Epidemiology, Comorbidities, and Treatment of Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) imposes a substantial burden, but epidemiological data are scarce. This study aimed to estimate the incidence and prevalence of CVS, comorbid conditions, and treatment patterns, using administrative databases in the United States. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used claims data from Merative MarketScan Commercial/Medicare Supplemental and Medicaid databases in all health care settings. Incidence and prevalence rates for 2019 were calculated and stratified by age, sex, region, and race/ethnicity. Patient characteristics were reported among newly diagnosed patients with CVS (i.e., no documented claims for CVS before 2019). CVS was defined as having 1+ inpatient and/or 2+ outpatient CVS claims that were 7+ days apart. RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of CVS was 16.7 (Commercial/Medicare) and 42.9 (Medicaid) per 100,000 individuals. The incidence of CVS was estimated to be 10.6 (Commercial/Medicare) and 26.6 (Medicaid) per 100,000 individuals. Both prevalence and incidence rates were higher among female individuals (for both Commercial/Medicare and Medicaid). Comorbid conditions were common and included abdominal pain (56%-64%), anxiety (32%-39%), depression (26%-34%), cardiac conditions (39%-42%), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (30%-40%). Despite a diagnosis of CVS, only 32%-35% had prescriptions for prophylactic treatment and 47%-55% for acute treatment within the first 30-day period following diagnosis. DISCUSSION: This study provides the first population-level estimates of CVS incidence and prevalence in the United States. Comorbid conditions are common, and most patients with CVS do not receive adequate treatment. These findings underscore the need for improving disease awareness and developing better screening strategies and effective treatments.

Healthcare costs among hemophilia A patients in the United States treated with rurioctocog alfa pegol (FVIII-PEG) or antihemophilic factor (recombinant), FC fusion protein (rFVIIIFc) using real-world data.

AIMS: To compare healthcare costs in patients with non-inhibitor hemophilia A treated with Rurioctocog Alfa Pegol (FVIII-PEG) versus Antihemophilic Factor (Recombinant), FC Fusion Protein (rFVIIIFc). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Administrative claims data from the Merative MarketScan Commercial (Commerical) and Medicaid (Medicaid) databases were used for these analyses. Males with non-inhibitor hemophilia A treated with FVIII-PEG or rFVIIIFc from 1 January 2016 to 31 March 2021 were identified (earliest treatment = index). Patients were required to have continuous database enrollment for six months before and after the index date. Follow-up was variable in length until disenrollment or study end. All-cause and hemophilia-related healthcare costs were reported per-patient per month [PPPM] and the average weekly dose during follow-up was compared between treatment groups. Generalized linear regressions were used to estimate multivariable-adjusted differences in total costs and weekly dosage in the two treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 131 FVIII-PEG (66 Commercial; 65 Medicaid) and 204 rFVIIIFc (111 Commercial; 93 Medicaid) patients were eligible. Mean age was 20.5 and 24.4 for FVIII-PEG and rFVIIIFc in Commercial and 14.9 and 17.5 for FVIII-PEG and rFVIIIFc in Medicaid. PPPM mean (standard deviations [SD]) total healthcare costs in Commercially insured patients were $35,868 [$21,717] for FVIII-PEG vs $40,424 [$25,882] for rFVIIIFc. Costs in Medicaid were $27,495 [$23,243] for FVIII-PEG vs $30,237 [$28,430] for rFVIIIFc. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the costs for rFVIIIFc (vs FVIII-PEG) were higher by $5,215 in Commercial and $3,895 in Medicaid, but the differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Similar findings were observed for hemophilia-specific healthcare costs. The adjusted mean weekly dose was 6,047 vs 4,892 IU, p = 0.21 for FVIII-PEG vs rFVIIIFc in Commercial and 5,549 vs 7,228 IU, p = 0.07 for FVIII-PEG vs rFVIIIFc in Medicaid. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare costs and treatment dosing were similar (p > 0.05) for non-inhibitor hemophilia A patients treated with FVIII-PEG and rFVIIIFc.

