Performance of point charge embedding schemes for excited states in molecular organic crystals.

Modeling excited state processes in molecular crystals is relevant for several applications. A popular approach for studying excited state molecular crystals is to use cluster models embedded in point charges. In this paper, we compare the performance of several embedding models in predicting excited states and S1-S0 optical gaps for a set of crystals from the X23 molecular crystal database. The performance of atomic charges based on ground or excited states was examined for cluster models, Ewald embedding, and self-consistent approaches. We investigated the impact of various factors, such as the level of theory, basis sets, embedding models, and the level of localization of the excitation. We consider different levels of theory, including time-dependent density functional theory and Tamm-Dancoff approximation (TDA) (DFT functionals: ωB97X-D and PBE0), CC2, complete active space self-consistent field, and CASPT2. We also explore the impact of selection of the QM region, charge leakage, and level of theory for the description of different kinds of excited states. We implemented three schemes based on distance thresholds to overcome overpolarization and charge leakage in molecular crystals. Our findings are compared against experimental data, G0W0-BSE, periodic TDA, and optimally tuned screened range-separated functionals.

The association between US Food and Drug Administration-expedited review designations and health plan specialty drug coverage.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) speeds approval of important clinical advancements through 4 expedited review programs: Priority Review, Accelerated Approval, Fast Track, and Breakthrough Therapy. Whether health plans prioritize coverage of expedited drugs relative to drugs that the FDA determined did not qualify from these programs is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To investigate how fast US commercial health plans issued coverage policies for drugs included in different numbers of FDA-expedited programs. Second, to examine the association between a drug's inclusion in an FDA-expedited program and plan coverage restrictiveness. METHODS: We used a separate dataset for each study objective. For the first objective, we created a dataset of policies issued by 17 large commercial health plans for 2018 FDA-approved drugs. Included policies were active exactly 1 year following each drug's FDA approval. We investigated the relationship between the speed of policy issuance and the number of expedited programs. We controlled for cancer and orphan indication. For the second objective, we analyzed a dataset of commercial health plan specialty drug coverage policies. We categorized drugs with respect to the number of expedited programs (0, 1, or 2+ programs). Coverage policies were categorized as whether plans imposed restrictions beyond a drug's FDA-approved labeling, for example, step therapy requirements. We used regression analysis to examine the association between FDA-expedited review and coverage restrictiveness when controlling for other relevant factors (eg, availability of alternatives). RESULTS: For our first objective, plans issued 62% (742/1,190) of policies within a year of a drug's FDA approval. In unadjusted analysis, policy issuance speed increased with each additional expedited program (hazard ratio=1.15; P<0.01). After controlling for cancer and orphan status, the number of expedited programs was not associated with faster policy issuance (hazard ratio=0.95; P=0.209). For our second objective, plans imposed coverage restrictions in 33% (672/2,027) of policies for drugs the FDA included in at least 1 FDA-expedited program vs 51% (870/1,706) of policies for drugs the FDA excluded from these programs. In multivariable regression, we did not find an association between FDA-expedited review and coverage restrictiveness after controlling for other decision-making factors (including disease prevalence, annual cost, etc). CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for other decision-making factors, we did not find that FDA-expedited approval was associated with faster coverage policy issuance, nor did we find that plans covered drugs the FDA included in expedited review programs less restrictively than drugs excluded from these programs. Our findings raise questions about why plans do not also accelerate access for these clinical advancements. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Mr Ingham is an employee of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and is a stockholder of Johnson & Johnson. Dr Chambers reports grants from Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, during the conduct of the study.

Treatment patterns, economic burden, and overall survival in US Medicare Advantage beneficiaries newly diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in 2015-2020.

The present study assessed changes in patient management, economic burden, and overall survival (OS) in a contemporary cohort of 2775 US Medicare Advantage beneficiaries aged ≥66 years newly diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) between 01 January 2015 and 30 June 2020. Use of venetoclax-based therapy increased and replaced hypomethylating agent (HMA) monotherapy as the most common first-line treatment choice in 2019-2020. In newly diagnosed AML patients aged ≥75 and 66-74 years, mean per-patient 1-year healthcare expenditures were $81,818 and $156,033 (2020 USD) and median OS was 2.3 and 8.5 months, respectively. In addition, 40% of Medicare Advantage patients with newly diagnosed AML continue to receive supportive care alone. These findings indicate that at the population level clinical outcomes remain poor for older adults with AML, pointing to a continuing unmet medical need.

Effectiveness, treatment durability, and treatment costs of canagliflozin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes in the USA.

