Acthar Gel in African Americans versus Non-African Americans with Symptomatic Sarcoidosis: Physician Assessment of Patient Medical Records.

Introduction: Sarcoidosis is common among African Americans in the United States. Acthar® Gel is a viable option for the treatment of advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis. This study examined patient characteristics, Acthar Gel utilization, co-medication use, and treatment response based on physicians' assessments among African Americans versus non-African Americans with advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis. Methods: Data from the medical charts of patients were used. During data collection, patients had either completed ≥1 course or received treatment with Acthar Gel for ≥6 months. Results: This study comprised 168 African Americans and 104 non-African Americans. On average, the time since the first diagnosis of sarcoidosis was slightly longer among African Americans than non-African Americans (5.2 versus 4.3 years). Skin, heart, eyes, and joints were the most common extrapulmonary sites involved among both race groups. Shortness of breath, fatigue, bone and joint pain, and wheezing/coughing were the most frequent symptoms among both race groups. A higher proportion of African Americans versus non-African Americans were first-time Acthar Gel users and had not completed treatment during data collection. Patients in both race groups with higher starting doses of Acthar Gel therapy had a shorter treatment duration and vice-versa. A significantly lower proportion of patients among both race groups were on any co-medication after Acthar Gel initiation (p<0.0001). Further, a higher proportion of African Americans versus non-African Americans had a reduction in any co-medication use after Acthar Gel initiation. The mean daily dose of prednisone decreased among African Americans (18.5 to 10.1 mg) and non-African Americans (17.6 to 10.0 mg) after Acthar Gel initiation. Improvement in patient health status and overall symptoms was similar for both race groups. Conclusion: Findings suggest that Acthar Gel improves health outcomes for patients with sarcoidosis, which could help to alleviate health disparities among African Americans, who are disproportionately affected by this disease.

Cost-Effectiveness of Acthar Gel versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Advanced Symptomatic Sarcoidosis.

Introduction: Sarcoidosis is a multisystem, inflammatory, systemic granulomatous disease with unknown etiology. Despite the current standard of care (SoC), there is an unmet need for the treatment of advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) versus SoC in patients with advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis from the United States (US) payer and societal perspectives over 2 and 3 years. Methods: A probabilistic cohort-level state-transition approach was used for this cost-effectiveness analysis. Patients were monitored at the end of a 3-month cycle for the attainment of partial or complete response. Patients in the partial, complete, or no-response state were allowed to transition in each of these states at each 3-month cycle. Following the attainment of response, patients could have a durable response or relapse to a no-response state. Patients in a no-response state received treatment and could transition into a response or no-response state based on the probability of treatment success with the respective treatment. Clinical parameters and health utility data were sourced from the Acthar Gel in Participants with Pulmonary Sarcoidosis (PULSAR) trial (NCT03320070) and healthcare utilization, costs, and disutilities were sourced from the published literature. Base case analysis considered a payer perspective over 2 years. Results: From a payer perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $134,796 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $39,179 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. From a societal perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC results in an ICER of $117,622 per QALY and $21,967 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. Sensitivity analysis findings were consistent with the base case. Conclusion: The results from this cost-effectiveness analysis indicate that Acthar Gel is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis compared to the SoC from the US payer and societal perspectives.

Impact of an enhanced recovery after surgery program with a multimodal analgesia care pathway on opioid prescribing and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

Background: Opioids are a mainstay for acute pain management, but their side effects can adversely impact patient recovery. Multimodal analgesia (MMA) is recommended for treatment of postoperative pain and has been incorporated in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols. The objective of this quality improvement study was to implement an MMA care pathway as part of an ERAS program for colorectal surgery and to measure the effect of this intervention on patient outcomes and costs. Methods: This pre-post study included 856 adult inpatients who underwent an elective colorectal surgery at three hospitals within an integrated healthcare system. The impact of ERAS program implementation on opioid prescribing practices, outcomes, and costs was examined after adjusting for clinical and demographic confounders. Results: Improvements were seen in MMA compliance (34.0% vs 65.5%, P < 0.0001) and ERAS compliance (50.4% vs 57.6%, P < 0.0001). Reductions in mean days on opioids (4.2 vs 3.2), daily (51.6 vs 33.4 mg) and total (228.8 vs 112.7 mg) morphine milligram equivalents given during hospitalization, and risk-adjusted length of stay (4.3 vs 3.6 days, P < 0.05) were also observed. Conclusions: Implementing ERAS programs that include MMA care pathways as standard of care may result in more judicious use of opioids and reduce patient recovery time.

