Incidence of Herpes Zoster and Postherpetic Neuralgia and Herpes Zoster Vaccination Uptake in a US Administrative Claims Database.

Background: The objective of this study was to estimate the annual incidence rates of herpes zoster (HZ) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) among individuals aged ≥19 years and the proportion who received HZ vaccination among those aged ≥50 years. Methods: This observational cohort study was conducted with administrative claims data from HealthVerity and included insured individuals across the US. Crude and US age- and sex-standardized incidence rates of HZ and PHN were calculated from 1 January 2019 to 31 May 2022 by calendar year in persons aged ≥19 years. Outcomes were defined as ≥1 ICD-10 diagnosis code for HZ or PHN. Analyses were stratified by age, sex, and immunocompromised status. Among those aged ≥50 years, the proportion who received 1 or 2 doses of recombinant zoster vaccine (Shingrix) or 1 dose of Zostavax was calculated. Results: Standardized annual incidence rates from 2019 to 2021 were 542 to 685 per 100 000 person-years for HZ and 35 to 38 per 100 000 person-years for PHN. Rates were highest among females, older adults, and individuals who were immunocompromised. From 1 January 2019 to 31 May 2022, 4.3% and 9.0% of persons aged ≥50 years received 1 and 2 doses of Shingrix, respectively, and 0.2% received 1 dose of Zostavax. Conclusions: In this US claims database analysis, HZ and PHN were more frequent among older adults, females, and individuals who were immunocompromised. Between 1 January 2019 and 31 May 2022, 9% of persons aged ≥50 years received 2 doses of the Shingrix vaccine. Greater efforts are needed to increase vaccine uptake against HZ, especially for those at highest risk.

Prevalence of Diagnosed Genital Herpes and Antiviral Treatment in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Genital herpes is a common sexually transmitted infection caused by the herpes simplex virus. Contemporary United States (US) population-based epidemiologic data on genital herpes are limited. This study aimed to provide nationally representative estimates of genital herpes prevalence and treatment using a large US health insurance claims database. METHODS: This observational cohort study used administrative claims data from HealthVerity. Crude and age- and sex-standardized prevalence rates of genital herpes and recurrent genital herpes were calculated for the years 2019 to 2021. The distribution of patients with prevalent genital herpes who received episodic or suppressive antiviral therapy was also estimated. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2021, the standardized prevalence of genital herpes and recurrent genital herpes ranged from 236 to 280 cases per 100,000 person-years and 81 to 98 cases per 100,000 person-years, respectively. The prevalence of genital herpes was highest among those aged 25-29 years (prevalence range: 497 to 582), female patients (prevalence range: 348 to 404), and those with a history of HIV infection (prevalence range: 1608 to 2080). The prevalence of recurrent genital herpes was also highest in these groups. From 2019 to 2021, two-thirds of patients (65% to 68%) with prevalent genital herpes received antiviral medications; the majority received episodic therapy (80%) rather than suppressive therapy (20%). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of genital herpes and recurrent genital herpes in the US is substantial, with the highest rates observed in young adults, women, and immunocompromised individuals. About two-thirds receive antiviral treatment each year.

Antihypertensive Medication and Fracture Risk in Older Veterans Health Administration Nursing Home Residents.