Introduction: This real-world study compared glycemic effectiveness, treatment durability, and treatment costs with canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the USA. Research design and methods: A retrospective cohort study using administrative claims and laboratory data (1 April 2012 to 28 February 2017) from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database were used to assess mean HbA1c at 3-month intervals, achievement of HbA1c thresholds (<7.0%, <8.0%, <9.0%), and treatment durability (ie, adherence, discontinuation, switching, treatment failure (ie, exceeding threshold (7.0%, 8.0%, 9.0%), having a prescription for a new antihyperglycemic agent)) in adults with T2DM who initiated canagliflozin 300 mg or any dose of a GLP-1 receptor agonist. Medication costs were calculated for adherent patients. Results: There were no significant differences in the primary outcome of HbA1c levels at 3-month intervals (≤12 months) in the canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose GLP-1 receptor agonist cohort. The likelihood of achieving HbA1c<8.0% was not different (p=0.666), the likelihood of achieving HbA1c<7.0% was lower (p=0.016), and the likelihood of achieving HbA1c<9.0% was higher (p=0.020) in the canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose GLP-1 receptor agonist cohort. The likelihood of treatment failure after reaching any HbA1c target was not different between cohorts. A higher proportion of patients were adherent to treatment (p<0.0001) and a lower proportion discontinued (p<0.0001) or switched medication (p=0.023) in the canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose GLP-1 receptor agonist cohort. Over 1 year, medication costs were $1421 (p<0.001) lower with canagliflozin 300 mg than any dose of GLP-1 receptor agonists. Conclusions: This real-world, US-based study found that initiation of canagliflozin 300 mg versus any dose of a GLP-1 receptor agonist in patients with T2DM was not associated with significant differences in the primary outcome of HbA1c levels at 3-month intervals for up to 12 months after index, but showed better adherence, less discontinuation, and lower drug acquisition costs compared with initiation of any dose of a GLP-1 receptor agonist.

The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review.

Background: Non-medical switching (NMS) is defined as switching to a clinically similar but chemically distinct medication for reasons apart from lack of effectiveness, tolerability or adherence. Objective: To update a prior systematic review evaluating the impact of NMS on outcomes. Data sources: An updated search through 10/1/2018 in Medline and Web of Science was performed. Study selection: We included studies evaluating ≥25 patients and measuring the impact of NMS of drugs on ≥1 endpoint. Data extraction: The direction of association between NMS and endpoints was classified as negative, positive or neutral. Data synthesis: Thirty-eight studies contributed 154 endpoints. The direction of association was negative (n = 48; 31.2%) or neutral (n = 91; 59.1%) more often than it was positive (n = 15; 9.7%). Stratified by endpoint type, NMS was associated with a negative impact on clinical, economic, health-care utilization and medication-taking behavior in 26.9%,41.7%,30.3% and 75.0% of cases; with a positive effect seen in 3.0% (resource utilization) to 14.0% (clinical) of endpoints. Of the 92 endpoints from studies performed by the entity dictating the NMS, 88.0%were neutral or positive; whereas, only 40.3%of endpoints from studies conducted separately from the interested entity were neutral or positive. Conclusions: NMS was commonly associated with negative or neutral endpoints and was seldom associated with positive ones.

The Importance of Considering Differences in Study Design in Network Meta-analysis: An Application Using Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Drugs for Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adaptive trial designs present a methodological challenge when performing network meta-analysis (NMA), as data from such adaptive trial designs differ from conventional parallel design randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aim to illustrate the importance of considering study design when conducting an NMA. METHODS: Three NMAs comparing anti-tumor necrosis factor drugs for ulcerative colitis were compared and the analyses replicated using Bayesian NMA. The NMA comprised 3 RCTs comparing 4 treatments (adalimumab 40 mg, golimumab 50 mg, golimumab 100 mg, infliximab 5 mg/kg) and placebo. We investigated the impact of incorporating differences in the study design among the 3 RCTs and presented 3 alternative methods on how to convert outcome data derived from one form of adaptive design to more conventional parallel RCTs. RESULTS: Combining RCT results without considering variations in study design resulted in effect estimates that were biased against golimumab. In contrast, using the 3 alternative methods to convert outcome data from one form of adaptive design to a format more consistent with conventional parallel RCTs facilitated more transparent consideration of differences in study design. This approach is more likely to yield appropriate estimates of comparative efficacy when conducting an NMA, which includes treatments that use an alternative study design. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs based on adaptive study designs should not be combined with traditional parallel RCT designs in NMA. We have presented potential approaches to convert data from one form of adaptive design to more conventional parallel RCTs to facilitate transparent and less-biased comparisons.