Treatment-Related Cost Analysis of Terlipressin for Adults with Hepatorenal Syndrome with Rapid Reduction in Kidney Function.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), a special form of acute kidney failure, is a rare, acute, life-threatening complication of cirrhosis and has a very poor prognosis. Terlipressin (TERLIVAZ®) is the first and only pharmacological treatment approved by Food and Drug Administration (September 2022) to improve kidney function for adults with HRS with rapid reduction in kidney function. We constructed a decision analytic economic model to estimate the cost per complete response/HRS reversal of terlipressin + albumin from a United States hospital perspective. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the HRS treatment-related cost per response over an HRS hospitalization (assuming 14 days). Patients can experience either HRS reversal (complete response) or no HRS reversal (partial/no response) upon receipt of treatment. The efficacy, safety, and treatment duration data were from published head-to-head randomized international trials. Total treatment cost comprised drug acquisition and treatment-related costs (intensive care unit [ICU], dialysis [intermittent or continuous], pulse oximetry monitoring for terlipressin, and adverse events) sourced from the published literature. Cost per response, defined as the total treatment cost per HRS reversal was estimated for each treatment. The number needed to treat (NNT), defined as the number of patients treated to achieve HRS reversal in 1 additional patient, was estimated. RESULTS: Cost per response of terlipressin + albumin was lower than midodrine and octreotide + albumin (M&O) (US$85,315 vs. $467,794) and norepinephrine + albumin ($81,614 vs. $139,324). NNT for HRS reversal was 2 patients with terlipressin + albumin vs. M&O + albumin and 4 patients with terlipressin + albumin vs. norepinephrine + albumin, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis shows that terlipressin is a cost-effective treatment due to its higher efficacy and administration in the non-ICU setting. Terlipressin is a value-based treatment option for appropriate adults with HRS with rapid reduction in kidney function.

Hepatorenal syndrome, a functional, progressive kidney failure, is a life-threatening complication of cirrhosis. It is important to improve kidney function in patients who are hospitalized with hepatorenal syndrome considering the cost of treatment. This study assessed the cost per complete response/ hepatorenal syndrome reversal of terlipressin + albumin from a United States hospital perspective. This study shows that terlipressin improves kidney function with lower intensive care unit and dialysis costs compared with unapproved treatments. Terlipressin is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for appropriate adults with hepatorenal syndrome with rapid reduction in kidney function.

Corticosteroid Use and Adherence in Patients Treated with Acthar Gel for Advanced Sarcoidosis.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term corticosteroid use in immune-mediated diseases is associated with increased risk of adverse events (AEs) and worsened health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Previous studies report chronic high-dose corticosteroid therapy results in higher rates of healthcare resource use and AE-related medical costs. Recent studies suggest Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) is an effective steroid-sparing therapy for sarcoidosis. This study compares the corticosteroid-sparing effect between Acthar Gel and comparators and evaluates the impact of Acthar Gel adherence on reduction of corticosteroid burden. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a large administrative pharmacy and medical claims database (Symphony Health Solutions) was conducted. Patients were included with confirmed ICD-9/10 diagnosis for sarcoidosis in the study period (2014-2020), followed by ≥ 2 Acthar Gel claims or comparators (janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi)/rituximab), ≥ 18 years old, with 12 months coverage pre/post index. Outcomes were compared as change from baseline. Acthar Gel adherence was determined by proportion of days covered in the follow-up period. RESULTS: The Acthar Gel (n = 735) and comparator (n = 626) cohorts were mostly female (68-72%) between 55 and 58 years old. Compared to the comparator cohort at baseline, Acthar Gel patients had greater any corticosteroid use (80% vs. 56%, p < 0.001), extended use (61% vs. 32%, p < 0.001), and mean average daily dose (6.72 vs. 3.03, p < 0.001). After treatment, Acthar Gel patients had greater reduction from baseline in any corticosteroid use (- 9.0% vs. - 3.2%) and extended use (- 10.0% vs. - 3.0%). In the Acthar Gel adherence cohorts, patients with above average adherence had greater reduction in both measures (- 11.2% vs. - 6.1%; - 11.6% vs. - 7.6%, respectively) than patients with below average adherence. Acthar Gel patients had greater reduction of extended use at all dose levels. CONCLUSION: Acthar Gel is associated with reductions in corticosteroid use compared to alternatives. Better adherence is associated with greater reduction in corticosteroid exposure. Key Summary Points.

