Real-World Survival, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Costs Among U.S. Elderly Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated With R-GemOx in the Relapsed/Refractory Setting.

BACKGROUND: Little recent real-world evidence exists on overall survival, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs among R/R DLBCL patients treated with the combination of rituximab, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx), a widely-used regimen for patients ineligible for stem cell transplant due to age or comorbidities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis used 2014 to 2019 U.S. Medicare claims. Individuals aged ≥66 years with a new DLBCL diagnosis between October 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018 and continuous fee-for-service Medicare Part A, B, and D coverage in the 12 months pre- and postindex were followed to identify the sample of patients with evidence of R-GemOx treatment in the second-line (2L) or third-line (3L) setting. Outcomes included overall survival, all-cause and DLBCL-related HCRU, and costs after R-GemOx initiation. RESULTS: The final sample included 157 patients who received treatment with R-GemOx in the R/R settings (mean (SD) age 77.5 (6.0) years, 39.5% age>80 years; 66.9% male; 91.1% White). Of these, 126 received R-GemOx in the 2L setting and 31 received R-GemOx in the 3L setting. Median overall survival from R-GemOx initiation was 6.9 months and 6.8 months in the 2L and 3L setting, respectively. Rates of all-cause hospitalization (68.1% [2L] and >90% [3L]) and hospice use (42.9% [2L] and 51.7% [3L]) were high in the 12 months after R-GemOx initiation. All-cause total costs were substantial ($144,653 [2L] and $142,812 [3L]) and approximately 80% of costs were DLBCL-related within 12 months of R-GemOx initiation. CONCLUSION: Elderly U.S. Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with DLBCL who initiated R-GemOx treatment in the R/R setting have poor overall survival, high rates of HCRU, and substantial costs.

Real-world treatment patterns, survival, health resource use and costs among Medicare beneficiaries with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Aim: To examine real-world treatment patterns, survival, healthcare resource use and costs in elderly Medicare beneficiaries with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods: 11,880 Medicare patients aged ≥66 years with DLBCL between 1 October 2015 and 31 December 2018 were followed for ≥12 months after initiating front-line treatment. Results: Two-thirds (61.2%) of the patients received standard-of-care R-CHOP as first-line treatment. Hospitalization was common (57%) in the 12-months after initiation of 1L treatment; the mean DLCBL-related total costs were US$84,416 during the same period. Over a median follow-up of 2.1 years, 17.8% received at least 2L treatment. Overall survival was lower among later lines of treatment (median overall survival from initiation of 1L: not reached; 2L: 19.9 months; 3L: 9.8 months; 4L: 5.5 months). Conclusion: A large unmet need exists for more efficacious and well-tolerated therapies for older adults with DLBCL.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common form of Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and it becomes more common with age. While researchers continue to develop newer, more effective treatments for DLBCL, it is important to understand how patients use existing treatments and the associated costs, particularly among the elderly. In our real-world analysis of nearly 12,000 older patients with DLBCL, we found high rates of hospitalization and hospice use, short length of life in later lines of therapy and substantial healthcare costs. Our findings suggest a large current unmet need for more effective and well-tolerated therapies for older adults with DLBCL in both the front-line and relapse/refractory settings.

Assessing unmet need among elderly Medicare Beneficiaries with Mantle cell lymphoma: an analysis of treatment patterns, survival, healthcare resource utilization, and costs.

Studies evaluating real-world outcomes and health care utilization for mantle cell lymphoma are limited. We utilized national Medicare claims (2009-2019) to examine treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, costs, and survival in 3664 elderly patients receiving 1 L treatment for MCL. Over a median follow-up of 2.8 years, 40.3% received at least 2 L treatment. The most common 1 L regimen was bendamustine-rituximab (50.1%), with increased use of BTKi-based regimens observed in 2 L (39.4%). Half (51.8%) of patients had an all-cause hospitalization within 12 months of initiating 1 L; hospitalization rates were higher in later lines. Healthcare costs were substantial and most costs (>80%) were MCL-related. Overall survival was poorer among later lines of treatment (median OS from initiation of 1 L: 53.5 months; 2 L: 22.0 months; 3 L: 11.8 months; 4 L: 7.8 months). These results suggest a large unmet need and future work should evaluate whether novel therapies have improved outcomes among elderly patients with MCL.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Aim: Limited real-world data exist on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin's lymphoma (cHL). Methods: This study used the ConcertAI Oncology Dataset to assess treatment patterns, real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), and real-world overall survival (rwOS) in adults with R/R cHL diagnosed from 2000 to 2019. Results: Among 226 (79%) treated patients, there was substantial treatment heterogeneity. Median rwPFS was 21.0 months in the second line (2L) of therapy. Median rwOS was 146.7 months in 2L and decreased to 40.6 months in the fifth line. Conclusion: Patients were exposed to a myriad of treatments in the R/R setting. These data support a relation between rwPFS and rwOS and highlight the need for effective therapeutic options.

