High-Dose vs. Standard-Dose Influenza Vaccine and Cardiopulmonary Hospitalization or Mortality: Emulating the INVESTED Trial Using Insurance Claims Data.

The INVESTED trial did not show benefits of high-dose (HD) vaccine vs. standard-dose (SD) for a primary composite outcome of cardiopulmonary hospitalization or all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96-1.15) and its components (all-cause mortality HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.84-1.21, cardiopulmonary hospitalization HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.96-1.16) during three influenza seasons (2016-2019) among participants with recent myocardial infarction or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). We emulated INVESTED using Medicare claims data to assess whether the real-world evidence (RWE) study reached similar conclusions. We identified 1:1 propensity score (PS)-matched trial-eligible Medicare beneficiaries aged > 65 years and with prior HHF who received an HD or SD vaccine for the 2016-2019 seasons. We also re-analyzed the INVESTED trial data restricting to participants > 65 years with prior HHF to align eligibility criteria more closely with the RWE study. We compared HRs from the trial and RWE study for the main outcomes. Among 53,393 pairs of PS-matched Medicare beneficiaries, the HD vaccine group showed lower risk of the primary composite outcome (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.95-0.98) and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.91-0.95), and similar risk of cardiopulmonary hospitalization (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96-1.00), compared with SD. The RWE and trial results were closely concordant after the trial population was limited to participants > 65 years with prior HHF: trial-based results for the primary composite outcome (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.89-1.17), all-cause mortality (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.72-1.16), and cardiopulmonary hospitalization (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.88-1.18). Although similar to the main trial results, the RWE was closer to the results from trial participants with aligned eligibility criteria. This study affirms the importance of considering different distributions of baseline patient characteristics when comparing trial findings to RWE.

Frailty, Home Time, and Health Care Costs in Older Adults With Atrial Fibrillation Receiving Oral Anticoagulants.

Importance: There are no data on patient-centered outcomes and health care costs by frailty in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking oral anticoagulants (OACs). Objective: To compare home time, clinical events, and health care costs associated with OACs by frailty levels in older adults with AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This community-based cohort study assessed Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 65 years or older with AF from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2019. Data analysis was performed from January to December 2022. Exposures: Apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin use were measured from prescription claims. Frailty was measured using a validated claims-based frailty index. Main outcomes and measures: Outcome measures were (1) home time (days alive out of the hospital and skilled nursing facility) loss greater than 14 days; (2) a composite end point of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, or death; and (3) total cost per member per year after propensity score overlap weighting. Results: The weighted population comprised 136 551 beneficiaries, including 45 950 taking apixaban (mean [SD] age, 77.6 [7.3] years; 51.3% female), 45 320 taking rivaroxaban (mean [SD] age, 77.6 [7.3] years; 51.9% female), and 45 281 taking warfarin (mean [SD] age, 77.6 [7.3] years; 52.0% female). Compared with apixaban, rivaroxaban was associated with increased risk of home time lost greater than 14 days (risk difference per 100 persons, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.5-2.1]), composite end point (rate difference per 1000 person-years, 21.3 [95% CI, 16.4-26.2]), and total cost (mean difference, $890 [95% CI, $652-$1127]), with greater differences among the beneficiaries with frailty. Use of warfarin relative to apixaban was associated with increased home time lost (risk difference per 100 persons, 3.2 [95% CI, 2.9-3.5]) and composite end point (rate difference per 1000 person-years, 29.4 [95% CI, 24.5-34.3]), with greater differences among the beneficiaries with frailty. Compared with apixaban, warfarin was associated with lower total cost (mean difference, -$1166 [95% CI, -$1396 to -$937]) but higher cost when excluding OAC cost (mean difference, $1409 [95% CI, $1177 to $1642]) regardless of frailty levels. Conclusions and Relevance: In older adults with AF, apixaban was associated with increased home time and lower rates of clinical events than rivaroxaban and warfarin, especially for those with frailty. Apixaban was associated with lower total cost compared with rivaroxaban but higher cost compared with warfarin due to higher OAC cost. These findings suggest that apixaban may be preferred for older adults with AF, particularly those with frailty.

