The burden of undertreatment and non-treatment among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and elevated stroke risk: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Global treatment guidelines recommend treatment with oral anticoagulants (OACs) for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and an elevated stroke risk. However, not all patients with NVAF and an elevated stroke risk receive guideline-recommended therapy. A literature review and synthesis of observational studies were undertaken to identify the body of evidence on untreated and undertreated NVAF and the association with clinical and economic outcomes. METHODS: An extensive search (1/2010-4/2020) of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, conference proceedings, and health technology assessments (HTAs) was conducted. Studies must have evaluated rates of nontreatment or undertreatment in NVAF. Nontreatment was defined as absence of OACs (but with possible antiplatelet treatment), while undertreatment was defined as treatment with only antiplatelet agents. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met our inclusion criteria. Rates of nontreatment for patients with elevated stroke risk ranged from 2.0-51.1%, while rates of undertreatment ranged from 10.0-45.1%. The clinical benefits of anticoagulation were reported in the evaluated studies with reductions in stroke and mortality outcomes observed among patients treated with anticoagulants compared to untreated or undertreated patients. Adverse events associated with all bleeding types (i.e. hemorrhagic stroke, major bleeding or gastrointestinal hemorrhaging) were found to be higher for warfarin patients compared to untreated patients in real-world practice. Healthcare resource utilization was found to be lower among patients highly-adherent to warfarin compared to untreated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of nontreatment and undertreatment among NVAF patients remain high and are associated with preventable cardiovascular events and death. Strategies to increase rates of treatment may improve clinical outcomes.

The IMPact of untReated nOn-Valvular atrial fibrillation on short-tErm clinical and economic outcomes in the US Medicare population: the IMPROVE-AF model.

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment guidelines recommending the use of oral anticoagulants (OACs) for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and moderate to high risk of stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥1), many patients remain untreated. A study conducted among Medicare beneficiaries with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of ≥2 found that 51% of patients were not prescribed an OAC despite being eligible for treatment. When left untreated, NVAF poses an enormous burden to society, as stroke events are estimated to cost the US healthcare system about $34 billion each year in both direct medical costs and indirect productivity losses. This research explored the short-term clinical implications and budget impact (BI) of increasing OAC use among Medicare beneficiaries with NVAF. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed from the payer and societal perspectives to estimate the impact of increasing treatment rates among Medicare-eligible NVAF patients with a moderate-to-high risk of stroke over 1 year. Results of the model compared (1) a base case scenario using literature-derived rates of OAC use, and (2) a hypothetical scenario assuming an absolute 5% increase in overall OAC use. Clinical outcomes included the incremental annual number of ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and gastrointestinal bleeding events, and stroke-related deaths. Economic outcomes included incremental annual and per-member per-month (PMPM) direct medical costs for the payer perspective and the incremental sum of annual direct medical and indirect costs from productivity loss and caregiver burden for the societal perspective. RESULTS: In total, 1.95 million Medicare patients with NVAF were estimated to be treated with OACs in the base case (3.8% of beneficiaries). In the hypothetical scenario analysis, nearly 200,000 more patients were treated resulting in 3,705 fewer ischemic strokes, 14 fewer gastrointestinal bleeds, 141 more hemorrhagic strokes, and 175 fewer deaths. The total incremental BI was $399.16 million ($0.65 PMPM) from the payer perspective and $377.10 million from the societal perspective due to indirect cost savings ($22.06 million). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that increased overall OAC use has a positive clinical benefit on the annual number of ischemic stroke events and deaths avoided in the Medicare population, while maintaining a modest increase in the overall BI to the Medicare system.

Applying State-of-the-Art Survival Extrapolation Techniques to the Evaluation of CAR-T Therapies: Evidence from a Systematic Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: Traditional statistical techniques for extrapolating short-term survival data for anticancer therapies assume the same mortality rate for noncured and "cured" patients, which is appropriate for projecting survival of non-curative therapies but may lead to an underestimation of the treatment effectiveness for potentially curative therapies. Our objective was to ascertain research trends in survival extrapolation techniques used to project the survival benefits of chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapies. METHODS: A global systematic literature search produced a review of survival analyses of CAR-T therapies, published between January 1, 2015 and December 14, 2020, based on publications sourced from MEDLINE, scientific conferences, and health technology assessment agencies. Trends in survival extrapolation techniques used, and the rationale for selecting advanced techniques, are discussed. RESULTS: Twenty publications were included, the majority of which (65%, N = 13) accounted for curative intent of CAR-T therapies through the use of advanced extrapolation techniques, i.e., mixture cure models [MCMs] (N = 10) or spline-based models (N = 3). The authors' rationale for using the MCM approach included (a) better statistical fits to the observed Kaplan-Meier curves (KMs) and (b) visual inspection of the KMs indicated that a proportion of patients experienced long-term remission and survival which is not inherently captured in standard parametric distributions. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that an advanced extrapolation technique should be considered in base case survival analyses of CAR-T therapies when extrapolating short-term survival data to long-term horizons extending beyond the clinical trial duration. CONCLUSION: Advanced extrapolation techniques allow researchers to account for the proportion of patients with an observed plateau in survival from clinical trial data; by only using standard-partitioned modeling, researchers may risk underestimating the survival benefits for the subset of patients with long-term remission. Sensitivity analysis with an alternative advanced extrapolation technique should be implemented and re-assessment using clinical trial extension data and/or real-world data should be conducted as longer-term data become available.