A systematic literature review of the epidemiology, quality of life, and economic burden, including disease pathways and treatment patterns of relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma.

INTRODUCTION: A systematic literature review was conducted to understand disease burden in patients with relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL). AREAS COVERED: Embase®, PubMed®, and Cochrane were searched for records from 2001 to 2020 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A total of 13,257 abstracts and 1731 papers were screened; 144 studies were identified. cHL accounted for 0.5% of all cancers, with 4‒66.7% of cases progressing to R/R disease (studies with >500 patients); this range varied across countries. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed via EORTC-QLQ-C30 (n = 7), EQ-5D (n = 5), SF-36 (n = 3), FACIT-F (n = 1), and MFI (n = 1) questionnaires. In general, pembrolizumab and other programmed cell death protein-1 inhibitors improved QoL scores. Brentuximab vedotin showed mixed outcomes, and high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem-cell rescue (ASCR) showed worsening functionality/symptoms. Economic burden studies (n = 21) reported increased costs and health care resource in R/R cHL. Across clinical guidelines (n = 13) and treatment pattern studies (n = 46), HDT followed by ASCR was recommended as initial R/R cHL treatment. Pembrolizumab and nivolumab were frequently recommended for patients relapsing following HDT/ASCR. EXPERT OPINION: Despite recent treatment advances, patients with R/R cHL continue to report reduced quality of life. Unmet medical needs remain, particularly with respect to slowing disease progression and identifying the best treatment approaches for improving longer-term survival and quality of life. This systematic literature review provides an extensive overview of the current landscape in patients with R/R cHL, focusing on four key areas: epidemiology, QoL, economic burden, and disease management. These findings will be useful to those with an interest in managing patients with R/R cHL or in designing future studies.

Clinical outcomes of relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma patients after contemporary first-line treatment: a German Hodgkin Study Group analysis.

To evaluate patterns of rrHL after contemporary first-line treatment we studied 409 patients with first rrHL (HD13: n = 87, HD14: n = 118, HD15: n = 188, HDR3i: n = 51) at a median age of 37.4 years (18.4-76.8) from the GHSG database. Time to first relapse was ≤12 months in 49% and stage III/IV rrHL present in 52% of patients. In total, 291 patients received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) and intended ASCT failed in 38 patients. ASCT was primarily not intended in 80 patients largely due to low risk disease or age/comorbidities. Overall, 10-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates after first relapse were 48.2% (95% CI 41.9-54.2%) and 59.4% (95% CI 53.0-65.2%), respectively, with significant differences between subgroups. Inferior survival was observed with no ASCT due to advanced age/comorbidities (five-year PFS 36.2%, 95% CI 17.7-55.0%) or failure of salvage therapy (five-year PFS 36.3%, 95% CI 19.7-53.2%). Similarly, presence of primary refractory disease or stage IV at rrHL conferred inferior survival. In patients with low-risk disease, however, survival appeared favorable even without ASCT (10 y PFS 72.6%, 95% CI 53.7-84.8%). We herein confirm the curative potential of current rrHL treatments providing a robust benchmark to evaluate novel therapeutic strategies in rrHL. Approximately 50% of rrHL patients experienced a consecutive relapse.

Quality-of-life analysis of pembrolizumab vs brentuximab vedotin for relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma.