Predicting Treatment Effects of a New-to-Market Drug in Clinical Practice Based on Phase III Randomized Trial Results.

Trial results may not be generalizable to target populations treated in clinical practice with different distributions of baseline characteristics that modify the treatment effect. We used outcome models developed with trial data to predict treatment effects in Medicare populations. We used data from the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy trial (RE-LY), which investigated the effect of dabigatran vs. warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE) among patients with atrial fibrillation. We developed outcome models by fitting proportional hazards models in trial data. Target populations were trial-eligible Medicare beneficiaries who initiated dabigatran or warfarin in 2010-2011 ("early") and 2010-2017 ("extended"). We predicted 2-year risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for stroke/SE, major bleeding, and all-cause death in the Medicare populations using the observed baseline characteristics. The trial and early target populations had similar mean (SD) CHADS2 scores (2.15 (SD 1.13) vs. 2.15 (SD 0.91)) but different mean ages (71 vs. 79 years). Compared with RE-LY, the early Medicare population had similar predicted benefit of dabigatran vs. warfarin for stroke/SE (trial RR = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.50 to 0.76 and RD = -1.37%, -1.96% to -0.77%, Medicare RR = 0.73, 0.65 to 0.82 and RD = -0.92%, -1.26% to -0.59%) and risks for major bleeding and all-cause death. The time-extended target population showed similar results. Outcome model-based prediction facilitates estimating the average treatment effects of a drug in different target populations when treatment and outcome data are unreliable or unavailable. The predicted effects may inform payers' coverage decisions for patients, especially shortly after a drug's launch when observational data are scarce.

Common non-cardiovascular multimorbidity groupings and clinical outcomes in older adults with major cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Among older adults, non-cardiovascular multimorbidity often coexists with cardiovascular disease (CVD) but their clinical significance is uncertain. We identified common non-cardiovascular comorbidity patterns and their association with clinical outcomes in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), or atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: Using 2015-2016 Medicare data, we took 1% random sample to create 3 cohorts of beneficiaries diagnosed with AMI (n = 24,808), CHF (n = 57,285), and AF (n = 36,277) prior to 1/1/2016. Within each cohort, we applied latent class analysis to classify beneficiaries based on 9 non-cardiovascular comorbidities (anemia, cancer, chronic kidney disease, chronic lung disease, dementia, depression, diabetes, hypothyroidism, and musculoskeletal disease). Mortality, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular hospitalizations, and home time lost over a 1-year follow-up period were compared across non-cardiovascular multimorbidity classes. RESULTS: Similar non-cardiovascular multimorbidity classes emerged from the 3 CVD cohorts: (1) minimal, (2) depression-lung, (3) chronic kidney disease (CKD)-diabetes, and (4) multi-system class. Across CVD cohorts, multi-system class had the highest risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.7-3.9), cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 1.6-3.3), non-cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 3.1-7.2), and home time lost (rate ratio, 2.7-5.4). Among those with AMI, the CKD-diabetes class was more strongly associated with all the adverse outcomes than the depression-lung class. In CHF and AF, differences in risk between the depression-lung and CKD-diabetes classes varied per outcome; and the depression-lung and multi-system classes had double the rates of non-cardiovascular hospitalizations than cardiovascular hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: Four non-cardiovascular multimorbidity patterns were found among Medicare beneficiaries with CHF, AMI, or AF. Compared to the minimal class, the multi-system, CKD-diabetes, and depression-lung classes were associated with worse outcomes. Identification of these classes offers insight into specific segments of the population that may benefit from more than the usual cardiovascular care.

Comparative Effectiveness of Empagliflozin vs Liraglutide or Sitagliptin in Older Adults With Diverse Patient Characteristics.

