Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale: psychometric validation and responder definition for assessing itch in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic disease characterized by intense, persistent and debilitating itch, resulting in sleep deprivation, signs of anxiety and depression, impaired quality of life and reduced productivity. The Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) was developed and validated as a single-item, patient-reported outcome (PRO) of itch severity. OBJECTIVES: To describe the content validity and psychometric assessment (test-retest reliability, construct validity, known-groups validity, sensitivity to change) of the Peak Pruritus NRS, and to derive empirically a responder definition to identify adults with a meaningful change in itch. METHODS: Content validity was assessed through in-depth patient interviews. Psychometric assessments used data from phase IIb and phase III dupilumab clinical trials and included test-retest reliability, construct validity, known-groups validity and sensitivity to change in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. RESULTS: Interview participants indicated that the Peak Pruritus NRS was a relevant, clear and comprehensive assessment of itch severity. Peak Pruritus NRS scores showed large, positive correlations with existing PRO measures of itch, and weak or moderate correlations with clinician-reported measures assessing objective signs of AD. Peak Pruritus NRS score improvements were highly correlated with improvements in other itch PROs, and moderately correlated with improvements in clinician-reported measures assessing objective signs of AD. The most appropriate threshold for defining a clinically relevant, within-person response was ≥ 2-4-point change in the Peak Pruritus NRS. CONCLUSIONS: The Peak Pruritus NRS is a well-defined, reliable, sensitive and valid scale for evaluating worst itch intensity in adults with moderate-to-severe AD.

Economic evaluation of donepezil in moderate to severe Alzheimer disease.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the costs to society of Alzheimer disease (AD) care in a multinational, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil in patients with moderate to severe AD. METHODS: A total of 290 patients with AD (screening standardized Mini-Mental State Examination score 5 to 17) were randomized to receive either donepezil (n = 144; 5 mg/day for 28 days, followed by 10 mg/day as per clinician's judgment) or placebo (n = 146) for 24 weeks. The authors collected data on patient and caregiver health resource utilization prospectively using the Canadian Utilization of Services Tracking questionnaire. Costs were calculated for patients and caregivers in each group based on resource utilization multiplied by the unit prices for each resource. A cost (the average Ontario minimum wage for 1998 [Can 6.85 dollars per hour]) was assigned to unpaid time that caregivers spent assisting the patient with activities of daily living (ADL). RESULTS: Patient and caregiver demographics at baseline were similar across the two groups. After adjusting for baseline total cost per patient, the mean total societal cost per patient for the 24-week period was donepezil, Can 9,904 dollars (US 6,686 dollars) and placebo, Can 10,236 dollars (US 6,910 dollars). This net cost saving of Can 332 dollars (US 224 dollars) included the average 24-week cost of donepezil treatment. Most of the cost-saving with donepezil treatment was due to less use of residential care by patients, and caregivers spending less time assisting patients with ADL. CONCLUSION: This cost-consequence analysis reveals economic benefits of treatment of moderate to severe AD with donepezil.

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias increase costs of comorbidities in managed Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the relationship between comorbid conditions and costs for patients with AD and related dementias (ADRD) in a Medicare managed care organization (MCO). To derive implications for improving management of patients with ADRD. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was carried out on administrative data for 3,934 patients with ADRD and 19,300 age/sex-matched control subjects enrolled in a large Medicare MCO. Patients with ADRD were identified from diagnoses on medical claims and encounter data for a 2-year period. Control subjects were selected from health plan members without dementia. Comorbid conditions were based on the diagnostic classifications from the Charlson comorbidity index. Health care costs and utilization for MCO-covered services for cases were compared with those of control subjects. RESULTS: Prevalence of ADRD was 4.4%, substantially higher than reported in previous studies of Medicare managed care and similar to population-based estimates. After controlling for comorbid conditions, age, and sex, annual costs were $4,134 higher for ADRD patients, resulting in excess costs of $16 million to the MCO. For the 10 most prevalent comorbidities in ADRD patients, adjusted costs were higher for ADRD patients compared with control subjects with the same condition. Higher costs were attributable to higher inpatient and skilled nursing facility utilization. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, prevalence rates for ADRD mirrored population estimates. Costs for patients with ADRD in this Medicare MCO varied considerably by comorbid condition and were substantially higher for patients with both AD and comorbid diseases commonly targeted for disease management, indicating that AD increases costs through effects on the management of comorbid illnesses. These findings indicate that better treatment and care management of AD could reduce the costs of comorbid illnesses commonly experienced by the frail elderly.