KEYNOTE-204 (NCT02684292) demonstrated a progression-free survival advantage for pembrolizumab over brentuximab vedotin (BV) in patients who had relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL) following, or who were ineligible for, autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL), measured by patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from KEYNOTE-204, are reported from patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment and completed ≥1 PRO assessment. The EORTC QoL Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and EuroQoL EQ-5D were administered at baseline, every 6 weeks until week 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Prespecified end points included least squares mean (LSM) changes from baseline to week 24 and time to true deterioration (TTD; ≥10-point decline from baseline). Comparisons were evaluated using 2-sided P values uncontrolled for multiplicity. High compliance at baseline (>90%) and through week 24 (>80%) was demonstrated across treatment groups (PRO analysis set: pembrolizumab, n = 146; BV, n = 150). The EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) score improved from baseline to week 24 on pembrolizumab and worsened on BV and demonstrated significant LSM differences at 24 weeks (GHS/QoL: 8.60 [95% confidence interval, 3.89-13.31]; P = .0004). Significant improvements were observed in each QLQ-C30 domain except emotional and cognitive functioning. Compared with BV, pembrolizumab prolonged TTD for GHS/QoL (hazard ratio, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.22-0.74]; P = .003) and each QLQ-C30 domain except cognitive functioning. In conclusion, pembrolizumab demonstrated overall improvements in PROs of HRQoL measures over BV in the KEYNOTE-204 study. These data and previously reported efficacy results support pembrolizumab as the preferred treatment option for patients with R/R cHL who are ineligible for or experience relapse after ASCT.

Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and costs of patients diagnosed with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma in the United States.

AIMS: With the advent of ICD-10-CM codes for PMBCL on 10/01/2015, assessment of treatment patterns and healthcare burden among US patients is possible. This study sought to describe the real-world treatment patterns and economic outcomes of patients with PMBCL. METHODS: Data from the Optum Clinformatics DataMart database was used (January 2013-March 2018). Patients with a first PMBCL ICD-10-CM diagnosis (with or without an antecedent ICD-10-CM diagnosis of DLBCL/other lymphoma, which may have been assigned before PMBCL confirmation) after 10/01/2015 (index date) and no ICD-9-CM diagnosis code for unspecified PMBCL/DLBCL were identified as incident patients. Those with PMBCL ICD-10-CM and unspecified ICD-9-CM diagnosis for PMBCL/DLBCL before 10/01/2015 (index date) were identified as prevalent patients. Patients were observed from the index date up to the earliest among death, end of data availability, or end of continuous health plan enrollment. An adapted algorithm was used to identify lines of therapy (LOT). RESULTS: Among 118 incident and 30 prevalent PMBCL patients, 14% and 20% of patients received ≥2 LOTs, respectively. In incident patients, 48% received ≥1 LOT, 14% ≥2, and 4% ≥3 LOTs. Among prevalent patients, 63% received ≥1 LOT and 20% ≥2 LOTs. The most frequently recorded 1 L therapy was R-CHOP both among incident and prevalent patients. Mean total healthcare costs for incident and prevalent patients were $149,340 and $92,799 per patient per year, respectively, with higher costs ≤12 months ($187,241 and $167,553). Outpatient costs were the main driver (accounting for 60.5% and 64.6% for incident and prevalent patients, respectively). LIMITATIONS: Potential underuse of ICD-10-CM codes shortly after discontinuation of ICD-9-CM codes in 01/2015; regimens identified for each LOT using the claims-based algorithm may not reflect the regimen administered. CONCLUSION: The multiple LOTs necessary for a sizeable minority of patients and the high costs of care highlight the significant unmet needs of PMBCL patients.