Importance: Limited evidence is available on the comparative effectiveness of empagliflozin vs alternative second-line glucose-lowering agents in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) receiving routine care who have a broad spectrum of cardiorenal risk. Objective: To evaluate the association of empagliflozin with cardiovascular outcomes relative to liraglutide and sitagliptin, stratified by age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective comparative effectiveness cohort study used deidentified Medicare claims data from August 1, 2014, to September 30, 2018, with follow-up from drug initiation until treatment changes, death, or gap in Medicare enrollment (>30 days). Data analysis was performed from October 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries older than 65 years with T2D were included. A total of 45 788 patients (22 894 propensity score-matched pairs initiating treatment with either empagliflozin or liraglutide) were included in cohort 1, and 45 624 patients (22 812 propensity score-matched pairs initiating treatment with either empagliflozin or sitagliptin) were included in cohort 2. Exposures: Empagliflozin vs liraglutide (cohort 1) or empagliflozin vs sitagliptin (cohort 2). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were (1) modified major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, and all-cause mortality, and (2) hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Hazard ratios (HRs) and rate differences (RDs) per 1000 person-years were estimated, adjusting for 143 baseline covariates using 1:1 propensity score matching. Results: Among 45 788 patients in cohort 1, the mean (SD) age was 71.9 (5.1) years; 23 396 patients (51.1%) were female, 22 392 (48.9%) were male, and 38 049 (83.1%) were White. Among 45 624 patients in cohort 2, the mean (SD) age was 72.1 (5.1) years; 21 418 patients (46.9%) were female, 24 206 (53.1%) were male, and 37 814 (82.9%) were White. Relative to patients initiating liraglutide, those initiating empagliflozin had a similar risk of the modified MACE outcome (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79-1.03) and a reduced risk of HHF (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.82). Across subgroups, empagliflozin was associated with a lower risk of the modified MACE outcome in patients with a history of ASCVD (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98) and HF (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-1.00) compared with liraglutide, and potential heterogeneity in estimates was observed by sex (male: HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.71-1.01]; female: HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.94-1.42]; P = .02 for homogeneity). However, reductions in the risk of HHF were observed across most subgroups (eg, ASCVD: HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85]; HF: HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.49-0.88]). Compared with sitagliptin, empagliflozin was associated with reduced risks of the modified MACE outcome (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.60-0.77) and HHF (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.56), which were consistent across all subgroups. Absolute benefits of empagliflozin vs sitagliptin were larger in patients with a history of ASCVD (modified MACE: RD, -17.6 [95% CI, -24.9 to -10.4]; HHF: RD, -16.7 [95% CI, -21.7 to -11.9]), HF (modified MACE: RD, -41.1 [95% CI, -59.9 to -22.6]; HHF: RD, -50.4 [95% CI, -67.5 to -33.9]), or CKD (modified MACE: RD, -26.7 [95% CI, -41.3 to -12.3]; HHF: RD, -31.9 [95% CI, -43.5 to -20.8]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study of older adults, empagliflozin was associated with a lower risk of HHF (relative to both liraglutide and sitagliptin) and the modified MACE outcome (relative to sitagliptin), with larger absolute benefits in patients with established cardiorenal diseases. These findings suggest that older adults with T2D might benefit more from empagliflozin vs liraglutide or sitagliptin with respect to the risk of HHF; with respect to the risk of MACEs, empagliflozin might be preferable to liraglutide only in patients with cardiovascular disease history and to sitagliptin across all patient subgroups.

Effectiveness and safety of empagliflozin in routine care patients: Results from the EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) study.

AIM: To investigate effectiveness and safety outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating empagliflozin versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor treatment across the broad spectrum of cardiovascular risk. METHODS: In a population-based cohort study we identified 39 072 pairs of 1:1 propensity score-matched adult patients with T2D initiating empagliflozin or DPP-4 inhibitors, using data from 2 US commercial insurance databases and Medicare between August 2014 and September 2017. The primary outcomes were a composite of myocardial infarction (MI)/stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Safety outcomes were bone fractures, lower-limb amputations (LLAs), diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), and acute kidney injury (AKI). We estimated pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusting for more than 140 baseline covariates. RESULTS: Study participants had a mean age of 60 years and only 28% had established cardiovascular disease. Compared to DPP-4 inhibitors, empagliflozin was associated with similar risk of MI/stroke (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.81-1.21]), and lower risk of HHF (HR 0.48 [95% CI 0.35-0.67] and 0.63 [95% CI 0.54-0.74], based on a primary and any heart failure discharge diagnosis, respectively). The HR was 0.52 (95% CI 0.38-0.72) for all-cause mortality (ACM) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.70-0.98) for a composite of MI/stroke/ACM. Empagliflozin was associated with a similar risk of LLA and fractures, an increased risk of DKA (HR 1.71 [95% CI 1.08-2.71]) and a decreased risk of AKI (HR 0.60 [95% CI 0.43-0.85]). CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, the initiation of empagliflozin versus a DPP-4 inhibitor was associated with a lower risk of HHF, ACM and MI/stroke/ACM, a similar risk of MI/stroke, and a safety profile consistent with documented information.