Importance: Limited evidence exists on the association between initiation of antihypertensive medication and risk of fractures in older long-term nursing home residents. Objective: To assess the association between antihypertensive medication initiation and risk of fracture. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study using target trial emulation for data derived from 29 648 older long-term care nursing home residents in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) from January 1, 2006, to October 31, 2019. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, to November 11, 2023. Exposure: Episodes of antihypertensive medication initiation were identified, and eligible initiation episodes were matched with comparable controls who did not initiate therapy. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was nontraumatic fracture of the humerus, hip, pelvis, radius, or ulna within 30 days of antihypertensive medication initiation. Results were computed among subgroups of residents with dementia, across systolic and diastolic blood pressure thresholds of 140 and 80 mm Hg, respectively, and with use of prior antihypertensive therapies. Analyses were adjusted for more than 50 baseline covariates using 1:4 propensity score matching. Results: Data from 29 648 individuals were included in this study (mean [SD] age, 78.0 [8.4] years; 28 952 [97.7%] male). In the propensity score-matched cohort of 64 710 residents (mean [SD] age, 77.9 [8.5] years), the incidence rate of fractures per 100 person-years in residents initiating antihypertensive medication was 5.4 compared with 2.2 in the control arm. This finding corresponded to an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 2.42 (95% CI, 1.43-4.08) and an adjusted excess risk per 100 person-years of 3.12 (95% CI, 0.95-6.78). Antihypertensive medication initiation was also associated with higher risk of severe falls requiring hospitalizations or emergency department visits (HR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.53-2.13]) and syncope (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.30-2.19]). The magnitude of fracture risk was numerically higher among subgroups of residents with dementia (HR, 3.28 [95% CI, 1.76-6.10]), systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or higher (HR, 3.12 [95% CI, 1.71-5.69]), diastolic blood pressure of 80 mm Hg or higher (HR, 4.41 [95% CI, 1.67-11.68]), and no recent antihypertensive medication use (HR, 4.77 [95% CI, 1.49-15.32]). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings indicated that initiation of antihypertensive medication was associated with elevated risks of fractures and falls. These risks were numerically higher among residents with dementia, higher baseline blood pressures values, and no recent antihypertensive medication use. Caution and additional monitoring are advised when initiating antihypertensive medication in this vulnerable population.

Cognitive Impairment in Sexual and Gender Minority Groups: A Scoping Review of the Literature.

Purpose: The purpose of this review was to synthesize evidence on differences in cognitive impairment by sexual orientation/gender identity (SOGI) status. Methods: A scoping review of the literature was conducted. Five databases (PubMed/Medline, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Embase) were searched for primary articles comparing incidence or prevalence of cognitive impairment among sexual and gender minority (SGM) groups versus non-SGM groups. Two reviewers independently screened articles and conducted risk-of-bias assessment on eligible articles. Results: Fifteen primary studies were eligible. Most studies (n = 13) were cross-sectional, with moderate to critical risk of bias. Among eight studies examining self-reported cognitive impairment, seven reported a higher prevalence among some SGM groups versus non-SGM groups. Among seven studies using objective measures of cognitive impairment, three examined prevalence of clinician-documented diagnosis of dementia, of which two reported a higher prevalence specifically among transgender versus cisgender individuals. Among the other four studies examining objective measures, two reported poorer cognitive performance or memory, one reported better performance, and another reported no difference. Comparisons across studies were challenging due to inconsistencies in how SOGI and cognitive impairment were operationalized, and the factors used for statistical adjustment; some studies adjusted for putative intermediary factors that potentially explain differences in cognitive impairment. Conclusions: Whereas most published studies identified a positive relationship between SOGI status and self-reported cognitive impairment, evidence is mixed with regard to objective cognitive performance. Well-designed longitudinal, observational studies are needed, using objective measures of cognitive function, with careful consideration of confounding versus intermediary risk factors.

Temporal effect of imatinib adherence on time to remission in chronic myeloid leukemia patients.

INTRODUCTION: Adherence to imatinib in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients is estimated to be as low as 70% despite its clinical benefit, and our understanding of the impact of nonadherence in this population is limited. This study presents a novel application of the Alternating Conditional Estimation (ACE) algorithm in newly diagnosed CML patients to map the full dose-response curve (DRC) and determine how the strength of this curve varies over time. METHODS: We applied the ACE algorithm alongside a backward elimination procedure to detect the presence of time dependence and nonlinearity in the relationship between imatinib adherence and time-to-remission. An extended Cox model allowing for the flexible modeling of identified effects via unpenalized B-splines was subsequently fit and assessed. RESULTS: The substantial improvement in model fit associated with the extended Cox approach suggests that traditional Cox proportional hazards model assumptions do not hold in this setting. Results indicate that the DRC for imatinib is non-linearly increasing, with an attenuated effect above a 74% adherence rate. The strength of this effect on remission varied over time and was strongest in the initial months of treatment, reaching a peak around 90 days post-initiation (log hazard ratio: 2.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.47 to 2.66). CONCLUSION: Most patients that achieved remission did so by 4 months (120 days) with consistently high adherence, suggesting that this could be a critical time and duration for realizing treatment benefit and patient monitoring. Findings regarding the relationship between adherence and remission can additionally help guide the design of future studies.