Real-World Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, Health Care Resource Use, and Costs of Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) represents the most common subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the U.S., but current real-world data are limited. This study was conducted to describe real-world characteristics, treatment patterns, health care resource utilization (HRU), and health care costs of patients with treated DLBCL in the U.S. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database (January 2013 to March 2018). Patients with an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis for DLBCL after October 2015 and no prior International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis for unspecified DLBCL or primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma were classified as incident; those with such codes were classified as prevalent. An adapted algorithm identified lines of therapy (e.g., first line [1L]). All-cause HRU and costs were calculated per-patient-per-year (PPPY) among patients with a ≥1L. RESULTS: Among 1,877 incident and 651 prevalent patients with ≥1L, median age was 72 years and 46% were female. Among incident patients, 22.6% had at least two lines (2L), whereas 38.4% of prevalent patients had ≥2L. The most frequent 1L therapy was rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Incident patients had 1.3 inpatient and 42.0 outpatient (OP) visits PPPY, whereas prevalent patients had 0.8 and 31.3 visits PPPY, respectively. Total costs were $137,156 and $81,669 PPPY for incident and prevalent patients, respectively. OP costs were the main driver of total costs at $88,202 PPPY, which were higher within the first year. CONCLUSION: This study showed that a large portion of patients require additional therapy after 1L treatment to manage DLBCL and highlighted the substantial economic burden of patients with DLBCL, particularly within the first year following diagnosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) carry a substantial clinical and economic burden. A large portion of these patients require additional therapy beyond first-line treatment. There is significant unmet need among patients with DLBCL who require additional therapy beyond first-line treatment. Patients who do not respond to first-line therapy and are not eligible for transplants have very high health care resource utilization and costs, especially in the first 12 months following initiation of treatment.

Real-World Healthcare Resource Utilization in Patients with Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma Treated with Pembrolizumab and Nivolumab in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease who relapse after or are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation have a poor prognosis. Recently, the anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA; May 2016 and March 2017, respectively) as treatment options for R/R cHL patients. OBJECTIVE: In the absence of comparative clinical trials between these agents, this observational study was conducted to evaluate the healthcare resource utilization (HRU) of patients with cHL initiated on pembrolizumab compared to nivolumab in the USA. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Healthcare insurance claims from Symphony Health's IDV® (Integrated Dataverse) (July 2014-June 2018) were used in this retrospective study. The study population included adult patients with cHL initiated on pembrolizumab or nivolumab (index date). Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for differences in patient characteristics between cohorts. All-cause and cHL-related hospitalizations and outpatient visits were measured during the observation (post-index) period and reported per patient-year (PPY). Rates of HRU were compared between cohorts using rate ratios (RRs). RESULTS: A total of 92 and 218 patients initiated on pembrolizumab and nivolumab, respectively, were included in the study population. After weighting, the mean age was similar at 55 years in both cohorts, while the proportion of females was lower in the pembrolizumab cohort (35.3%) compared to the nivolumab cohort (44.1%). Mean Quan-Charlson Comorbidity Index score was well balanced after weighting in the pembrolizumab and nivolumab cohorts (4.2 and 4.3, respectively). During the observation period, patients in the pembrolizumab cohort had significantly lower rates of all-cause hospitalizations (RR [95% CI] 0.33 [0.09-0.80]) and cHL-related hospitalizations (RR [95% CI] 0.14 [0.02-0.37]) than those in the nivolumab cohort. Rates of all-cause and cHL-related outpatient visits were not statistically different between patients in the pembrolizumab and nivolumab cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, adult cHL patients initiated on pembrolizumab had significantly lower rates of all-cause and cHL-related hospitalizations compared to patients initiated on nivolumab.

Relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma: a structured review of epidemiology, treatment guidelines and real-world treatment practices.

Background: Primary mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is an uncommon subtype of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Approximately 10-30% of patients experience refractory or relapsed PMBCL (rrPMBCL) after first-line therapy. Data and treatment guidelines for rrPMBCL are scarce, and management is based on clinical experience.Methods: Two structured literature reviews were undertaken to determine the incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates associated with rrPMBCL, and to identify clinical practice guidelines and real-world patterns of care.Results: Epidemiology studies included reported lymphomas (n = 1), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 1), lymphoid neoplasm (n = 1), PMBCL (n = 6), and rrPMBCL (n = 1). Of 12 published treatment guidelines, only four provided recommendations for rrPMBCL. Sixteen studies provided data on real-world treatment patterns, but most were single-center studies with small patient numbers. Chemotherapy/immunochemotherapy, followed by high-dose treatment (HDT) and stem cell transplantation, was a mainstay of salvage therapy in most studies; real-world care generally followed treatment guidelines.Conclusions: Salvage chemotherapy (often with rituximab and radiotherapy), followed by HDT and stem cell transplantation, appears to be the standard real-world treatment for rrPMBCL. However, large prospective and retrospective studies are warranted to improve our knowledge of real-world treatment patterns.