Intensive versus standard blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes: a restricted mean survival time analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Restricted mean survival time analysis offers an intuitive and robust summary of treatment effect compared with HRs. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of intensive versus standard blood pressure (BP) control on death or cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure trial. SETTING: 77 sites in the USA and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 4733 adults with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events. INTERVENTIONS: Systolic BP target <120 mm Hg (n=2371) versus <140 mm Hg (n=2362). MEASUREMENTS: Composite endpoint of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke. RESULTS: The mean event-free survival time over 5 years (1825 days) was similar between intensive and standard BP control (1716 vs 1714 days; mean difference, 1.3 (95% CI -18.1 to 20.7) days). However, intensive BP treatment was more beneficial for those assigned to standard glycaemic control (1725 vs 1697 days; mean difference, 28.1 (95% CI 0.4 to 55.9) days), but not for those assigned to intensive glycaemic control (1706 vs 1731 days; mean difference, -25.2 (95% CI -52.3 to 1.9) days) (p=0.008 for interaction). In subgroup analysis, the mean event-free survival time difference between intensive and standard BP treatment was -76.0 (95% CI -131.8 to -20.3) days for those with cognitive impairment and 21.8 (95% CI -24.0 to 67.5) days for those with normal cognitive function (p=0.008 for interaction). The effect was not different by age, sex and baseline cardiovascular disease status. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive BP treatment may reduce death and cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes receiving standard glycaemic treatment and without cognitive impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00000620; Post-results.

Cost to Medicare of Delayed Adalimumab Biosimilar Availability.

Launched in 2002, originator adalimumab (Humira) is the top revenue-generating drug in the United States. Between 2016 and 2019, the US Food and Drug Administration approved 5 adalimumab biosimilars, yet none have been marketed owing to patent dispute settlements. We sought to calculate the cost of this delayed entry to Medicare over this period by estimating the difference between reported spending on originator adalimumab and estimated spending on originator and biosimilar adalimumab products assuming timely biosimilar market entry. Estimates of potential biosimilar spending were calculated based on the following evidence-based projections: (i) market capture of 15% for the first biosimilar and 5.5% for successive biosimilars in their first year on the market, and 5% annually thereafter; (ii) price reductions of 3.5% per year and 2.4% per additional biosimilar entry for originator adalimumab; and (iii) price discounts of 25% at launch, 3.4% per year, and 1.7% per additional biosimilar entry for biosimilar adalimumab. Based on these assumptions, had adalimumab biosimilars launched upon approval, estimated non-rebate spending on them would have been $18.3 million in 2016, $225.7 million in 2017, $436.2 million in 2018, and $727.7 million in 2019, whereas estimated non-rebate spending on originator adalimumab would have been $2.33 billion, $2.04 billion, $1.78 billion, and $1.42 billion. Cumulative spending on adalimumab would have thus been $8.98 billion instead of an observed $12.11 billion. Accounting for estimated rebates, total predicted savings would have been $2.19 billion. Reforms for timely biosimilar availability will be critical in ensuring optimal savings for Medicare after biosimilar approval.

Diabetes Drugs: List Price Increases Were Not Always Reflected In Net Price; Impact Of Brand Competition Unclear.