Real-world changes in costs over time among patients in the United States with hereditary angioedema on long-term prophylaxis with lanadelumab.

AIMS: Investigate trends in paid lanadelumab costs over time in a population of patients persistent for 18 months, and to understand overall hereditary angioedema (HAE) treatment cost trends, including costs of acute medication/short-term prophylaxis and supportive care. Lastly, we sought to describe the proportion of lanadelumab patients with evidence of down titration via changes in total paid amounts for lanadelumab in a fixed time period. METHODS: Patients were identified in the Merative MarketScan Databases who had ≥1 claim for lanadelumab during 1/1/2018-6/30/2022 (index), a ≤ 60-d gap in days of supply over 18 months, and were enrolled for ≥6 months pre-index and 18 months post-index. Lanadelumab and HAE-specific costs were assessed during follow-up months 0-6, 7-12, and 13-18. Down titration was defined as a ≥ 25% decrease in lanadelumab costs from months 0-6 to months 7-12 or 13-18. Outcomes were compared between time periods using paired t-tests and McNemar's test. RESULTS: Fifty-four lanadelumab users were included; 25 (46%) had evidence of down titration. Lanadelumab costs decreased from $316,724 to $269,861 to $246,919 in months 0-6, 7-12, and 13-18, respectively (p < .01); total HAE treatment costs decreased from $377,076 to $329,855 to $286,074 in months 0-6, 7-12, and 13-18, respectively (p < .01). LIMITATIONS: Persistence was determined via days of supply on medication claims; use of the medication was not confirmed. Down titration was based on costs; the lanadelumab regimen could not be assessed. Results may not be generalizable to uninsured patients or those without commercial or Medicare insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on long-term prophylaxis with lanadelumab experienced a significant reduction (24%) in HAE treatment costs over 18 months, driven by lower costs of acute medications and lanadelumab down titration. Down titration among appropriate patients with controlled HAE may lead to substantial savings in healthcare costs.

Incremental cost burden among patients with severe uncontrolled asthma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The economic burden of severe asthma and severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA) is significant. Updated assessments of health care resource utilization (HCRU) and cost are needed given the increase in treatment options and updates to guidelines in recent years. OBJECTIVE: To describe all-cause and asthma-related HCRU and costs among patients with SUA vs patients with nonsevere asthma in the United States using real-world data. METHODS: MarketScan administrative claims databases were used to select adults with persistent asthma for this retrospective analysis between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019. Asthma severity status was defined using the Global Initiative for Asthma step 4/5 criteria (index is the earliest date qualifying patients as severe or randomly assigned for nonsevere patients). Patients with SUA were a subset of the severe cohort meeting the following criteria: those who were hospitalized with asthma as the primary diagnosis or had at least 2 emergency department or outpatient visits with an asthma diagnosis and a steroid burst within 7 days. HCRU, costs (allcause and asthma-related defined as medical claims with an asthma diagnosis and pharmacy claims for asthma treatment), work loss, and indirect costs due to absenteeism and short-term disability (STD) were compared between patients with SUA, severe, and nonsevere asthma. Outcomes were reported during a fixed 12-month post-index period using chi-square and t-tests where appropriate. RESULTS: 533,172 patients with persistent asthma were identified (41.9% [223,610]) severe and 58.1% [309,562] nonsevere). Of the severe patients, 17.6% (39,380) had SUA. The mean (SD) all-cause total health care costs were significantly higher in patients with SUA ($23,353 [$40,817]) and severe asthma ($18,554 [$36,147]) compared with those with nonsevere asthma ($16,177 [$37,897], P < 0.001 vs nonsevere asthma). The results were consistent for asthma-related costs. In addition, although patients with severe asthma made up 41.9% of the total study population, they contributed disproportionately higher costs (60.5%) to the total asthma-related direct costs, with the effect more evident among patients with SUA (7.4% of study population contributed 17.7% of the total asthma-related costs). For the subset of patients with asthma with workplace absenteeism, patients with SUA lost more time from work (259.3 vs 236.2 hours lost, P = 0.002; 7.8 vs 5.3 STD days, P < 0.001), and had higher corresponding indirect costs ($5,944 vs $5,415, P = 0.002 for absenteeism related; $856 vs $582, P < 0.001 for STD related) compared with patients with nonsevere asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SUA have significantly higher asthma-related economic burden compared with patients with nonsevere asthma and contribute a disproportionally higher percentage of asthma-related costs. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Amgen and AstraZeneca. The design and analysis for this study was conducted primarily by Merative. Amgen and AstraZeneca provided funding to support protocol development, data analysis, and manuscript development activities associated with this study. Dr Burnette is on the advisory board and a consultant for GSK, a consultant and member of the advisory boards and speakers' bureaus of Sanofi, Genzyme, Regeneron, AstraZeneca, and Amgen Inc. Dr Wang, Dr Rane, Dr Lindsley, and Dr Llanos are employees and shareholders of Amgen Inc. Dr Chung and Dr Ambrose are employees and shareholders of AstraZeneca. Ms Princic and Ms Park are employees of Merative, which received funding from Amgen to conduct this study.