Patient-reported outcomes in KEYNOTE-087, a phase 2 study of pembrolizumab in patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma.

In KEYNOTE-087, pembrolizumab had a 69% overall response rate and acceptable safety in patients with relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (rrHL). We assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in KEYNOTE-087. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and the EuroQoL Five Dimensions Questionnaire 3-level version (EQ-5D) were administered to 206 patients across three cohorts defined by lymphoma progression after: (1) autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and subsequent brentuximab vedotin (BV) (n = 69); (2) salvage chemotherapy and BV (n = 79); and (3) ASCT without post-transplantation BV (n = 58). Compliance/completion rates were ≥90% at week 12 and ≥70% at week 24. QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL and EQ-5D visual analog scale scores showed mean increases from baseline in overall health at all assessed timepoints. With few exceptions, mean improvements from baseline to weeks 12 and 24 in QLQ-C30 functional and symptom scores occurred in all cohorts.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02453594.

Treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, and costs in patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma treated with brentuximab vedotin.

Data are limited on the real-world utilization and costs of brentuximab vedotin (BV) among patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (rrHL) in the United States. A total of 219 BV patients identified from the Truven MarketScan® databases were followed up for a median of 2.9 years before and 1.0 year after initiation of BV. Of these patients, 109 (50.6%) received systemic therapy after BV (post-BV ST). Median duration of treatment was short for BV (2.1 months) and post-BV ST treatment (1.3 months); time to next treatment was 6.2 and 9.1 months, respectively. Average total US dollar 2014 costs/person for BV and post-BV ST line of therapy were $167,152 and $132,115, respectively; mean per-patient-per-month costs for BV and post-BV ST were $30,434 and $29,138, respectively. Findings underscore the unmet medical need and substantial economic burden in BV-treated patients with rrHL.

Prescribers' behavior following below- versus above-range international normalized ratio values in warfarin-treated deep vein thrombosis patients.

Maintaining acceptable international normalized ratio (INR) control among deep vein thrombosis (DVT) patients taking warfarin is challenging. We evaluated prescribers' behavior to out-of-range INRs in DVT patients following initial INR stabilization. Following INR stabilization, a below-range INR was associated with fewer subsequent measurements and warfarin-dosing adjustments, and a longer time to re-achieve a therapeutic INR compared to an above-range INR.

Costs of hospital visits among patients with deep vein thrombosis treated with rivaroxaban and LMWH/warfarin.

BACKGROUND: For many years, the standard of care for patients diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has been low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging to an oral Vitamin-K antagonist (VKA). The availability of new non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOAC) agents as monotherapy may reduce the likelihood of hospitalization for DVT patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare hospital visit costs of DVT patients treated with rivaroxaban and LMWH/warfarin. METHODS: A retrospective claim analysis was conducted using the MarketScan Hospital Drug Database for care provided between January 2011 and December 2013. Adult patients using rivaroxaban or LMWH/warfarin with a primary diagnosis of DVT during the first day of a hospital visit were identified (i.e., index hospital visit). Based on propensity-score methods, historical LMWH/warfarin patients (i.e., patients who received LMWH/warfarin before the approval of rivaroxaban) were matched 4:1 to rivaroxaban patients. The hospital-visit cost difference between these groups was evaluated for the index hospital visit, as well as for total hospital-visit costs (i.e., including index and subsequent hospital visit costs). RESULTS: All rivaroxaban users (n = 134) in the database were well-matched with four LMWH/warfarin users (n = 536). The mean hospital-visit costs were $5257 for the rivaroxaban cohort and $6764 in the matched-cohort of patients using LMWH/warfarin. The $1508 cost difference was statistically significant between cohorts (95% CI = [-$2296; -$580]; p-value = 0.002). Total hospital-visit costs were lower for rivaroxaban compared to LMWH/warfarin users within 1, 2, 3, and 6 months after index visit (significantly lower within 1 and 3 months, p-values <0.05) LIMITATIONS: Limitations were inherent to administrative-claims data, completeness of baseline characteristics, adjustments restricted to observational factors, and lastly the sample size of the rivaroxaban cohort. CONCLUSION: The availability of rivaroxaban significantly reduced the costs of hospital visits in patients with DVT treated with rivaroxaban compared to LMWH/warfarin.