List prices for brand-name drugs have risen steeply, often despite the introduction of competition from other brand-name drugs in the same therapeutic class. List prices, however, do not reflect any rebates that manufacturers provide payers. To understand how net prices (after rebates and other discounts) respond to competition, we compared changes in inflation-adjusted, revenue-weighted mean list and net prices of a one-month supply of three classes of diabetes drugs: glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. These drug classes each had several brand-name products enter the market between 2005 and 2017. The annualized change in list price over this period was $75 (15 percent) for GLP1 agonists, $22 (8 percent) for DPP4 inhibitors, and $41 (11 percent) for SGLT2 inhibitors. In contrast, the annualized change in net price was $38 (10 percent) for GLP1 agonists, -$3 (-2 percent) for DPP4 inhibitors, and -$17 (-9 percent) for SGLT2 inhibitors, suggesting a variable impact of brand-name competition on net prices.

Restricted mean survival time versus conventional measures for treatment decision-making.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Restricted mean survival time (RMST) summarizes treatment effect in terms of a gain or loss in the event-free days. It remains uncertain whether communicating treatment benefit and harm using RMST-based summary is more effective than conventional summary based on absolute and relative risk reduction. We compared the effect of RMST-based approach and conventional approach on decisional conflict using an example of intensive versus standard blood pressure-lowering strategies. DESIGN: On-line survey. SETTING: A convenience sample of patients in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred adults aged 65 and older with hypertension requiring anti-hypertensive treatment (response rate 85.5%). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to either RMST-based summary or conventional summary about the benefit and harm of blood pressure-lowering strategies. MEASUREMENTS: Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), ranging from 0 (no conflict) to 100 (high conflict), and preference for intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy. RESULTS: Participants assigned to RMST-based approach (n = 100) and conventional approach (n = 100) had similar age (mean [standard deviation, SD]: 72.3 [5.6] vs 72.8 [5.5] years) and proportions of female (50 [50.0%] vs 61 [61.0%]) and white race (92 [92.0%] vs 92 [92.0%]). The mean (SD) DCS score was 25.2 (15.0) for RMST-based approach and 25.6 (14.1) for conventional approach (p = 0.84). The number (%) of participants who preferred intensive strategy was 10 (10.0%) for RMST-based approach and 14 (14.0%) for conventional approach (p = 0.52). The results were consistent in subgroups defined by age, sex, education level, cardiovascular disease status, and predicted mortality risk categories. CONCLUSION: In a sample of relatively healthy older adults with hypertension, RMST-based approach was as effective as conventional approach on decisional conflict about choosing a blood pressure-lowering strategy. This study provides proof-of-concept evidence that RMST-based approach can be used in conjunction with absolute and relative risk reduction for communicating treatment benefit and harm in a decision aid.

Regulatory approval characteristics of antimicrobial versus non-antimicrobial products, 1984-2018: an evaluation of Food and Drug Administration flexibilities.

Antimicrobial resistance is of growing concern. To encourage development of new treatments, some commentators have suggested regulators exercise increased flexibility on the clinical evidence required for approval. We examined all 1065 new drugs and biologics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration between 1984 and 2018 and recorded each drug's use of the Orphan Drug Act, fast-track, priority review, accelerated approval, and breakthrough therapy programmes, as well as dates of investigational new drug application, new drug application, and new drug approval, which were used to calculate clinical development and review times. There were 178 (17%) antimicrobial products, which were more likely than non-antimicrobial products to benefit from priority review (103 [58%] of 178 vs 402 [45%] of 887, p=0·0023), fast-track designation (58 [37%] of 157 vs 151 [19%] of 814], p<0·001), and accelerated approval (23 [18%] of 129 vs 67 [9%] of 711, p=0·0046), and less likely to have Orphan Drug Act designation (25 [14%] of 178 vs 267 [30%] of 887, p<0·0001). Median time from investigational new drug application to approval was shorter for antimicrobial than for non-antimicrobial drugs (5·9 years [IQR 4·6-7·3] vs 7·6 years [IQR 5·7-10·2], p<0·001). Except for Orphan Drug Act status, expedited clinical testing and review programmes have been used at least as frequently for antimicrobial products as for non-antimicrobial drugs. No evidence supported claims that antimicrobial progress through the regulatory approval process in the USA is more time-consuming than non-antimicrobial development.