Work Loss and Direct and Indirect Costs Associated with Parkinson's Disease.

Purpose: To examine work loss and indirect costs during the three-year periods prior to and following initial diagnosis of Parkinson's disease (PD) in patients and in spouses of PD patients, as well as direct costs of healthcare. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective, observational cohort study using the MarketScan Commercial and Health and Productivity Management databases. Results: A total of 286 employed PD patients and 153 employed spouses met all diagnostic and enrollment criteria for short-term disability (STD) analysis (PD Patient cohort and Caregiving Spouse cohort). The proportion of PD patients having a STD claim increased from roughly 5% and plateaued at around 12-14% starting in the year prior to first diagnosis of PD. The mean number of days lost from work due to STD per year increased from 1.4 days in the 3rd year prior to diagnosis to 8.6 days in the 3rd year after diagnosis (corresponding to an increase in indirect costs from $174 to $1104). STD use for spouses of patients with PD was lowest in the year after their spouses were diagnosed and then rose dramatically in the 2nd and 3rd years after the spouse's diagnosis. Total all-cause direct health-care costs increased during the years leading up to PD diagnosis and were highest in the years following diagnosis, with PD-related costs contributing ~20-30% of the total. Conclusion: PD has both a significant direct and indirect financial burden on patients and their spouses when analyzed for 3 years before and after diagnosis.

Real-World Analysis of Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Utilization, Costs, and Mortality Among People with Biliary Tract Cancers in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: People with advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs) have a 5-year survival of approximately 2% in the USA. Most cases are inoperable or require systemic treatment following surgery. This study adds to current literature by describing treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and mortality among people with BTCs. METHODS: Adults diagnosed with BTCs were identified in the Merative MarketScan administrative claims databases from 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2020. Descriptive analysis was used to measure treatment patterns (i.e., regimen types, therapy duration) during three lines of therapy (LOT). All-cause and disease-related HCRU and costs were measured per-patient-per-month (PPPM) during the entire follow-up and in each LOT. Mortality was reported among the subset linked to the National Death Index (NDI). RESULTS: There were 2648 eligible people with BTCs [mean age 64.0 (standard deviation [SD] 12.4) years, 51.5% female, average follow-up 11.9 (SD 11.1) months]. Treatment was received by 56.3% (n = 1490), and 20.9% (n = 5534) and 7.1% (n = 187) moved on to a second and third LOT, respectively. The average treatment duration decreased across LOTs, from 3.8 (SD 3.1) months in LOT1 to 2.6 (SD 2.4) months in LOT3. Gemcitabine + cisplatin was the most common regimen in LOT1 (44.6%). Total all-cause mean healthcare costs PPPM increased after LOT1 (mean $21,517, $29,721, and $28,557, for LOT1, LOT2, and LOT3, respectively) and the majority (71.2%) were related to BTCs. Of people with BTCs linked to the NDI (n = 2168), 66.1% died and average time to death was 11.3 (SD 11.2) months. CONCLUSIONS: These findings, showing a high rate of mortality, a decrease in treatment duration, and an increase in costs as people progress after LOT1, add recent data to current literature highlighting the unmet need for more effective treatment options for people with BTCs.