First International Pharmacoeconomic Conference on Alzheimer's Disease: report and summary.

The First International Pharmacoeconomic Conference on Alzheimer's Disease (AD) was held in Amsterdam in July 1998. The meeting was held under the auspices of the International Working Group for Harmonization of Dementia Drug Guidelines (http://dementia.ion.ucl.ac.uk/harmon), bringing together academics, clinicians, purchasers, and representatives from industry. Presentations were given on the methodology of pharmacoeconomic studies in AD, particularly focusing on caregiver burden, quality of life (QOL), and resource utilization. Three economic models of AD were presented based on data from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. In two studies, these data were then used to model the cost-effectiveness and effect on cost of treatment with donepezil. Both studies suggested a possible cost advantage for the use of donepezil, when compared with no placebo or treatment, particularly when donepezil is used appropriately in mild-to-moderate AD. These data need to be interpreted with care, as none of the cost or utility information were collected during the clinical trials. Additional data from a 2-year clinical trial of selegiline and vitamin E suggest that cognitive measures may be poor predictors of economic outcome, which is better measured directly. Both economic models of donepezil rely on short-term cognitive data to predict long-term outcome, a methodf that may not be useful in predicting economic savings. The issues facing pharmacoeconomists, researchers, clinicians, and families in the future were addressed in a series of workshops using a method of strategic futuring. The workshops attempted to see 7 years into the future for a range of areas, including consumer and caregiver use of pharmacoeconomic data; early detection and prevention; Japanese perspectives; activities of daily life and what will be daily life activities; caregiver burden; QOL at the end of life; new uses for new information and communication technology in clinical research; and physicians' use of pharmacoeconomic data. A range of exciting futures were predicted, although common themes that arose when considering barriers to achieving these futures included cost, education, political will, confidentiality, privacy, and ethics. The first conference was deemed to have been a success, having attracted more than 160 delegates and many distinguished speaker. A second conference is planned for the year 2000. Over the next 2 years, research needs to be broadened particularly in the methodological areas of resource utilization, QOL, and caregiver burden. Data from clinical trials with relevant economic and QOL outcomes will be needed by purchasers if drug treatments for dementia are to gain widespread use. It is also hoped that the models described at the meeting may become more freely available to politicians, purchasers, clinicians, and caregivers to help them make better decisions about treatment.

Determination of midazolam and two of its metabolites in human plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography.

A high-performance liquid chromatographic assay coupled with UV detection (254 nm) has been developed for the determination of midazolam and two of its hydroxylated metabolites, 1-hydroxymidazolam (1-OH) and 4-hydroxymidazolam (4-OH), in human plasma. Following a novel solid-phase extraction procedure, midazolam and its metabolites are well recovered from plasma. The analytes were extracted with C1 cartridges and the extracts were evaporated to dryness. The dry residues were dissolved in 200 microliters of mobile phase [0.02 M ammonium phosphate monobasic buffer-methanol-acetonitrile (60:35:5, v/v) (300 ml), 600 microliters of 0.2 M tetrabutylammonium bromide solution, adjusted to a pH* (apparent pH) of 4.10]. The separation of the analytes was performed on a Spherisorb C8 column (10 cm x 4.6 mm I.D.) maintained at 30 degrees C. The mobile phase was pumped at a flow-rate of 1.5 ml/min. The method has a lower limit of quantitation of 15 ng/ml of plasma for midazolam and proved to be reproducible (inter-assay precision 5.4%) and accurate (94 +/- 5%) over the therapeutic range of concentrations.