Rates of hospitalization among patients with deep vein thrombosis before and after the introduction of rivaroxaban.

BACKGROUND: Compared to warfarin, the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban may have advantages in treating patients with venous thromboembolism, because injectable bridging therapy and routine laboratory monitoring are not required. The objective of this study was to compare the rate of hospitalization in patients treated with rivaroxaban after its introduction with what it would have been before the introduction of rivaroxaban. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted using the MarketScan Hospital Drug Database from January 2011 to December 2013. Adult patients with a primary diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) treated with rivaroxaban or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridged to warfarin during the first day of an evaluation at a hospital were identified. Based on propensity-score methods, historical LMWH/warfarin patients (i.e., patients who received LMWH/warfarin before the approval of rivaroxaban) were matched 4:1 to rivaroxaban patients, and the rates of hospitalization were compared. RESULTS: All rivaroxaban-treated patients (n = 134) in the database were well matched with four historical LMWH/warfarin-treated patients (n = 536). Among the rivaroxaban cohort, 60% of the patients were admitted to the hospital, compared to 82% of the historical patients treated with LMWH/warfarin in the matched cohort. The difference was statistically significant and corresponded to a 27% reduction in hospital admissions (rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.73 [0.62-0.84]). Hospital admission rates adjusted for time-trend analyses also led to similar results. CONCLUSION: The availability of rivaroxaban significantly reduced the hospitalization rate in patients with DVT treated with rivaroxaban compared to what it would have been if only LMWH/warfarin were available.

Hospital length of stay of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients who were administered Rivaroxaban versus Warfarin with and without pretreatment parenteral anticoagulants therapies.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin has been the only anticoagulant used for decades to prevent strokes and systemic embolisms in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Compared with rivaroxaban, warfarin has a narrow therapeutic range and many genetic and food-drug interactions that could potentially prolong hospital length of stay (LOS). OBJECTIVE: To compare hospital LOS between NVAF patients who were administered rivaroxaban versus warfarin with and without pretreatment of parenteral anticoagulant agents in a population of rivaroxaban-treated patients. METHODS: A retrospective matched-cohort analysis was conducted using the Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database from November 2010 to September 2012. Adult patients were included in the study if they had a hospitalization for NVAF. Rivaroxaban users were matched with up to 4 warfarin users based on propensity score analyses. Patients with and without pretreatment of parenteral anticoagulant agents were evaluated separately. Hospital LOS was compared between treatment groups using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: The matched cohorts' characteristics were well balanced. Among the matched rivaroxaban and warfarin users who were administered parenteral agents, the mean age of the cohorts was 70 years and 47% of patients were female, whereas in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral agents, the mean age was 72 years and 50% of patients were female. In the sample of patients who were administered parenteral agents, rivaroxaban users had significantly shorter hospital LOS (LOS difference: 1.38 days, P < 0.001) compared with warfarin users among rivaroxaban-treated patients. No significant difference in LOS was found in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral anticoagulant agents (P = 0.169). CONCLUSION: In the study sample of NVAF patients who were administered parenteral anticoagulant agents, rivaroxaban was associated with a significantly shorter hospital LOS compared with warfarin. The difference in LOS was not statistically significant in the sample of patients who were not administered parenteral anticoagulant agents.