Patients who use corticosteroids long term for advanced sarcoidosis often suffer from negative health effects. This project aimed to evaluate whether Acthar^® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) use led to reduced corticosteroid use and whether higher adherence to Acthar Gel led to further reduction in corticosteroid use. Pharmacy and medical claims data were used to identify patients who fit certain criteria: the Acthar Gel cohort included patients with sarcoidosis who used Acthar Gel and the comparator cohort included patients with sarcoidosis who used janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or rituximab. The Acthar Gel cohort was split into high adherence and low adherence. The Acthar Gel cohort was found to have higher corticosteroid use than the comparator group in the baseline period before initiating Acthar Gel or a comparator therapy. After initiating treatment, Acthar Gel patients had a larger reduction in corticosteroid use according to a variety of metrics including number of corticosteroid fills and extended use fills. Furthermore, when comparing those with high Acthar Gel adherence and those with low Acthar Gel adherence, the patients with above average adherence had a larger reduction in the number of corticosteroid fills and extended use fills than patients with below average adherence to Acthar Gel. Patients who use Acthar Gel and more regularly tended to use corticosteroids less, which may allow them to avoid the negative health effects from long-term, high-dosage corticosteroid use. This finding may help providers and health plans evaluate situations in which Acthar Gel treatment may be beneficial to improve patient outcomes.

Acthar Gel (RCI): A Narrative Literature Review of Clinical and Economic Evidence.

Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection [RCI]) is a naturally sourced complex mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogs and other pituitary peptides used to treat patients with serious and rare inflammatory and autoimmune conditions. This narrative review summarizes the key clinical and economic findings among 9 indications: infantile spasms (IS), multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), dermatomyositis and polymyositis (DM/PM), ocular inflammatory diseases (primarily uveitis and severe keratitis), symptomatic sarcoidosis, and proteinuria in nephrotic syndrome (NS). Key studies of clinical efficacy and healthcare resource utilization and cost from 1956 to 2022 are discussed. Evidence supports the efficacy of RCI across all 9 indications. RCI is recommended as first-line treatment for IS and is associated with improved outcomes for the other 8 indications, including increased recovery rates in MS relapse; improved disease control in RA, SLE, and DM/PM; real-world effectiveness in patients with uveitis and severe keratitis; improved lung function and reduced corticosteroid use in symptomatic sarcoidosis; and increased rates of partial remission of proteinuria in NS. For many indications, RCI may improve clinical outcomes during exacerbations or when conventional treatments have failed to show a benefit. RCI is also associated with a reduction in the use of biologics, corticosteroids, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Economic data suggest RCI is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for MS relapse, RA, and SLE. Other economic benefits have been demonstrated for IS, MS relapses, RA, SLE, and DM/PM, including reduced hospitalizations, lengths of stay, inpatient and outpatient services, and emergency department visits. RCI is considered safe and effective and features economic benefits for numerous indications. Its ability to control relapse and disease activity makes RCI an important nonsteroid treatment option that could help preserve functioning and well-being among patients with inflammatory and autoimmune conditions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Acthar Gel Versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Exacerbations in Moderate-to-Severe Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

INTRODUCTION: Despite current standard of care (SoC), there is an unmet need for the treatment of active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The study assessed the cost-effectiveness of Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) versus SoC treatment in patients with active, moderate-to-severe SLE from the US payer and societal perspectives over 2 and 3 years. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness model was developed using a probabilistic cohort-level state-transition approach. Patients received Acthar Gel in an exacerbation state, and the outcomes were assessed at the end of a 3-month cycle for response achievement based on the probability of treatment success with Acthar Gel. Patients may sustain the response or experience an exacerbation. For the base case scenario, moderate-to-severe SLE was defined as British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-2004 ≥ 20 or SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥ 10 and clinical response was based on SLE responder index (SRI)-4. Clinical response, productivity loss, and utility were derived from a phase 4 SLE trial; cost and disutility estimates were sourced from the literature. RESULTS: From a payer perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $133,110 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $94,818 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. From a societal perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC results in an ICER of $70,827 per QALY and $32,525 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. Results from the sensitivity and scenario analyses are consistent with those of the base case model. CONCLUSIONS: Acthar Gel is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for appropriate patients with moderate-to-severe SLE at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 over 2-3 years from the US payer and societal perspectives. Acthar Gel results in the reduction of direct medical and indirect costs.

Pain and Fatigue Improvements in Patients Treated with Repository Corticotropin Injection Across Five Indications: A Narrative Review.

Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar® Gel) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in 19 indications, including for the treatment of selected patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, and keratitis. Despite treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, many patients with RA, SLE, and other chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases continue to be affected by severe pain and fatigue, indicating a need for other therapies. To examine the clinical data regarding the impact of RCI treatment on pain and fatigue in selected populations, this review included English-language peer-reviewed publications of clinical trials of any size and cohort studies with more than 10 patients that included pain and/or fatigue based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and/or physician-assessed measures in adults following treatment with RCI for RA, SLE, symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, or keratitis. Literature searches identified eight studies that met these criteria. Four studies (reported in five publications) were in patients with RA or SLE, two in patients with sarcoidosis, one in patients with uveitis, and one in patients with noninfectious keratitis. Across the different types of studies assessed (clinical trials, chart reviews, real-world evidence), the results were consistent with respect to the impact of RCI treatment on improving pain and fatigue. As summarized in this review, data from patient- and physician-reported outcome measures in eight studies demonstrate that, in addition to improving more traditional efficacy measures, RCI may also improve pain and fatigue in patients with RA, SLE, symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, and noninfectious keratitis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are chronic autoimmune diseases. Clinical studies of drugs for these diseases do not often ask patients how they feel after treatment. Despite treatment, many people with these diseases have pain and feel tired. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) is a prescription drug for patients with RA, SLE, and other chronic immune diseases. We reviewed the results of published studies with data on pain and fatigue from patients treated with RCI. Four studies were in patients with RA or SLE. Two studies were in patients with symptomatic sarcoidosis. One study was in patients with uveitis. One study was in patients with noninfectious keratitis. These eight studies show that adding RCI to standard treatment lowers pain and fatigue in some patients. It would be helpful to measure pain and fatigue in future clinical studies of drugs for patients with chronic immune diseases.

Understanding Predictors of Response to Repository Corticotropin Injection Treatment Among Patients With Advanced Symptomatic Sarcoidosis.

Background: Sarcoidosis, an inflammatory systemic granulomatous disease, affects multiple organs and has a diverse clinical course. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) is an effective treatment for advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis. Since sarcoidosis affects patients differently, treatment response may vary by patient demographic, clinical, and treatment-related characteristics and physician specialty. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding predictors of sarcoidosis treatment response. Objectives: This study investigated predictors of response to RCI treatment. Methods: Post-hoc analysis was conducted using data from a previously published retrospective cross-sectional chart review study among symptomatic sarcoidosis patients ≥18 years of age previously treated with RCI. Outcome improvement 3 months post-RCI treatment was based on the clinician's subjective evaluation and analyzed using adjusted logistic regression. The most influential predictors for each outcome were based on statistical significance (P<.05) and the strength of the relationship assessed by the standardized ß coefficients. Results: The top predictors of outcome improvements were as follows. Global health assessment: (1) improvement in current health status influenced by complete RCI compliance, moderate overall symptom severity, and presence of extrapulmonary sites; and (2) improvement in overall symptoms influenced by age, shorter duration since sarcoidosis diagnosis, and complete RCI compliance. Clinical outcomes: (1) lung function improvement influenced by mild weight loss, mild wheezing/coughing, and non-African American race; (2) reduction in pulmonary fibrosis influenced by moderate overall symptom severity, mild wheezing/coughing, and mild weight loss; and (3) reduction in inflammation influenced by physician specialty, completing a course of RCI treatment, and moderate-to-severe night sweats. Patient-related outcomes: (1) reduction in fatigue influenced by physician specialty and moderate-to-severe fatigue; and (2) improvement in quality-of-life influenced by shorter duration since sarcoidosis diagnosis, moderate-to-severe wheezing/coughing, and complete RCI compliance. Corticosteroid discontinuation/reduction was influenced by physician specialty, moderate-to-severe shortness of breath, and comedication use before RCI. Conclusions: RCI may be a better treatment option for patients with more severe disease, primarily those presenting with symptoms. Complete compliance with RCI treatment may improve patients' health and quality of life. Understanding factors that influence RCI effectiveness across different treatment outcomes in real-world clinical practice is important for designing optimal sarcoidosis treatment strategies.