Predicting Pre-emptive Discussions of Biologic Treatment: Results from an Openness and Preference Survey of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients and Their Prescribers.

INTRODUCTION: It is important to compare patient and provider discrepancies on stated openness to and preference for biologics as well as predictors associated with initial discussions on biologic use. METHODS: Patients (N = 263) and physicians (N = 100) completed a self-administered Web-based survey assessing demographics, health characteristics, and behaviors related to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment. Bootstrap methods were used to check discrepancies between providers' and patients' stated openness to and preference for biologics. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis identified patient-specific predictors associated with initial biologics discussions. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients responded consistently to preference questions, and 169 patients responded consistently to openness questions. Physicians significantly overestimated patients' openness to biologics in general (85.46% vs. 74.61%, p < 0.0001), but underestimated patients' openness to the intravenous (IV) mode of administration (MOA; 55.97% vs. 63.96%, p < 0.0001). Overall, physicians significantly underestimated patient preference for IV MOA (22.07% vs. 42.35%, p < 0.0001) and, to a lesser extent, subcutaneous MOA (48.84% vs. 54.69%, p < 0.0001). Among Crohn's disease (CD) patients (N = 123), CART threshold analysis identified an inpatient visit in the last 6 months, CD diagnosis for more than 3 years, and non-adherence to prior IBD treatment as most positively predictive of having an initial biologics discussion. CONCLUSION: Physicians appear to underestimate patient preferences in favor of biologics, especially IV formulations. Since it is unclear if physicians were aware of the patients' preferences beforehand, this study supports the need for validated, shared decision-making tools when initiating IBD treatment. Additional studies are necessary to measure physicians' influences on patient preference/treatment-related decisions and the impact on patient outcomes.

Patient experience with intravenous biologic therapies for ankylosing spondylitis, Crohn's disease, psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe patient experience with intravenous (IV) biologics for ankylosing spondylitis, Crohn's disease, psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, or ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted in 405 patients with these autoimmune diseases who were receiving an IV biologic to treat their disease. RESULTS: On a 7-point scale (1= not at all satisfied; 7= very satisfied), mean satisfaction with IV medication was rated 6.1; 77% of patients rated satisfaction as 6 or 7. The most frequently perceived benefits of IV therapy were related to supervision provided by health care professionals. Most patients (82%, n=332) preferred their IV medication to subcutaneous injection. The three most common reasons for preferring IV were not wanting to self-inject (43%), less frequent dosing (34%), and preference for administration by a health care professional (24%). African-American/black patients had a stronger preference for IV administration than Caucasian/white patients (97% vs 80%, P<0.05) and a greater dislike of needles/self-injection (71% vs 40%, P<0.05). Hospital outpatient departments were not rated as well as physician in-office infusion. Only half (49%) of the patients reported that both they and their physician equally influenced the choice to switch from subcutaneous to IV therapy, and only 30% were given a choice of infusion center. CONCLUSION: Users of IV biologics are highly satisfied with their medications and perceive the opportunity for health care provider interaction at their infusion facilities as an advantage of their regimen. These findings support continued need for IV therapeutic options and shared decision-making between patients and physicians while selecting biologic treatments.

Targeting Medication Non-Adherence Behavior in Selected Autoimmune Diseases: A Systematic Approach to Digital Health Program Development.

BACKGROUND: 29 autoimmune diseases, including Rheumatoid Arthritis, gout, Crohn's Disease, and Systematic Lupus Erythematosus affect 7.6-9.4% of the population. While effective therapy is available, many patients do not follow treatment or use medications as directed. Digital health and Web 2.0 interventions have demonstrated much promise in increasing medication and treatment adherence, but to date many Internet tools have proven disappointing. In fact, most digital interventions continue to suffer from high attrition in patient populations, are burdensome for healthcare professionals, and have relatively short life spans. OBJECTIVE: Digital health tools have traditionally centered on the transformation of existing interventions (such as diaries, trackers, stage-based or cognitive behavioral therapy programs, coupons, or symptom checklists) to electronic format. Advanced digital interventions have also incorporated attributes of Web 2.0 such as social networking, text messaging, and the use of video. Despite these efforts, there has not been little measurable impact in non-adherence for illnesses that require medical interventions, and research must look to other strategies or development methodologies. As a first step in investigating the feasibility of developing such a tool, the objective of the current study is to systematically rate factors of non-adherence that have been reported in past research studies. METHODS: Grounded Theory, recognized as a rigorous method that facilitates the emergence of new themes through systematic analysis, data collection and coding, was used to analyze quantitative, qualitative and mixed method studies addressing the following autoimmune diseases: Rheumatoid Arthritis, gout, Crohn's Disease, Systematic Lupus Erythematosus, and inflammatory bowel disease. Studies were only included if they contained primary data addressing the relationship with non-adherence. RESULTS: Out of the 27 studies, four non-modifiable and 11 modifiable risk factors were discovered. Over one third of articles identified the following risk factors as common contributors to medication non-adherence (percent of studies reporting): patients not understanding treatment (44%), side effects (41%), age (37%), dose regimen (33%), and perceived medication ineffectiveness (33%). An unanticipated finding that emerged was the need for risk stratification tools (81%) with patient-centric approaches (67%). CONCLUSIONS: This study systematically identifies and categorizes medication non-adherence risk factors in select autoimmune diseases. Findings indicate that patients understanding of their disease and the role of medication are paramount. An unexpected finding was that the majority of research articles called for the creation of tailored, patient-centric interventions that dispel personal misconceptions about disease, pharmacotherapy, and how the body responds to treatment. To our knowledge, these interventions do not yet exist in digital format. Rather than adopting a systems level approach, digital health programs should focus on cohorts with heterogeneous needs, and develop tailored interventions based on individual non-adherence patterns.