Testing for Cytomegalovirus Among Individuals Who Were Immunocompromised, 2018-2022.

This cohort study investigates rates of cytomegalovirus testing before and during the COVID-19 pandemic among individuals who were immunocompromised.

Year-by-Year Blood Pressure Variability From Midlife to Death and Lifetime Dementia Risk.

Importance: High visit-to-visit blood pressure variability (BPV) in late life may reflect increased dementia risk better than mean systolic blood pressure (SBP). Evidence from midlife to late life could be crucial to understanding this association. Objective: To determine whether visit-to-visit BPV at different ages was differentially associated with lifetime incident dementia risk in community-dwelling individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from the Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) study, an ongoing population-based prospective cohort study in the US. Participants were 65 years or older at enrollment, community-dwelling, and without dementia. The study focused on a subset of deceased participants with brain autopsy data and whose midlife to late-life blood pressure data were obtained from Kaiser Permanente Washington medical archives and collected as part of the postmortem brain donation program. In the ACT study, participants underwent biennial medical assessments, including cognitive screening. Data were collected from 1994 (ACT study enrollment) through November 2019 (data set freeze). Data analysis was performed between March 2020 and September 2023. Exposures: Visit-by-visit BPV at ages 60, 70, 80, and 90 years, calculated using the coefficient of variation of year-by-year SBP measurements over the preceding 10 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause dementia, which was adjudicated by a multidisciplinary outcome adjudication committee. Results: A total of 820 participants (mean [SD] age at enrollment, 77.0 [6.7] years) were analyzed and included 476 females (58.0%). A mean (SD) of 28.4 (8.4) yearly SBP measurements were available over 31.5 (9.0) years. The mean (SD) follow-up time was 32.2 (9.1) years in 27 885 person-years from midlife to death. Of the participants, 372 (45.4%) developed dementia. The number of participants who were alive without dementia and had available data for analysis ranged from 280 of those aged 90 years to 702 of those aged 70 years. Higher BPV was not associated with higher lifetime dementia risk at age 60, 70, or 80 years. At age 90 years, BPV was associated with 35% higher dementia risk (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.02-1.79). Meta-regression of HRs calculated separately for each age (60-90 years) indicated that associations of high BPV with higher dementia risk were present only at older ages, whereas the association of SBP with dementia gradually shifted direction linearly from being incrementally to inversely associated with older ages. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, high BPV indicated increased lifetime dementia risk in late life but not in midlife. This result suggests that high BPV may indicate increased dementia risk in older age but might be less viable as a midlife dementia prevention target.

New Users of Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker-Versus Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor-Based Antihypertensive Medication Regimens and Cardiovascular Disease Events: A Secondary Analysis of ACCORD-BP and SPRINT.

BACKGROUND Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) block distinct components of the renin-angiotensin system. Whether this translates into differential effects on cardiovascular disease events remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS We used the ACCORD-BP (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes-Blood Pressure) trial and the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) to emulate target trials of new users of ARBs versus ACEIs on cardiovascular disease events (primary outcome) and death (secondary outcome). We estimated marginal cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and treatment-specific cumulative incidence functions with inverse probability of treatment weights. We identified 3298 new users of ARBs or ACEIs (ACCORD-BP: 374 ARB versus 884 ACEI; SPRINT: 727 ARB versus 1313 ACEI). For participants initiating ARBs versus ACEIs, the inverse probability of treatment weight rate of the primary outcome was 3.2 versus 3.5 per 100 person-years in ACCORD-BP (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.63-1.31]) and 1.8 versus 2.2 per 100 person-years in SPRINT (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.56-1.18]). There were no appreciable differences in pooled analyses, except that ARBs versus ACEIs were associated with a lower death rate (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.37-0.85]). ARBs were associated with a lower rate of the primary outcome among subgroups of male versus female participants, non-Hispanic Black versus non-Hispanic White participants, and those randomly assigned to standard versus intensive blood pressure (Pinteraction: <0.01, 0.05, and <0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS In this secondary analysis of ACCORD-BP and SPRINT, new users of ARB- versus ACEI-based antihypertensive medication regimens experienced similar cardiovascular disease events rates, with important subgroup differences and lower rates of death overall. REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01206062, NCT00000620.