Real-world use of inhaled nitric oxide therapy in patients with COVID-19 and mild-to-moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Background: Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) has been studied in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 when it may be too late to impact disease course. This article aims to describe real-world iNO use and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with mild-to-moderate ARDS in the United States. Methods: This was a retrospective medical chart review study that included patients who were ≥18 years old, hospitalized for COVID-19, met the Berlin ARDS definition, received iNO for ≥24 hours continuously during hospitalization, and had a partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio (P/F ratio) of >100 to ≤300 mmHg at iNO initiation. Outcomes included oxygenation parameters, physician-rated Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale scores, and adverse events. Response to iNO was defined as >20% improvement in P/F ratio. Results: Thirty-seven patients at six sites were included. A P/F ratio of ≤100 was the most common reason for exclusion (n=146; 83% of excluded patients). The mean P/F ratio (SD) increased from 136.7 (34.4) at baseline to 140.3 (53.2) at 48 hours and 151.8 (50.0) at 72 hours after iNO initiation. The response rate was 62% (n=23). During hospitalization, no patient experienced adverse events, including methemoglobinaemia, airway injury, or worsening pulmonary oedema associated with iNO. At discharge, 54.0% (n=20) of patients improved or remained stable according to the CGI-I. Conclusion: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and mild-to-moderate ARDS, iNO was associated with improvement in the P/F ratio with no reported toxicity. This study provides additional evidence supporting a favourable benefit-risk profile for iNO in the treatment of mild-to-moderate ARDS in patients with COVID-19 infection.

Real-world treatment patterns for repository corticotropin injection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Introduction: Repository corticotropin injection (RCI, Acthar® Gel) is a naturally sourced mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogues and other pituitary peptides with anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. In a recent clinical trial, RCI was safe and effective for the treatment of refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study aims to describe real-world use and outcomes of patients with RA who were prescribed RCI in clinical practice through retrospective analysis of an electronic medical record database. Methods: Patients with RA who were prescribed RCI were identified through the ColumbusTM electronic medical record repository, representing approximately 100 rheumatology practices. Demographics, medications, comorbidities, disease histories, laboratory evaluations, clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated from 12 months pre-RCI to 12 months post-RCI initiation. Results: The RCI cohort (n=63) comprised predominantly white women, aged 54 years on average, at 6 years from RA diagnosis, with high disease activity at baseline according to Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) scores. Within the 12 months pre-RCI initiation, 87% of patients were prescribed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and 67% were prescribed glucocorticoids. Twelve months post-RCI initiation, glucocorticoid, opioid and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug prescriptions decreased; disease-modifying antirheumatic drug prescriptions remained stable. Reductions in CDAI, RAPID3, physician global assessment, tender joint count, swollen joint count, and pain visual analogue scale scores were observed 12 months post-RCI initiation. Few discontinuations were due to side effects. Study limitations included small sample size and incomplete electronic medical record data. Conclusion: These findings support the safety and effectiveness of RCI for short-term adjunctive treatment of refractory RA and provide patient-management insights from routine clinical practice.

Post Hoc Analysis of Predictors of Clinical Response to Repository Corticotropin Injection in Persistently Active Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: A phase IV clinical trial confirmed the safety and efficacy of repository corticotropin injection (RCI, Acthar® Gel) in patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that was nonresponsive to standard-of-care therapies. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to identify baseline demographics and clinical characteristics that may be predictors of response to RCI. METHODS: The phase IV trial was a two-part, randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal study. Post hoc analysis was conducted with the open-label portion of the trial data, in which all 258 subjects received RCI (80 U) twice weekly for 12 weeks. Responders were subjects who achieved low disease activity (LDA) by a Disease Activity Score with 28-joint count and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) of < 3.2 at week 12. Responders were compared with nonresponders by assessing the proportion of subjects in each group for demographics and clinical characteristics, including weight, disease duration, medical history including osteoarthritis and unrelated joint conditions, hemoglobin A1c, C-reactive protein, ESR, DAS28-ESR, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), depression, anxiety, tender joint count (TJC), and swollen joint count (SJC). Bivariate analysis followed by multiple logistic regression analysis were conducted to identify significant baseline predictors for the outcome of achieving LDA by week 12. RESULTS: Bivariate analysis showed that RCI responders had significantly lower baseline TJC (p = 0.0310), SJC (p = 0.0018), ESR (p = 0.0487), and CDAI (p = 0.0112) and shorter RA disease duration (p = 0.0446). Subjects were less likely to achieve LDA if they had osteoarthritis (p < 0.0001), other joint-related conditions unrelated to RA (p < 0.0001), anemia (p = 0.0132), depression (p = 0.0006), or prior or concomitant use of targeted-synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (p < 0.0001). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that, of the above, only ongoing osteoarthritis (p = 0.0272) or other joint-related conditions (p = 0.0193) were significant negative predictors of RCI response. CONCLUSIONS: These results identify specific patient characteristics that may be considered predictors of positive or negative clinical response to RCI.