Novel Adherence Measures for Infusible Therapeutic Agents Indicated for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Published studies on adherence to biologic medications show that many types of calculation methods are used. However, infused biologics are not well-suited to typical measures of adherence, such as proportion of days covered. OBJECTIVE: To construct and assess 7 novel adherence measures potentially applicable to infusible biologic agents and compare outcomes for 2 infusible biologics used for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with RA (ie, 2 or more 714.x claims) who received ≥24 months of continuous medical and pharmacy eligibility and who started taking abatacept or infliximab therapy were selected from a large commercial insurer database of medical and pharmacy claims. The 7 new adherence measures included cumulative amount of time with a refill gap ≥20% (CG20) beyond the expected infusion interval, cumulative time off treatment, days of uninterrupted use (DoUU), observed versus expected refill ratio (OvERR), repeated observations of underuse (RoUU), variance in time between infusions, and time to discontinuation (TTD). Mean observed infusion intervals were calculated and served as a reference measure of adherence. RESULTS: The mean maintenance intervals approximated recommended guidelines. The mean observed infusion interval for abatacept recipients was 33 days (recommended, 28 days); it was 53 days (recommended, 56 days) for patients receiving infliximab. Three measures demonstrated a significant positive relationship to the mean observed infusion interval-CG20 (r = .258), DoUU (r = .212), and TTD (r = .081; P <.05). OvERR (r = -.072) and RoUU (r = -.189; P <.05) showed significant negative correlations. Real-world comparisons showed that adherence was significantly (P <.001) greater for the infliximab group according to most measures. CONCLUSION: New measures of adherence correlate significantly with mean maintenance intervals. Future studies should examine relationships between these adherence measures and clinically relevant end points and/or cost outcomes to determine their predictive utility. Alternative methods of reporting adherence may have greater clinical significance than traditional measures.

Comparative multidatabase analysis of dosing patterns and infusion intervals for the first 12 infliximab infusions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: According to prescribing information for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments in the United States, infliximab should be administered at weeks 1, 2, 6, and then every 8 weeks starting at a 3-mg/kg dose, with flexible dosing up to 10 mg/kg and/or every 4 weeks based on clinical response. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated dosing and intervals of the first 12 infliximab infusions in patients with RA across multiple large administrative databases. METHODS: Data were obtained from 4 databases: HealthCore Integrated Research Database (HIRD), IMS LifeLink Health Plan Claims Database (IMS Lifelink), Premier Perspective Database (PPD), and Wolters Kluwer Pharma Solutions (WKPS). Patients were aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with RA, and naive to biologic therapy. Patients with other select inflammatory conditions were excluded. The induction period included infusions 1 through 3; the maintenance period included infusions 4 through 12. RESULTS: Observed dosing patterns from the HIRD, IMS LifeLink, PPD, and WKPS databases demonstrated minimal dose increases from the first infusion (93.5, 103.3, 58.8, and 73.2 mg, respectively) and from the first maintenance infusion (69.1, 64.3, 45.7, and 45.7 mg, respectively) to the highest dose during the first 12 infusions. The mean number of days between infusions in the maintenance period ranged from 53.3 to 63.5 in HIRD, 53.7 to 60.3 in IMS LifeLink, 53.4 to 59.4 in PPD, and 52.3 to 55.0 in the WKPS database. CONCLUSION: Data from multiple databases of patients with RA suggest that, in clinical practice, infliximab dosing and intervals are consistent with FDA prescribing information and remain relatively stable during the first 12 infusions.