Identifying Patients for Intensive Blood Pressure Treatment Based on Cognitive Benefit: A Secondary Analysis of the SPRINT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Intensive vs standard treatment to lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduces risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia; however, the magnitude of cognitive benefit likely varies among patients. Objective: To estimate the magnitude of cognitive benefit of intensive vs standard systolic BP (SBP) treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this ad hoc secondary analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), 9361 randomized clinical trial participants 50 years or older with high cardiovascular risk but without a history of diabetes, stroke, or dementia were followed up. The SPRINT trial was conducted between November 1, 2010, and August 31, 2016, and the present analysis was completed on October 31, 2022. Intervention: Systolic blood pressure treatment to an intensive (<120 mm Hg) vs standard (<140 mm Hg) target. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of adjudicated probable dementia or amnestic MCI. Results: A total of 7918 SPRINT participants were included in the analysis; 3989 were in the intensive treatment group (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [9.2] years; 2570 [64.4%] men; 1212 [30.4%] non-Hispanic Black) and 3929 were in the standard treatment group (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [9.4] years; 2570 [65.4%] men; 1249 [31.8%] non-Hispanic Black). Over a median follow-up of 4.13 (IQR, 3.50-5.88) years, there were 765 and 828 primary outcome events in the intensive treatment group and standard treatment group, respectively. Older age (hazard ratio [HR] per 1 SD, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.78-1.96]), Medicare enrollment (HR per 1 SD, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.35-1.49]), and higher baseline serum creatinine level (HR per 1 SD, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.19-1.29]) were associated with higher risk of the primary outcome, while better baseline cognitive functioning (HR per 1 SD, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.41-0.44]) and active employment status (HR per 1 SD, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.42-0.46]) were associated with lower risk of the primary outcome. Risk of the primary outcome by treatment goal was estimated accurately based on similar projected and observed absolute risk differences (C statistic = 0.79). Higher baseline risk for the primary outcome was associated with greater benefit (ie, larger absolute reduction of probable dementia or amnestic MCI) of intensive vs standard treatment across the full range of estimated baseline risk. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the SPRINT trial, participants with higher baseline projected risk of probable dementia or amnestic MCI gained greater absolute cognitive benefit from intensive vs standard SBP treatment in a monotonic fashion. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.

Community pharmacist intervention to optimize statin adherence in diabetes care: The GuIDE-S study.

BACKGROUND: Statin use in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) reduces cardiovascular events, yet adherence remains suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the impact of a community pharmacist intervention on statin adherence in new users with T2D. METHODS: As part of a quasi-experimental study, community pharmacy staff proactively identified adult patients with T2D who were not prescribed a statin. When appropriate, the pharmacist prescribed a statin via a collaborative practice agreement or facilitated acquisition of a prescription from another prescriber. Patients received individualized education and follow-up and monitoring for 1 year. Adherence was defined as the proportion of days covered (PDC) by a statin over 12 months. Linear and logistic regression were used to compare the effect of the intervention on continuous and a binary adherence threshold, defined as PDC ≥ 80%, respectively. RESULTS: Overall, 185 patients started statin therapy and were matched to 370 control patients for analysis. Adjusted average PDC was 3.1% higher in the intervention group (95% CI -0.037 to 0.098). Patients in the intervention group were 21.2% more likely to have PDC ≥ 80% (95% CI 0.828-1.774). CONCLUSION: The intervention resulted in higher statin adherence than usual care; however, the differences were not statistically significant.