Post Hoc Analysis of the Correlation Between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinical Response to Repository Corticotropin Injection for Persistently Active Rheumatoid Arthritis.

PURPOSE: Approximately 6% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the USA have refractory disease that is resistant to standard-of-care therapies. A recent phase IV clinical trial affirmed the safety and efficacy of repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar® Gel) for refractory RA. This post hoc analysis of the clinical trial data assessed whether changes in clinical measures correlated with patient-reported outcome (PRO) improvements. METHODS: Data were assessed from the trial's open-label period when patients received RCI (80 U) twice weekly for 12 weeks. Clinical assessments included hemoglobin A1c, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), total joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), Disease Activity Score with 28 joint count and ESR (DAS28-ESR), and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). PROs included pain (Visual Analog Scale), fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-F]), disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI]), and activity impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] questionnaire). Patients grouped by minimal clinically important difference (MCID) improvement vs no improvement in PROs were compared with clinical measures at week 12. Correlations were determined by multivariable linear regression analysis and standardized coefficient estimates. RESULTS: RCI responders, defined as patients with DAS28-ESR < 3.2 at week 12, reported significantly greater PRO improvements for pain, disability, fatigue, activity impairment, current work impairment, and overall work impairment than nonresponders. Patients with MCID improvements in all PROs showed significantly greater decreases in mean values for TJC, DAS28-ESR, and CDAI, whereas those with pain, fatigue, and disability improvements had significantly greater SJC and ESR reductions. Multivariable linear regression analysis determined that improvement from baseline in all PROs correlated with significant decreases in TJC, DAS28-ESR, and CDAI. ESR reduction significantly correlated with improvements in pain and disability, but not fatigue or WPAI. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that clinical responses to RCI were directly correlated with patient perception of improvement.

Cost-Effectiveness of Repository Corticotropin Injection for the Treatment of Acute Exacerbations in Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Relapses are common among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) despite treatment with disease-modifying therapies. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI, Acthar® Gel), plasmapheresis (PMP), and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) are alternative therapies for MS relapse. There is a dearth of economic assessments of these therapies for the acute exacerbations of MS. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of RCI compared to PMP or IVIg. METHODS: A Markov state-transition model compared outcomes (costs, relapses, remission, and utilities) with RCI versus PMP or IVIg for the acute exacerbations in MS. The model was developed from the United States (US) payer and societal perspectives over one to three years. Patients initiated on alternative therapies were evaluated in one-day increments for the first 30 days during treatment. The model assumes the natural history of MS after treatment in the first month, adjusting for the effect of treatment. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The uncertainty in model parameters was evaluated in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In the base case, RCI has an ICER of USD 42,078 per QALY compared to PMP over one year from the payer perspective and is dominant over two and three years; RCI is dominant compared to PMP from the societal perspective over all three years. Compared to IVIg, RCI is a dominant strategy from both payer and societal perspectives over all three years. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis supports the base case findings, suggesting that RCI may be cost-effective versus PMP and IVIg for acute exacerbations in MS. CONCLUSION: RCI is a cost-effective alternative treatment for MS relapses compared to PMP and IVIg from the US payer and societal perspectives.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes from an Electronic Medical Records Database for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Repository Corticotropin Injection.

PURPOSE: Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar® Gel) is a naturally sourced mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogs and other pituitary peptides that exerts anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties via melanocortin receptors. RCI is approved as a short-term adjunctive therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and is typically used in patients with refractory RA. The objective of this study was to describe real-world outcomes of RA patients treated with RCI by retrospective analysis of an electronic medical records (EMR) database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EMR data were obtained from the United Rheumatology-Normal Integrated Community Evidence (UR-NICETM) data repository for patients who used RCI for the treatment of RA. Demographics, comorbidities, disease history, medications, and laboratory evaluations 365 days prior to and 365 days after initiation of RCI were examined. RESULTS: The patient cohort was predominantly White females with a mean age of 60 years and high RA activity prior to RCI therapy. Clinical measures of disease severity indicated that patients had high RA activity before starting RCI therapy. Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) scores were significantly reduced 365 days post-initiation of RCI. Swollen and tender joint counts and patient-reported outcomes, including Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), Physician Global Assessment, and patient assessment of pain severity were also significantly lower. The number of patients taking conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic (b) DMARDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), and opioids decreased, as did the number of drugs tried within each class for csDMARDs, bDMARDs, NSAIDs, and glucocorticoids. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that RCI significantly improves clinical outcomes of RA and decreases the need for concomitant medications for up to 1 year following initiation of therapy. The study provides valuable insights into the use of RCI and management of these difficult-to-treat RA patients during routine clinical practice.