Costs of colorectal cancer screening with colonoscopy, including post-endoscopy events, among adults with Medicaid insurance.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the healthcare utilization and costs associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by colonoscopy, including costs associated with post-endoscopy events, among average-risk adults covered by Medicaid insurance. METHODS: This cohort study evaluated a population of adults (ages 50-75 years) with CRC screening between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2018 (index = earliest test) from the IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid database. Individuals at above-average risk for CRC or with prior CRC screening were excluded. CRC screening was reported by screening type: colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test [FIT], fecal occult blood test [FOBT], multi-target stool DNA [mt-sDNA]. Frequency and costs of events potentially related to colonoscopy (defined as occurring within 30 days post-endoscopy) were reported overall, by event type, and by individual event. RESULTS: We identified a total of 13,134 average-risk adults covered by Medicaid insurance who received screening by colonoscopy; 63.6% (8350) had Medicare dual-eligibility while 36.4% (4785) did not have Medicare dual-eligibility. The mean (SD) cost of a colonoscopy procedure was $684 ($907) and mean (SD) out-of-pocket costs were $6 ($132). Serious gastrointestinal (GI) events (perforation and bleeding) were observed in 4.6% of individuals with colonoscopy, 4.3% had other GI events, and 3.0% had an incident cardiovascular/cerebrovascular event. Mean (SD) event-related costs were $1233 ($5784) among individuals with a serious GI event, $747 ($1961) among individuals with other GI events, and $4398 ($19,369) among individuals with a cardiovascular/cerebrovascular event. CONCLUSIONS: This large, claims-based cohort study reports average (SD) out-of-pocket costs for Medicaid beneficiaries at $6 ($132), which could be one factor contributing to the accessibility of CRC screening by colonoscopy. The incidence of events potentially associated with colonoscopy (i.e. within 30 days after the screening) was 3-4%, and the event-related costs were considerable.

Treatment patterns and health care costs among patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

BACKGROUND: Biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (tsDMARD) therapies are used in management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Although previous studies have demonstrated that rates of adherence, persistence, discontinuation, and switching, as well as health care costs, are variable among treatments, limited published data exist on more recently approved therapies. OBJECTIVE: To describe adherence, persistence, discontinuation, reinitiation, switching, dosing patterns, and health care costs among PsA patients treated with biologics and tsDMARDs. METHODS: This was a real-world, retrospective administrative claims study. Adult PsA patients with at least 1 claim for an approved PsA biologic (adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, secukinumab, or ustekinumab) or tsDMARD (apremilast or tofacitinib) between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019, were selected from the IBM MarketScan administrative claims databases. The first claim for one of the study treatments determined the index date and drug cohort. Patients were required to be continuously enrolled in their health plans for 12 months before and after the index date and to have at least 1 claim with a diagnosis of PsA in the 12 months before or on the index date. Adherence (measured by proportion of days covered [PDC] and medication possession ratio [MPR]), persistence (< 60-day gap in treatment), discontinuation (> 90-day gap), reinitiation of index drug, switching, and dosing patterns for each index drug were assessed during the 12-month follow-up period. Health care costs were reported per patient per month (PPPM) during the 12-month follow-up and assessed after adjusting PsA treatment costs by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review discount factors to account for discounts and rebates not usually reflected in claims data and by adherence. RESULTS: Overall, 6,674 patients met the selection criteria. The top 3 index drugs were adalimumab (37%), apremilast (26%), and etanercept (18%). Over 12 months of follow-up, 31%-59% of patients remained persistent on the index drug, whereas 35%-56% discontinued, 13%-29% switched to a different biologic or tsDMARD, and 3%-15% reinitiated the index therapy, depending on the index drug. The mean PDC ranged from 0.51 to 0.69 during the 12-month follow-up and 0.80 to 0.93 during the follow-up period before discontinuation. Dose values were largely consistent with prescribing information, with the exception of secukinumab. Index drug costs PPPM ranged from $2,361 (apremilast) to $6,528 for ustekinumab after adjustment for discounts and adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this real-world analysis suggest that there is substantial variability in persistence, discontinuation, adherence, reinitiating, and switching patterns among the different biologic and tsDMARD treatment options for PsA patients. In addition, this study provides real-world cost data for biologics and tsDMARDs among patients with PsA. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Eli Lilly Inc., which participated in analysis and interpretation of data, drafting, reviewing, and approving the publication. All authors contributed to the development of the publication and maintained control over the final content. Murage, Malatestinic, Zhu, Atiya, Kern, Stenger, and Sprabery are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly Inc. Princic and Park are employed by IBM Watson Health, which received funding from Eli Lilly Inc. to conduct this study. Ogdie has received consulting fees from Amgen, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Corrona, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer and has also received grant support from Pfizer, Novartis, and Amgen. Portions of these data have been presented in poster form at the virtual International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) 2020 and Congress of Clinical Rheumatology (CCR) West 2020 conferences.