Association of New Use of Antihypertensives That Stimulate vs Inhibit Type 2 and 4 Angiotensin II Receptors With Dementia Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Prevalent use of antihypertensive medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, compared with those that do not stimulate these receptors, has been associated with a lower risk of dementia. However, previous studies were limited by inclusion of individuals with prevalent hypertension and a history of antihypertensive use prior to the start of the study, which can introduce bias. Objective: To examine the association of new use of antihypertensive medication regimens that stimulate vs inhibit type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) among Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted among 57 773 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries (January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2018) aged 65 years or older with incident hypertension. Data analysis was conducted from January 1 through June 30, 2022. Exposures: Initiation of antihypertensive medication regimens that stimulate or inhibit type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, or mixed regimens (both stimulating and inhibiting), with the time-dependent measure being each 30-day interval. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to first occurrence of ADRD (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse definition). Cox proportional hazards regression modeling with time-dependent variables was performed to estimate the association between time-dependent treatment groups and time to ADRD, after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Results: The sample included 57 773 Medicare beneficiaries (36 348 women [62.9%]; mean [SD] age, 73.8 [6.3] years; 2954 [5.1%] Black, 1545 [2.7%] Hispanic; 50 184 [86.9%] White, and 3090 [5.4%] Other individuals [the Other category included individuals of American Indian, Asian, other, or unknown race and ethnicity]). During a median of 6.9 years (IQR, 4.7-9.3 years) of follow-up, the unadjusted incidence density rate of ADRD was 2.2 cases per 100 person-years (95% CI, 2.1-2.4 cases per 100 person-years) for the group receiving regimens that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors compared with 3.1 cases per 100 person-years (95% CI, 3.0-3.2 cases per 100 person-years) for the group receiving regimens that inhibit type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors and 2.7 cases per 100 person-years (95% CI, 2.6-2.9 cases per 100 person-years) for the group receiving mixed treatment regimens. In adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression modeling, stimulating treatment was associated with a statistically significant 16% reduction in the hazard of ADRD compared with inhibiting treatment (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.90). Mixed regimen use was also associated with reduced hazards of ADRD compared with the inhibiting group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.96). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries suggests that use of antihypertensive medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors was associated with lower risk of ADRD compared with antihypertensive medications that inhibit these receptors. Confirmation is needed in a randomized trial.

Provider knowledge, beliefs, and self-efficacy to deprescribe opioids and sedative-hypnotics.

BACKGROUND: While many studies have assessed and measured patient attitudes toward deprescribing, less quantitative research has addressed the provider perspective. We thus sought to describe provider knowledge, beliefs, and self-efficacy to deprescribe, with a focus on opioids and sedative-hypnotics. METHODS: An electronic anonymous survey was distributed to primary care providers at Kaiser Permanente Washington. Two reminder emails were sent. The survey included 10 questions on general deprescribing, and six questions each specific to opioid and sedative-hypnotic deprescribing. Knowledge questions used a multiple-choice response option format. Questions addressing beliefs and self-efficacy (i.e., confidence) used a 0-10 Likert scale. Scales were dichotomized at ≥7 to define agreement (belief questions) or confidence (self-efficacy questions). We calculated descriptive statistics to summarize the responses. RESULTS: Of 370 eligible primary care providers, 95 (26%) completed the survey. For general deprescribing questions, a majority believed that lack of patient willingness, withdrawal symptoms and fear of symptom return, and time constraints impeded deprescribing. Approximately half chose the correct answers about opioid deprescribing, 21% were confident that they could alleviate patient concerns about opioid tapering, and 32% were confident managing chronic non-cancer pain without opioids. For sedative-hypnotics, 64%-87% of respondents correctly answered questions about risks and the relative effectiveness of alternatives, but only one-third correctly answered a question about sedative-hypnotic tapering. Roughly half were confident in their ability to successfully engage patients in sedative deprescribing conversations and select alternatives. Only 54% and 34% were confident in writing a tapering protocol for opioids and sedative-hypnotics, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that raising provider awareness of patient willingness to deprescribe, addressing knowledge gaps, and increasing self-efficacy for deprescribing are important targets for improving deprescribing. Support for writing tapering protocols and prescribing evidence-based drug and non-drug alternatives may be important to improve care.

