocytopenia: A retrospective study with electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: Second-line treatment for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is not well reported for patients treated in real-world clinical settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of four second-line treatments for ITP. PATIENTS/METHODS: Included adult patients had at least two medical records containing ITP diagnoses and second-line eltrombopag, romiplostim, rituximab, or splenectomy. Date of treatment initiation or splenectomy was set as index date, between July 1, 2008, and March 31, 2017. Patients had first-line corticosteroid or intravenous immune globulin treatment and continuous database activity from 6 months before to 12 months after index. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, platelet counts, bleeding-related episodes (BREs), and thrombotic events (TEs) were compared by second-line treatment cohort. RESULTS: The sample included 3332 patients (mean age, 60.5 years; 52.3% female): eltrombopag (5.8%), romiplostim (9.9%), rituximab (73.3%), and splenectomy (11.0%). Patients having splenectomy were younger, more likely female and commercially insured, and less likely to require a third line of treatment than medical regimen cohorts. Proportions of patients having treatment-free (≥180 days with no second-line index or rescue agent) periods varied significantly (P = .01) by regimen: 33% for eltrombopag, 23% for romiplostim, 26% for rituximab, and 17% for splenectomy. All regimens significantly improved platelet counts, while TE and BRE rates differed significantly (P = .03 and P = .01, respectively) when all treatment groups were compared. CONCLUSIONS: Over an average 7-year follow-up, all second-line regimens improved platelet counts, but eltrombopag yielded the highest proportion of patients with completely treatment-free periods of at least 180 days.