Adherence to fecal immunochemical test screening among adults at average risk for colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study examined adherence to screening for fecal immunochemical test (FIT). METHODS: Adults (≥ 50-75) with a FIT between 1/1/2014 and 6/30/2019 in MarketScan administrative claims were selected (index = earliest FIT). Patients were followed for 10 years pre- and 3 years post-index. Patients at increased risk for CRC or with prior screening were excluded. Year over year adherence was measured post-index. RESULTS: Of 10,253 patients, the proportion adherent to repeat testing at year 2 was 23.4% and 10.6% at year 3. Of 76.6% not adherent in year 2, 5.4% were adherent in year 3. CONCLUSION: Results suggest adherence to FIT tests is poor, minimizing potential benefits. Future studies are needed to consider alternative test options and whether more choice will improve long-term adherence.

Healthcare costs of colorectal cancer screening and events following colonoscopy among commercially insured average-risk adults in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the healthcare costs associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and the frequency and costs of events potentially related to colonoscopy among average-risk adults. METHODS: In this cohort study, adults (ages 50-75 years) with CRC screening between 1/1/2014 and 6/30/2019 (index = earliest test) were selected from the IBM MarketScan Research databases. Individuals at above-average risk for CRC or with prior CRC screening were excluded. Frequency of utilization was reported by screening type: colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT), fecal occult blood test (FOBT), multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA). For colonoscopy, frequency and costs of potential events were reported overall, by event type, and by an individual event in the 30 days after colonoscopy. RESULTS: Among the 333,306 average-risk adults, colonoscopy was the most common CRC screening modality (70.6%), followed by FIT (17.7%), FOBT (8.1%), and mt-sDNA (3.2%). The mean cost of a colonoscopy procedure was $2,125 and the mean out-of-pocket costs were $79. Serious gastrointestinal (GI) events were observed in 1.3% of individuals with colonoscopy, 1.9% had other GI events, and 1.2% had an incident cardiovascular event. Mean event-related costs were $2,631 among individuals with a serious GI event, $1,774 among individuals with any other GI event, and $4,234 among individuals with a cardiovascular event. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides updated and more detailed information regarding the costs of CRC screening and potential colonoscopy events based on a comprehensive review of a robust claims dataset.