Cost-Effectiveness of Repository Corticotropin Injection versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Active Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) often have inadequately controlled symptoms and are unable to achieve remission or low disease activity despite aggressive treatment. This results in irreversible joint damage, adversely affecting patients' physical and social functioning. The objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of repository corticotropin injection (RCI) versus standard of care (SoC) in patients with active RA from the United States (US) payer and societal perspectives over two to three years. METHODS: An individual-level microsimulation was developed to generate individual trajectories for patients with RA, using data from a published Phase 4 trial of RCI. These trajectories report a patient's disease pathway and associated cost and quality-of-life outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of RCI versus SoC was assessed using the literature-derived direct medical and indirect costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) derived from a Phase 4 trial of RCI. The uncertainty in base case estimates of the parameters was evaluated in the sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Over two years, RCI has an incremental QALY gain of 1.591 and incremental cost of $183,965 and $117,443 from payer and societal perspective, respectively, resulting in an ICER of $115,629/QALY and $73,817/QALY compared to SoC. Over three years, RCI has an incremental QALY gain of 2.336 and incremental cost of $202,315 and $104,506 from payer and societal perspective, respectively, resulting in an ICER of $86,607/QALY and $44,737/QALY compared to SoC. Results from the probabilistic sensitivity analysis are consistent with those of the base case model. CONCLUSION: RCI is a cost-effective strategy for patients with persistently active RA who are previously treated with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and corticosteroids compared to SoC over two to three years from the payer and societal perspectives at a US willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY. Further, the economic benefit of RCI is realized with improvement in a patient's clinical and health outcomes.

Patient-Reported Outcomes from a Phase 4, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Repository Corticotropin Injection (Acthar® Gel) for Persistently Active Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed patient-reported outcomes from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar® Gel) in patients with persistently active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) despite treatment with moderate-dose glucocorticoids. METHODS: The trial enrolled adults with active SLE and moderate-to-severe rash and/or arthritis despite use of stable glucocorticoids (7.5 mg/day to 30 mg/day prednisone equivalent), antimalarials, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for ≥ 4 weeks and/or immunosuppressants for ≥ 8 weeks before screening. Patients were randomly assigned to 80 U of RCI or placebo subcutaneously every other day through week 4, then twice weekly through week 24. Primary analyses evaluated the change from baseline to week 24 in the Lupus Quality of Life (QoL) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI)-Lupus questionnaires. Post hoc analyses stratified results by baseline disease activity (SLE Disease Activity Index-2000 [SLEDAI-2K] < 10 or ≥ 10; Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index [CLASI]-Activity < 11 or ≥ 11; and British Isles Lupus Assessment Group [BILAG]-2004 < 20 or ≥ 20) and by BILAG-based Combined Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response at weeks 20 and 24. RESULTS: RCI treatment resulted in greater improvement in the LupusQoL pain domain at week 16 and planning domain at week 24 compared with placebo. Post hoc analyses demonstrated greater improvements with RCI in the pain, planning, and fatigue domains than with placebo at multiple time points in patients with higher disease activity by baseline SLEDAI-2K ≥ 10, CLASI-Activity ≥ 11, and BILAG-2004 ≥ 20 and/or in BICLA responders. Compared with placebo, RCI also resulted in greater improvements in percentage work time missed at week 24 in patients with baseline CLASI-Activity < 11 and in percentage impairment while working at week 16 in BICLA responders. CONCLUSIONS: RCI may improve QoL and work productivity in patients who have persistently active SLE despite treatment with standard SLE therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02953821.

Key Steps Toward a Promotional Communications Strategy: Collaboration Best Practices for Teams Creating Promotional Materials and Regulatory Colleagues.

A promotional communications strategy is considered early in prescription medical product development by commercial disciplines (e.g., commercial/marketing) and informs promotional materials to key stakeholders such as healthcare providers and patients. Health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) is a scientific discipline that is also responsible for the generation of promotional materials to other key stakeholders such as payors. The overarching promotional strategy benefits from consistent partnerships with regulatory affairs colleagues, culminating in cost savings and patient-centric promotional materials. Yet there is a paucity of published content that details effective collaboration between promotional teams and regulatory colleagues prior to medical/legal/regulatory (MLR) review. The following review aims to showcase such organizational innovation from the perspective of teams developing promotional materials (i.e., commercial and HEOR). Behind-the-scenes marketing activities are described in relation to the following key steps that build the strategy's foundation: insight gathering from key stakeholders; sub-strategy development; tactic identification; and promotional message development. Integration of regulatory colleagues with teams developing promotional materials is imperative to accomplish these key steps prior to any MLR review. Finally, four themes in best practices for collaboration with regulatory colleagues are shared from the perspective of commercial disciplines and HEOR, alongside a real-world example for each: (1) Alignment of Strategies; (2) Shared Process & Tools; (3) Creative Problem-Solving; and (4) Culture of Connecting.