Community pharmacist intervention to close statin gaps in diabetes care: The GuIDE-S study.

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy is recommended for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) to lower cardiovascular risk; however, evidence suggests that significant gaps in statin therapy exist. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate (1) the impact of a community pharmacist-led model for initiating statin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on statin initiation and (2) pharmacists' self-reported perceptions of the intervention feasibility and fidelity to the intervention. METHODS: This was a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study of 9 intervention and 18 control pharmacies within a community pharmacy chain. Pharmacy staff proactively identified patients with T2D not taking a statin and prescribed a statin via a collaborative practice agreement or facilitated acquisition of a prescription from the patient's preferred prescriber. The eligible population included patients aged 18-84 years with T2D, who had filled ≥60 days' supply of one, noninsulin, diabetes medication in a rolling 6-month period, and who had not filled a statin during the same period. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare time to statin initiation. Pharmacists at intervention pharmacies completed a survey at 6 and 12 months after implementation (March and August 2019, respectively) to assess intervention feasibility and fidelity. RESULTS: For the statin initiation analysis, 1670 intervention patients were matched to 3358 control patients. Overall, 26.3% (n=442) of intervention patients and 25.4% (n=854) of control patients initiated a statin within 12 months of their index date. There was no difference in statin initiation likelihood between intervention and control patients (hazard ratio: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.83, 1.21). Fifteen pharmacists completed the 6-month survey (33% response rate), and 12 completed the 12-month survey (26%). The intervention's feasibility score was 4.0 at 6 months and 4.2 at 12 months, indicating an increase in perceived feasibility. Fidelity decreased from 6 to 12 months. CONCLUSION: The community pharmacist-led intervention resulted in more patients initiating statin therapy as compared to usual care; however, the differences were not statistically significant. Pharmacists perceived the intervention to be feasible; however, fidelity decreased over time.

Risk of Mild Cognitive Impairment or Probable Dementia in New Users of Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors: A Secondary Analysis of Data From the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

Importance: The cardiovascular and renal outcomes of angiotensin-II receptor blocker (ARB) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) treatment are well-known; however, few studies have evaluated initiation of these agents and cognitive impairment. Objective: To emulate a target trial to evaluate the cognitive outcomes of initiating an ARB- vs ACEI-based antihypertensive regimen in individuals at risk for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and probable dementia (PD). Design, Setting, and Participants: Active comparator, new-user observational cohort study design using data from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), conducted November 2010 through July 2018. Marginal cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and treatment-specific cumulative incidence functions were estimated with inverse probability (IP) weighting to account for confounding. Participants were using neither an ARB nor ACEI at baseline. Data analysis was conducted from April 7, 2021, to April 26, 2022. Exposures: New users of ARB vs ACEI during the first 12 months of trial follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite of adjudicated amnestic MCI or PD. Results: Of 9361 participants, 727 and 1313 new users of an ARB or ACEI, respectively, with well-balanced baseline characteristics between medication exposure groups after inverse probability weighting (mean [SD] age, 67 [9.5] years; 1291 ]63%] male; 240 [33%] Black; 89 [12%] Hispanic; 383 [53%] White; and 15 [2%] other race or ethnicity. In the primary analysis, during a median follow-up of 4.9 years, the inverse probability-weighted rate of amnestic MCI or PD was 4.3 vs 4.6 per 100 person-years among participants initiating ARB vs ACEI (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.13). In subgroup analyses, new users of an ARB vs ACEI had a lower rate of amnestic MCI or PD among those in the standard systolic blood pressure treatment arm (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.91) but not in the intensive arm (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.90-1.52) (P = .007 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance: In this observational cohort study of US adults at high cardiovascular disease risk, there was no difference in the rate of amnestic MCI or PD among new users of an ARB compared with ACEI, although 95% CIs were wide.

Prescribing Alzheimer's Disease treatments by provider type and geographic region: a comparison among physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants.

