Effect of COVID-19 on Bronchiectasis Exacerbation Rates: A Retrospective U.S. Insurance Claims Study.

Rationale: Bronchiectasis is a chronic, progressive disease of bronchial dilation, inflammation, and scarring leading to impaired mucociliary clearance and increased susceptibility to infection. Identified causes include previous severe respiratory infections. A small, single-center UK study demonstrated a reduction in bronchiectasis exacerbations during the first year of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. No studies have been conducted in a U.S. (commercially insured) cohort to date. Objectives: To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the frequency of exacerbations in a large cohort of commercially insured U.S. patients with bronchiectasis by testing the hypothesis that U.S. patients with bronchiectasis had fewer exacerbations during the pandemic. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study used health insurance claims data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database, which included U.S. patients and their covered dependents. Eligible patients were ⩾18 years of age with bronchiectasis; patients with other respiratory conditions were excluded. The main study cohort excluded patients with frequent asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnoses. The primary objective was to compare the bronchiectasis exacerbation rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: The median number of exacerbations per patient per year decreased significantly from the year before the COVID-19 pandemic to the first year of the pandemic (1 vs. 0; P < 0.01). More patients had zero exacerbations during the first year of the pandemic than the year prior (57% vs. 24%; McNemar's chi-square = 122.56; P < 0.01). Conclusions: In a U.S. population-based study of patients with International Classification of Diseases codes for bronchiectasis, the rate of exacerbations during Year 1 of the COVID-19 pandemic was reduced compared with the 2-year time period preceding the pandemic.

Hospitalization for Myocardial Infarction with Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: An On-Treatment Comparative Effectiveness Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Prescribing patterns and suboptimal adherence present methodological challenges for real-world head-to-head comparisons of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in intent-to-treat studies. The aim of this study was to compare ticagrelor and clopidogrel in an on-treatment population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the Optum™ Clinformatics™ database to identify patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) discharged on ticagrelor or clopidogrel between January 1, 2012 and September 30, 2019. The primary end point was hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI); the secondary end point was hospitalization for major bleeding. The ticagrelor and clopidogrel cohorts were balanced by propensity score matching (PSM) 1:3 for demographic and clinical characteristics. Outcomes were ascertained from day 31 until day 365 or end of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 339,387 patients with ACS, 14,110 ticagrelor- and 57,482 clopidogrel-treated patients met the study criteria. After PSM, 13,373 ticagrelor- and 29,656 clopidogrel-treated patients provided 4945 and 13,895 patient-years of data, respectively, for the primary end point. Hospitalization for MI was significantly lower in the ticagrelor compared to the clopidogrel cohort (2.22 vs. 3.52 per 100 patient-years; 36.8% relative risk reduction [RRR]; P < 0.0001). Hospitalization for major bleeding was similar in the ticagrelor and clopidogrel cohorts (2.04 vs. 2.06 per 100 patient-years; 1.1% RRR, P = 0.9214). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world on-treatment analysis, hospitalization for MI was significantly lower with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel, with similar rates of hospitalization for major bleeding. Study findings underscore the importance of being on the appropriate guideline-recommended therapy and support the use of ticagrelor over clopidogrel.