Severe hypoglycemia rates and associated costs among type 2 diabetics starting basal insulin therapy in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To derive current real-world data on the rates and costs of severe hypoglycemia (SH) for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) who have initiated basal insulin therapy and to examine differences in SH rates and costs stratified by history of prior SH events. METHODS: We used a nation-wide electronic health records database that included encounter and laboratory data, as well as clinical notes, to estimate the rates and costs of SH events among adults with T2D who initiated basal insulin between 2008 and 2011. Unadjusted and regression-adjusted rates and quarterly costs were calculated for all patients as well as stratified by history of a SH event before starting basal insulin and history of a SH event during the basal insulin titration period. RESULTS: We identified 7235 incident cases of basal insulin use among patients with T2D who did not use insulin during the previous 12 months. Regression-adjusted incidence and total event rates were 10.36 and 11.21 per 100 patient-years, respectively. A history of SH events during the pre-index baseline and post-index titration periods were statistically significantly associated with both the incidence and total event rates (p < 0.01). Regression-adjusted total healthcare and diabetes-related costs were statistically significantly (p < 0.01) higher in those quarters when a SH event occurred than in those quarters without any SH events ($3591 vs. $487 and $3311 vs. $406, respectively). A history of previous SH or SH events during the titration period were not statistically significantly associated with costs. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the real-world burden of SH is high among people with T2D who start using basal insulin and that history of previous SH events, both before starting insulin and during the insulin titration period, influences future SH. These results can also provide insights into interventions that can prevent or delay SH. These results should, however, be interpreted in light of the key limitations of our study: not all SH events may have been captured or coded in the database, data on filled prescriptions were not available, and the post-titration follow-up period could have been divided into time units other than quarters (3 month blocks) resulting in potentially different conclusions. Further real-world studies on the frequency and costs of SH, using methods to identify as many SH events as possible, can allow healthcare providers to make more informed decisions on the risks and benefits of basal insulin therapy in T2D patients.

Estimated medical cost reductions associated with apixaban in real-world patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: The Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial demonstrated that apixaban was effective in reducing the risk of stroke and major bleeding in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. Medical cost avoidance studies for oral anticoagulants have used warfarin event rates from clinical trials, which may not reflect the real-world (RW) setting. This study aimed to estimate the difference in medical costs associated with apixaban instead of warfarin in RW NVAF patients. METHODS: This study selected patients with NVAF diagnosis during 2007-2010 from a Medco population of US commercial and Medicare health plans. Stroke and major bleeding excluding intracranial hemorrhage (MBEIH) were identified using diagnosis codes. Pharmacy claims were used to define warfarin exposure periods. Rates of stroke and MBEIH were calculated during warfarin exposure. To estimate the absolute risk reduction (ARR) between warfarin and apixaban in RW, the relative risk reductions (RRR) from ARISTOTLE were multiplied by the event rates observed in RW during warfarin exposure. Medical cost reductions associated with apixaban were calculated by applying the ARR to the 1-year incremental cost for each event. Stroke and MBEIH costs were obtained from the literature and adjusted to 2011 levels. RESULTS: During a patient year, the use of apixaban instead of warfarin resulted in medical cost reductions of $493 for stroke and $752 for MBEIH and $1245 for the combined outcome of both events. The medical costs avoided were greater as baseline stroke risk increased. CONCLUSION: If RRRs demonstrated in ARISTOTLE persist in RW, the use of apixaban will be associated with lower medical costs vs warfarin. Main limitations of this study were: identification of clinical events using administrative codes rather than confirmatory clinical data, inability to evaluate the level of international normalized ratio (INR) control, and not including INR monitoring and drug costs.

Application of randomized clinical trial data to actual practice: apixaban therapy for reduction of stroke risk in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients.

BACKGROUND: Clinical event rates may differ among patients treated in the real world (RW) compared to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). When translating the efficacy of new treatments to RW, the relative risk reductions (RRRs) from RCTs may produce different absolute risk reductions in RW. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the absolute effect of apixaban on stroke and major bleeding (MB) rates in a RW non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) population. METHODS: NVAF patients were selected during 2007-2010 from a population of U.S. commercial and Medicare health plans using the Medco claims database. Pharmacy claims were used to define warfarin exposure periods. Stroke and MB were identified using diagnosis codes. RW event rates were calculated during periods of warfarin exposure. The numbers of stroke and MB events estimated to be avoided in RW with apixaban versus warfarin were calculated by applying RRRs from the ARISTOTLE trial to RW rates from the Medco database. The Medco data did not contain information for patients receiving apixaban as it was not on the market at the time of analysis. RESULTS: Stroke and MB rates among RW NVAF patients during warfarin exposure were higher compared with event rates in patients treated with warfarin in ARISTOTLE (stroke: 5.29 vs. 1.51 per 100 person years (PYs); MB: 10.78 vs. 3.09 per 100 PYs). If RRRs from trials persist in RW, apixaban vs. warfarin would result in greater absolute risk reductions (ARRs) and a lower number needed to treat (NNT) in RW vs. ARISTOTLE (stroke: 91 vs. 313; MB: 30 vs. 105). CONCLUSION: The impact of apixaban, as an alternative to warfarin in RW may be greater than in RCTs. The NNT with apixaban versus warfarin in RW may be lower versus ARISTOTLE if RRRs from the trial persists in RW and if baseline stroke and MB rates among RW patients are higher compared to trial participants.

Myocardial perfusion imaging laboratory efficiency with the use of regadenoson compared to adenosine and dipyridamole.

OBJECTIVE: Adenosine, dipyridamole, and regadenoson are pharmacologic stress agents used in myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), to diagnose and monitor coronary artery disease. Clinical studies suggest that regadenoson has pharmacologic properties that simplify the MPI procedure through availability to a wider range of patients and easier administrative requirements. This study assesses the operational advantages and laboratory efficiency associated with the use of regadenoson compared to adenosine and dipyridamole. METHODS: A web-based survey of 141 nuclear medicine technologists working in US-based cardiovascular imaging laboratories from June-July 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics measured the adenosine, dipyridamole, and regadenoson cohorts. Bivariate analyses compared the overall and staff-specific time to conduct an MPI test. The site-specific sub-groups were defined by hospital vs non-hospital setting, hours of operation, number of SPECT cameras, and number of full-time equivalent staff, including nurses, nuclear technologists, physicians, and nurse practitioners/physician assistants. RESULTS: The total time to conduct an MPI test was shortest with regadenoson 156 (46) min compared to adenosine and dipyridamole 182 (63) and 191 (61) min, respectively. Time from regadenoson administration to the start of the imaging session, including dose calculation and infusion time, was 14.2 min less than adenosine, and 12.0 min less than dipyridamole. The time to manage adverse events was shortest if it occurred with regadenoson compared to adenosine and dipyridamole, with minor exceptions. Due to the nature of survey implementation, possible recall bias may limit the results. Some differences in procedures times may be attributable to differences in laboratories' protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Overall time savings and time savings stratified by operational ability (number of staff, number of SPECT cameras, hours of operation) translate to a more efficient utilization of laboratory resources when using regadenoson compared to adenosine and dipyridamole. Regadenoson is the most efficient pharmacologic stress agent compared to adenosine and dipyridamole.