Quality of vitamin K antagonist control and outcomes in atrial fibrillation patients: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients frequently require anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to prevent thromboembolic events, but their use increases the risk of hemorrhage. We evaluated time spent in therapeutic range (TTR), proportion of international normalized ratio (INR) measurements in range (PINRR), adverse events in relation to INR, and predictors of INR control in AF patients using VKAs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL and EMBASE (1990-June 2013) for studies of AF patients receiving adjusted-dose VKAs that reported INR control measures (TTR and PINRR) and/or reported an INR measurement coinciding with thromboembolic or hemorrhagic events. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression were performed. RESULTS: Ninety-five articles were included. Sixty-eight VKA-treated study groups reported measures of INR control, while 43 studies reported an INR around the time of the adverse event. Patients spent 61% (95% CI, 59-62%), 25% (95% CI, 23-27%) and 14% (95% CI, 13-15%) of their time within, below or above the therapeutic range. PINRR assessments were within, below, and above range 56% (95% CI, 53-59%), 26% (95% CI, 23-29%) and 13% (95% CI, 11-17%) of the time. Patients receiving VKA management in the community spent less TTR than those managed by anticoagulation clinics or in randomized trials. Patients newly receiving VKAs spent less TTR than those with prior VKA use. Patients in Europe/United Kingdom spent more TTR than patients in North America. Fifty-seven percent (95% CI, 50-64%) of thromboembolic events and 42% (95% CI, 35 - 51%) of hemorrhagic events occurred at an INR <2.0 and >3.0, respectively; while 56% (95% CI, 48-64%) of ischemic strokes and 45% of intracranial hemorrhages (95% CI, 29-63%) occurred at INRs <2.0 and >3.0, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on VKAs for AF frequently have INRs outside the therapeutic range. While, thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events do occur patients with a therapeutic INR; patients with an INR <2.0 make up many of the cases of thromboembolism, while those >3.0 make up many of the cases of hemorrhage. Managing anticoagulation outside of a clinical trial or anticoagulation clinic is associated with poorer INR control, as is, the initiation of therapy in the VKA-naïve. Patients in Europe/UK have better INR control than those in North America.

Hidden costs associated with venous thromboembolism: impact of lost productivity on employers and employees.

OBJECTIVE: To determine productivity loss and indirect costs with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). METHODS: Medical and pharmacy claims with short-term disability (STD) and long-term disability (LTD) claims from 2007 to 2010 were analyzed from the Integrated Benefits Institute's Health and Productivity Benchmarking (IBI-HPB) database (STD and LTD claims) and IMS LifeLink™ data (medical and pharmacy claims), which were indirectly linked using a weighting approach matching from IBI-HPB patients' demographic distribution. RESULTS: A total of 5442 DVT and 6199 PE claims were identified. Employees with DVT lost 57 STD and 440 LTD days per disability incident. The average per claim productivity loss from STD and LTD was $7414 and $58181, respectively. Employees with PE lost 56 STD and 364 LTD days per disability incident. The average per claim productivity loss from STD and LTD was $7605 and $48,751, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Deep vein thrombosis and PE impose substantial economic burdens.

Meta-analysis to assess the quality of international normalized ratio control and associated outcomes in venous thromboembolism patients.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) frequently require vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) to prevent recurrent events, but their use increases hemorrhage risk. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the quality of international normalized ratio (INR) control, identify study-level predictors of poor control and to examine the relationship between INR control and adverse outcomes in VTE patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched bibliographic databases (1990-June 2013) for studies of VTE patients receiving adjusted-dose VKAs that reported time in range (2.0-3.0) or proportion of INRs in range and/or reported INR measurements coinciding with thromboembolic or hemorrhagic events. Meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Upon meta-analysis, studies found 59% (95%CI: 54-64%) of INRs measured and 61% (95%CI: 59-63%) of the time patients were treated were spent outside the target range of 2.0-3.0; with a tendency for under- versus over-anticoagulation. Moreover, this poor INR control resulted in a greater chance of recurrent VTE (beta-coefficient=-0.46, p=0.01) and major bleeding (beta-coefficient=-0.30, p=0.02). Patients with an INR<2.0 made up 58% (95%CI: 39-77%) of VTE cases, while those with an INR>3.0 made up 48% (95%CI: 34-61%) of major hemorrhage cases. Upon meta-regression, being VKA-naïve (-14%, p=0.04) and treated in the community (-7%, p<0.001) were associated with less time in range, while being treated in Europe/United Kingdom (compared to North America) was associated with (11%, p=0.003) greater time. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to improve INR control or alternative anticoagulants, including the newer oral agents, should be widely implemented in VTE patients to reduce the rate of recurrent events and bleeding.