Costs of treatment change following first-line somatostatin analog monotherapy among patients with neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND: This study describes treatment characteristics and healthcare costs prior to and following treatment change from somatostatin analog (SSA) monotherapy among a privately-insured NET patient population in the US. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed NET and treated with SSA monotherapy were retrospectively identified in IBM MarketScan claims between 1/1/2014 and 3/31/2019. NET treatment change was captured ≥30 days after the SSA start date (earliest new treatment = index date). Healthcare costs (reimbursed amount in 2019 dollars) were reported for 1, 3, and 6 months pre- and post-index intervals. RESULTS: A total of 305 patients were identified (mean age: 58 years; female: 52%; metastatic disease: 49%). Most patients started on octreotide (81%) vs. lanreotide (19%). Common treatment changes included alternate SSA (38%), targeted therapy (30%), or chemotherapy (23%). Total costs increased on average by $13,272 between the month preceding and following treatment change (p < .001), with the highest increase among patients changing to targeted therapy ($19,677, p < .001) vs. an alternate SSA ($10,240, p < .001) or chemotherapy ($4,057, p = .155). The trajectory in mean cost difference using a 1, 3, and 6-month time period followed an increasing trend for patients who changed to targeted therapy (Δ$19,677, Δ$34,856, Δ$58,387) but was flat for patients who changed to the alternate SSA (Δ$10,240, Δ$10,026, Δ$11,727). CONCLUSIONS: Higher total healthcare costs were observed following treatment change from first-line SSA. Switching to the alternate SSA was associated with a fixed, one-time cost; whereas, switching to targeted therapy was associated with both an initial switching cost and a persistent monthly increase.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Healthcare Costs in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Ixekizumab: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe adherence, persistence, discontinuation, restarting, switching, dosing, and health care costs among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with ixekizumab (IXE). METHODS: MarketScan administrative claims databases were used to select adults (≥18 years) initiating IXE between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2019, for this retrospective study (earliest IXE claim = index). Eligible patients had one or more PsA diagnoses during the 12 months preceding the index and had 12 months of follow-up time after the index. Adherence (measured by proportion of days covered [PDC]) persistence (<60-day gap), discontinuation (≥90-day gap), switching, and dosing patterns were reported. Health care costs were reported per patient per month (PPPM) during follow-up and were assessed after adjusting PsA treatment costs for discount rates reported by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER). RESULTS: A total of 496 patients met the selection criteria (mean age, 51.1 years; 50.4% female). Over the 12-month follow-up, 52.8% remained persistent, 38.7% discontinued, 13.5% had no other treatment, 4.6% restarted, and 20.6% switched to a new biologic/traditional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. 70.6%of patients were identified as highly adherent (i.e. PDC > 0.80)to IXE prior to discontinuation. Dose values were consistent with prescribing information for patients with and without comorbid psoriasis. Although IXE costs ($5233 [SD = $2497]) accounted for 85.6% of PsA-related health care costs, only 3.5% of IXE costs were patient out-of-pocket expenses. Adjusting for the ICER discounts decreased all-cause and PsA-related costs by $2509 PPPM. CONCLUSION: Results from this real-world analysis suggest that treatment patterns and costs among patients with PsA initiating IXE are consistent with prior literature for other biologics.

Utilization of a Colorectal Cancer Screening Test Among Individuals With Average Risk.

Importance: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality. It is important to examine screening patterns over time, including after the introduction of new screening modalities. Objective: To compare use of CRC screening tests before and after the availability of the multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test, given that endorsed options have changed. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal cohort study used administrative claims data to examine CRC screening use in 2 discrete periods: before (August 1, 2011, to July 31, 2014) and after (August 1, 2016, to July 31, 2019) the mt-sDNA test became available. The MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases were queried for individuals aged 45 to 75 years between August 1, 2011, and July 31, 2019, with average risk of CRC and with continuous enrollment in the databases from August 1, 2001, to July 31, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of individuals up to date or not due for CRC screening during each measurement year and the type of screening test used among individuals due for screening. Data were reported overall and among individuals aged 45 to 49 or 50 years and older on August 1, 2011. Results: A total of 97 776 individuals with average risk were identified. Individuals had a mean (SD) age of 50.8 (3.5) years, and 54 227 (55.5%) were women. The proportion of individuals with average risk aged 50 to 75 years with commercial or Medicare supplemental insurance who were up to date with CRC screening increased from 50.4% in 2011 (30 605 of 60 770) to 69.7% in 2019 (42 367 of 60 770). Among individuals due for screening and screened, the use of high-sensitivity fecal occult blood test (FOBT) decreased between 2011 (1088 of 6241 eligible individuals [17.7%]) and 2019 (195 of 2943 eligible individuals [6.6%]), and the use of mt-sDNA increased between 2016 (58 of 3014 eligible individuals [1.9%]) and 2019 (418 of 2943 eligible individuals [14.2%]). No consistent trends were observed with fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or screening colonoscopy. Computed tomography colonography, double-contrast barium enema, and flexible sigmoidoscopy were rarely performed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the proportion of individuals with average risk who were up to date with CRC screening increased between 2011 and 2019 but remained suboptimal. There were no substantial changes in the use of the colonoscopy or FIT; however, there was an increase in the adoption of mt-sDNA and a decrease in the use of FOBT during the study period.