A Systematic Literature Review and Indirect Treatment Comparison of Efficacy of Repository Corticotropin Injection versus Synthetic Adrenocorticotropic Hormone for Infantile Spasms.

Background: Infantile spasms is a rare disease characterized by distinct seizures and hypsarrhythmia. Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) is available as a natural product (repository corticotropin injection, [RCI]; Acthar® Gel) and as synthetic analogs. RCI is a naturally-sourced complex mixture of purified ACTH analogs and other pituitary peptides approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration as a monotherapy for the treatment of infantile spasms. RCI is commonly used in the United States. Outside the United States, synthetic analogs of ACTH-synthetic ACTH1-24 (tetracosactide) and synthetic ACTH1-39 (corticotropin carboxymethyl-cellulose [CCMC])-are used. The efficacy of RCI may differ from that of synthetic ACTH treatments based on the structure of peptide; however, no head-to-head clinical trials have compared the efficacy of RCI and synthetic ACTH treatments. Objective: A systematic review and indirect treatment comparison of clinical trials was conducted to assess the comparative efficacy of RCI and synthetic ACTH treatments in infantile spasms. Methods: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through September 30, 2020. Relevant clinical trials on RCI or synthetic ACTH therapy and reporting either cessation of spasms or resolution of hypsarrhythmia, separately or as a combined outcome were included. A Bayesian indirect treatment comparison using a fixed-effects model was used for comparative efficacy. Results: Of 473 citations screened, 21 studies were reviewed qualitatively. In the indirect treatment comparison of six eligible clinical trial studies, the odds of achieving efficacy outcomes were five to eight times greater with RCI than with tetracosactide and 14 to 16 times greater than CCMC. This translated to a risk reduction of 10% to 14% and 40% to 50% with RCI versus tetracosactide and CCMC, respectively. For every two to five patients treated, RCI improved efficacy outcomes in one additional patient compared to synthetic ACTH (adjusted number needed-to-treat). Conclusions: Based on the available limited evidence, results suggest RCI may be more efficacious for infantile spasms than synthetic ACTH treatments. Our findings provide a blueprint to inform the design of future prospective studies for the treatment of infantile spasms.

Consequences of insurance denials among U.S. patients prescribed repository corticotropin injection (Acthar Gel) for nephrotic syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar Gel) is indicated to induce a diuresis or a remission of proteinuria in nephrotic syndrome (NS) without uremia of the idiopathic type or that due to lupus erythematosus. This study compares patient characteristics and measurable healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) between NS patients who received a prescription for RCI and then were either approved or denied treatment by their insurers. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of adults with NS from January 2015 to December 2018 was conducted using a de-identified open-source claims database. Patients were included in the study if they had ≥1diagnosis associated with NS, were age 18+, and had medical claims activity at some point in the year preceding ("baseline") and year following ("follow up") their first approved or denied RCI prescription. Baseline characteristics were reported with p-values indicating the significance of characteristics between cohorts. To assess outcomes, approved and denied patients were matched (1:1) using propensity-matching to account for underlying differences. RESULTS: Overall, 1,232 patients met inclusion criteria for the study. At baseline, approved patients were older than denied patients (mean age 53.9 vs. 48.4) and had higher rates of comorbidities. A greater proportion of approved patients required inpatient admissions (34.1 vs. 28.0%) and "high" doses of corticosteroids (CS) (26.2 vs. 20.7%) at baseline. Matched outcomes showed directionally more denied patients with inpatient admissions compared to approved (64 vs. 52) and a greater utilization of deep vein thrombosis ultrasound (12.2 vs. 6.6%) and dialysis (10.5 vs. 6.1%). Matched, denied patients had directionally greater CS use during follow-up both in the number of patients receiving CS (104 vs. 95) and the average annualized daily dose (4.1 vs. 3.4 mg). CONCLUSION: Patients denied access to RCI treatment had directionally higher HCRU compared to matched, approved counterparts. Thus, the results of this study may aid providers and payers in evaluating scenarios where RCI may be beneficial and improve quality of care for NS patients.