BACKGROUND: The estimated increase in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) caseload may present a logistical challenge to the US healthcare system. While nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) are increasingly delivering primary care to patients with chronic diseases, the nature of their prescribing of AD medications is largely unknown. The primary objective of this study was to compare the prescribing of AD medications across provider types (physician, NP, and PA) and geographic regions. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using IBM MarketScan® commercial and Medicare supplemental claims to examine unique AD prescriptions prescribed between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. Parallel analysis of prescriptions for another geriatric condition, osteoporosis (OP), was also conducted for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 103,067 AD prescriptions and 131,773 OP prescriptions were included in analyses. Physicians prescribed most AD prescriptions (95.65%), followed by NPs (3.37%) and PAs (0.98%). Small differences were identified among individual AD medications prescribed by physicians compared to NP/PAs. NPs/PAs prescribed a significantly higher proportion of AD prescriptions in rural as compared to urban areas (z = 0.023, 95%CI [0.018, 0.028]). CONCLUSION: Minimal variation exists in AD prescribing among physicians, NPs, and PAs, but NPs/PAs prescribe more AD prescriptions in rural areas. NPs/PAs, especially in rural areas, may play critical roles in alleviating projected workforce constraints. Further research assessing AD care, health outcomes, and costs by provider type and region is necessary to better guide healthcare workforce planning for AD care.

Use of geriatric assessment in cancer clinical trials: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are underrepresented in cancer clinical trials despite accounting for most of the disease burden. Geriatric assessment (GA) could be used in clinical trials of cancer drugs for older adults to improve the clinical evidence for cancer drug use among older adults. OBJECTIVE: To examine patterns of use of GA in cancer clinical trials. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of the studies reporting use of GA in a clinical trial setting for all cancer types and published between January 2010 and January 2020. Characteristics of GA use were extracted for each study, along with study phase, cancer type, and participant age (PROSPERO: CRD42020170584). RESULTS: We identified 320 studies and 63 studies met the final inclusion criteria. Among 74 purposes of GA use, the most common was to examine the association between impairments in GA domains and clinical outcomes (28/74, 38%). Among 258 GA domains assessed across 63 studies, physical status (59/258, 23%) and comorbidities (50/258, 19%) were most often evaluated. There was significant heterogeneity in the instruments used to assess physical function (n = 16) and mood disorders (n = 7). Most studies were phase 2 (32/63, 51%). CONCLUSIONS: GA is most often used in clinical trial settings to examine associations between GA-identified deficits and clinical outcomes. Significant heterogeneity exists in the GA instruments used across trials. Comprehensive and consistent incorporation of GA into future cancer clinical trial designs could help collect more older adult-specific clinical information and adjust trial eligibility criteria to increase representation by older adults.

Trends in blood pressure diagnosis, treatment, and control among VA nursing home residents, 2007-2018.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate treatment of high blood pressure (BP) can lead to preventable adverse events in nursing home residents, while excessive treatment can lead to associated harms. METHODS: Data were extracted from the VA electronic health record and Bar Code Medication Administration system on 40,079 long-term care residents aged ≥65 years from October 2006 through September 2018 (FY2007-2018). Hypertension prevalence at admission was identified by ICD code(s) in the year prior, and antihypertensive medication use was defined as administration ≥50% of days. BP measures were averaged over 2-year epochs. RESULTS: The age-standardized prevalence of hypertension diagnosis at admission increased from 75.2% in FY2007-2008 to 85.1% in FY2017-2018 (p-value for trend <0.001). Rates of BP treatment and control among residents with hypertension at admission declined slightly over time (p-values for trend <0.001) but remained high (80.3% treated in FY2017-2018, 80.1% with average BP <140/90 mmHg). The age-adjusted prevalence of chronic low BP (average <90/60 mmHg) also declined from 11.1% in FY2007-2008 to 4.7% in FY2017-2018 (p-value for trend <0.001). Persons identified as Black race or Hispanic ethnicity and those with a history of diabetes, stroke, and renal disease were less likely to have an average BP <140/90 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension is well controlled in VA nursing homes, and recent trends of less intensive BP control were accompanied by a lower prevalence of chronic low BP. Nonetheless, some high-risk populations have average BP levels >140/90 mmHg. Future research is needed to better understand the benefits and harms of BP control in nursing home residents.