Exploration of machine learning techniques to examine the journey to neuroendocrine tumor diagnosis with real-world data.

Aim: Machine learning reveals pathways to neuroendocrine tumor (NET) diagnosis. Patients & methods: Patients with NET and age-/gender-matched non-NET controls were retrospectively selected from MarketScan claims. Predictors (e.g., procedures, symptoms, conditions for which NET is misdiagnosed) were examined during a 5-year pre-period to understand presence of and time to NET diagnosis using conditional inference trees. Results: Among 3460 patients with NET, 70% had a prior misdiagnosis. 10,370 controls were included. Decision trees revealed combinations of factors associated with a high probability of being a patient with NET (e.g., abdominal pain, an endoscopic/biopsy procedure, vomiting) or longer times to diagnosis (e.g., asthma diagnosis with visits to >6 providers). Conclusion: Decision trees provided a unique examination of the journey to NET diagnosis.

Lay abstract We present the novel analytic approach of machine learning using real-world data to describe patient pathways to neuroendocrine tumor (NET) diagnosis. Due to the rarity and presentation of the disease, NET diagnosis is commonly inaccurate and delayed. We aimed to demonstrate the potential of analytics using conditional inference trees. Decision trees revealed specific combinations of characteristics associated with a high probability of being a patient with NET (e.g., abdominal pain, an endoscopic/biopsy procedure, vomiting) or longer times to diagnosis (e.g., asthma diagnosis with visits to >6 providers). Results from this study support prior literature and add advanced analyses that take initial steps toward developing tools aimed to help clinicians with early and accurate NET diagnosis. The methodology can be improved upon and translated to other diseases.

Corticosteroid dosing and opioid use are high in patients with SLE and remain elevated after belimumab initiation: a retrospective claims database analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate corticosteroid and opioid use among patients with SLE and to examine the impact of belimumab initiation on the use of other SLE therapies. METHODS: We identified adult patients with SLE (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision/10th Revision 710.0 and M32) between 1 January 2012 and 31 May 2018 (earliest SLE diagnosis=index date) within MarketScan administrative claims data. Patients were followed from index date for a minimum of 12 months and until the earlier of disenrolment in their health plan or study end (31 May 2018). Corticosteroid utilisation, corticosteroid dose (in prednisone equivalents) and opioid utilisation (overall, by strength (weak, strong) and by duration (chronic use defined as >90 days of cumulative drug supply)) were measured during follow-up. Oral corticosteroid and opioid use were compared in the 6 months before and after initiation of belimumab. RESULTS: There were 49 413 patients with SLE eligible for analysis (mean (SD) age: 50.1 (14.0) years, 90.2% female). Of these, 68.5% received corticosteroids, and the average number of prescriptions was 4.59 (4.11) over the first 12 months of follow-up. Among patients with oral corticosteroids, average daily dose was 19.4 (14.2) mg and 59.6% had an average daily dose of ≥15 mg. Half (52.6%) had at least one opioid prescription and of these, 34.6% had chronic use over the first 12 months of follow-up. Among patients initiating belimumab during follow-up (n=1710), oral corticosteroid use decreased by 9.1% (p=0.001), and average daily dose decreased from 14.5 (18.4) mg to 11.9 (18.0) mg (p<0.001) in the 6 months after initiation compared with the 6 months prior. Initiation of belimumab had no impact on prevalence of opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients with SLE are treated with corticosteroids to control SLE and opioid therapy to manage chronic pain. While there was no change in opioid use, oral corticosteroid use and dose intensity decreased following initiation of belimumab.