Economic assessment of doripenem versus imipenem in the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), the most common nosocomial infection in critically ill patients, is associated with significantly longer duration of mechanical ventilation, and increased mortality, hospital days, and health-care costs. A previously published prospective, randomized study established the noninferiority of intravenous (IV) doripenem versus IV imipenem/cilastatin ('imipenem') for VAP. This study compares the economic outcomes of IV therapy with doripenem versus imipenem as first-line treatment for VAP. METHODS: A decision-analytic model of inpatient care and outcomes for VAP was used to estimate costs associated with VAP treatment. The model calculates total hospital costs, comprising costs of initial and concomitant therapy, and costs associated with mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stays, and total days in hospital. RESULTS: Total treatment costs for doripenem were $10,630 lower than for imipenem ($71,259 vs. 81,889), driven primarily by differences in costs of mechanical ventilation ($45,224 for doripenem, $57,348 for imipenem). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses found doripenem consistently cost saving versus imipenem in 1,000 simulations. Study limitations include use of a simple model to represent a complex disease process and reliance on trial data that may not reflect real-world care and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Doripenem is a cost saving first-line treatment for VAP versus imipenem while providing an equivalent rate of cure.

Hospital resource utilization with doripenem versus imipenem in the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common nosocomial infection that is associated with prolonged length of stay (LOS) and significant mortality. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare resource utilization with doripenem, an investigational carbapenem, versus imipenem from a hospital perspective among patients with VAP. METHODS: This analysis was based on data from a Phase III, randomized, open-label, noninferiority study that compared clinical cure of VAP with doripenem 500 mg q8h i.v. (4-hour infusion) with imipenem 500 mg q6h (30-minute infusion) or 1000 mg q8h i.v. (1-hour infusion). Total hospital LOS, intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, and time on mechanical ventilation for doripenem and imipenem were compared in a clinical modified intent-to-treat population. P values were determined using the generalized Wilcoxon test, which compared treatments in a time-to-event analysis, censoring patients at the late follow-up visit (28-35 days after the end of i.v. therapy). RESULTS: Patients in the doripenem and imipenem groups had similar baseline clinical characteristics. Median hospital LOS was significantly shorter with doripenem versus imipenem (22 vs 27 days; P=0.010); median time on mechanical ventilation was significantly shorter for doripenem (7 vs 10 days; P=0.034); median ICU LOSs were similar between the 2 groups (12 vs 13 days). Clinical cure and mortality rates were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 3 primary end points in this analysis, hospital LOS and time on mechanical ventilation were significantly shorter with doripenem compared with imipenem; no statistical significance was observed in ICU LOS. These findings suggest that doripenem use may be associated with an economic and clinical benefit to patients and hospitals.

Long-acting injectable risperidone v. olanzapine tablets for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Randomised, controlled, open-label study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of long-acting injectable risperidone have not been compared with those of an oral atypical antipsychotic. AIMS: To compare long-acting risperidone and oral olanzapine in 377 patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: Patients were randomised to receive long-acting risperidone (25 mg or 50 mg every 14 days) or olanzapine (5-20 mg/day). RESULTS: In the 13-week phase, long-acting risperidone was at least as effective as (not inferior to) oral olanzapine. In the 12-month phase, significant improvements in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total and factor scores from baseline to month 12 and end-point were seen in both groups of patients. Few patients discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments were efficacious and well tolerated.

Impact of engine lubricant properties on regulated gaseous emissions of 2000-2001 model-year gasoline vehicles.

The impact of the sulfur (S) content in lubricating oil was evaluated for four ultra-low-emission vehicles and two super-ultra-low-emission vehicles, all with low mileage. The S content in the lube oils ranged from 0.01 to 0.76%, while the S content of the gasoline was fixed at 0.2 ppmw. Vehicles were configured with aged catalysts and tested over the Federal Test Procedure, at idle and at 50-mph cruise conditions. In all testing modes, variations in the S level of the lubricant did not significantly affect the regulated gas-phase tailpipe emissions. In addition to the regulated gas-phase emissions, a key element of the research was measuring the engine-out sulfur dioxide (SO2) in near-real-time. This research used a new methodology based on a differential optical absorption spectrometer (DOAS) to measure SO2 from the lubricants used in this study. With the DOAS, the contribution of SO2 emissions for the highest-S lubricant was found to range from less than 1 to 6 ppm on a gasoline S equivalent basis over the range of vehicles and test cycles used. The development and operation of the DOAS is discussed in this paper.