Retrospective database analysis of healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients who develop post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease within the first year following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants.

AIMS: Healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) patients following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) were evaluated in the USA. METHODS: MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental database claims from 01 July 2010 to 31 December 2017 were analyzed. Patients eligible for analysis received allogeneic HCT between 01 January 2011 to 31 December 2015, had ≥6 months of continuous enrollment before HCT, and had ≥1 claim for PTLD or ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims for a clinically-relevant lymphoma within 1 year following HCT (PTLD index = first claim of diagnosis). Patients with clinically-relevant lymphomas within 6 months before HCT were excluded. HRU and total paid amounts were assessed from the week before the HCT through 1-day pre-PTLD index (HCT to PTLD) and monthly from PTLD index through 1-year post-PTLD index. HRU is reported as mean (SD). Results were also provided by survival status. RESULTS: Overall, 92 patients were eligible for analysis. From HCT to PTLD, 98.9% of patients were hospitalized, with 1.7 (1.2) hospitalizations/patient. The average length of stay was 25.3 (22.2) days/patient. From HCT to PTLD, 98.9% of patients had outpatient services with 233.7 (261.1) services/patient and 91.3% of patients had a prescription fill with 32.9 (26.0) prescriptions/patient. In the first month post-PTLD index, 51.2% of patients were hospitalized. Mean paid amounts were $399,470/patient (range $7542-$1.7 M) from HCT to PTLD. Cumulative mean paid amounts 1-year post-PTLD were $429,043/patient. Total cost/patient/month was ∼7 times higher in patients who died (n = 49; $232,591) than those who lived (n = 43; $33,677). Costs were mainly driven by hospitalizations. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include those inherent to retrospective analyses (i.e. miscoding, lack of clinical detail). CONCLUSIONS: HRU and costs from HCT to PTLD were high and more than doubled within 1-year post-PTLD. PTLD patients who died had ∼7 times higher costs than those who lived, driven by hospitalizations. Effective treatments are needed to reduce the burden of PTLD.

Evaluation of the accuracy of algorithms to identify soft tissue sarcoma (STS) in administrative claims.

BACKGROUND: Lack of using a validated algorithm to select patients is a source of selection bias in oncology studies using administrative claims. The objective of this study to evaluate published algorithms to identify patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) in administrative claims and to evaluate new algorithms to improved performance. METHODS: Two cancer populations including STS cases and non-STS controls were selected from the MarketScan Explorys Linked Claims-Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Database between January 1, 2000 and July 31, 2018. Eligible cases had a diagnosis on a clinical record for STS in the EMR while controls had no evidence of STS on any EMR records. Both cases and controls were enrolled in administrative claims during a period of observation and were aged ≥ 18 years. A split sample was used to test and validate algorithms using data from administrative claims. Values for sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated for 14 algorithms. Prior literature validating algorithms in administrative claims across other cancer types report both sensitivity and specificity ranging from as low as 73% to as high as 95%. This was used as a benchmark for defining algorithm success. RESULTS: There were 784 STS cases and 249,062 non-STS cancer controls eligible for analysis. Requiring at least two claims with an ICD-CM diagnosis code for STS achieved a sensitivity of 67% but had a specificity of 72%. Algorithms that required NCCN-recommended systemic treatment for STS improved the specificity to over 90% but dropped the sensitivity to below 20%. Other combinations of diagnostic tests, symptoms, and procedures did not improve performance. CONCLUSIONS: The algorithms tested in this study sample did not achieve sufficient performance and suggest the ability to accurately identify the STS population in administrative data is problematic. Difficulties are likely due to the origin of STS in a variety of locations, the non-specific symptoms of STS, and the common diagnostic tests recommended to diagnose the disease. Future research applying machine learning to examine timing and patterns of variables that comprise the diagnostic process may further investigate the ability to accurately identify STS cases in claims databases.

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.