Parental Considerations Regarding Cure and Late Effects for Children With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: More than 80% of children with cancer become long-term survivors, yet most survivors experience late effects of treatment. Little is known about how parents and physicians consider late-effects risks against a potential survival benefit when making treatment decisions. METHODS: We used a discrete choice experiment to assess the importance of late effects on treatment decision-making and acceptable trade-offs between late-effects risks and survival benefit. We surveyed 95 parents of children with cancer and 41 physicians at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center to assess preferences for 5 late effects of treatment: neurocognitive impairment, infertility, cardiac toxicity, second malignancies, and impaired growth and development. RESULTS: Each late effect had a statistically significant association with treatment choice, as did survival benefit (P < .001). Avoidance of severe cognitive impairment was the most important treatment consideration to parents and physicians. Parents also valued cure and decreased risk of second malignancies; physician decision-making was driven by avoidance of second malignancies and infertility. Both parents and physicians accepted a high risk of infertility (parents, a 137% increased risk; physicians, an 80% increased risk) in exchange for a 10% greater chance of cure. CONCLUSIONS: Avoidance of severe neurocognitive impairment was the predominant driver of parent and physician treatment preferences, even over an increased chance of cure. This highlights the importance of exploring parental late-effects priorities when discussing treatment options.

The Women's Health Initiative Estrogen-alone Trial had differential disease and medical expenditure consequences across age groups.

OBJECTIVES: The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized trial identified age differences in the benefit-risk profile of estrogen-alone (ET) use. The impact of WHI trial on disease-associated medical expenditures attributable to subsequent decreased ET utilization has, however, not been measured. Therefore, the objective of this analysis was to quantify the age-specific disease-associated medical expenditures attributable to reduced ET utilization after the WHI Hormone Therapy (HT) trials. METHODS: Population-level disease counts and associated expenditures between 2003 and 2015 were compared between an observed ET-user population versus a hypothetical ET-user population assuming absence of the WHI HT trials, constructed by extrapolating ET utilization rates from 1996 to 2002 assuming pre-WHI HT rates would have continued without publication of the WHI HT trial data (2002-2004). Analyses were stratified by age (50-59, 60-69, and 70-79 years). Input data were extracted from Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and the literature. The primary outcomes were: ET utilization, chronic diseases (breast cancer, stroke, coronary heart disease, colorectal cancer, pulmonary embolism, and hip fracture) and disease-associated direct medical expenditures. RESULTS: Over 13 years, the decline in ET utilization was associated with $4.1 billion expenditure for excess chronic diseases (37,549 excess events) among women in their 50s, compared to savings of $1.5 billion and $4.4 billion for diseases averted by lower ET utilization among women in their 60s (13,495 fewer events) and 70s (40,792 fewer events), respectively. CONCLUSION: The decline in ET utilization had differential disease and expenditure consequences by age groups in the United States. These results are limited by the lack of inclusion of vasomotor symptom benefit and costs of alternative medications for these symptoms in the analysis.

The EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) study programme: Design and exposure accrual for an evaluation of empagliflozin in routine clinical care.

BACKGROUND: The EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial showed that empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in diabetic patients with cardiovascular disease. EMPRISE is a study programme on the effectiveness, safety and healthcare utilization of empagliflozin in routine care, leveraging real-world data from two commercial and one federal US data sources from 2014 to 2019. OBJECTIVES: To describe rationale and design of EMPRISE, assess ability to minimize confounding and evaluate the time to reach sufficient statistical power for a key study outcome, HHF, using baseline information from the first year of EMPRISE. METHODS: In 3 claims data sets, we identified a 1:1 propensity score (PS)-matched cohort of diabetic patients ≥18 years initiating empagliflozin or a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i), resulting in 6643 total pairs. The PS model included >140 baseline covariates. We measured covariate balance via standardized differences (SD) and postmatching c-statistic. We computed the incidence rate (IR) of HHF, predicted exposure accrual over time and calculated expected power. RESULTS: After PS matching, patient characteristics were balanced with SD <0.1 and c-statistic between 0.54 and 0.59. The population IR of HHF was 4.4 per 1000 person-years using a specific HHF definition and 14.8 using a broader HHF definition. In our projection, 80%-powered analyses would require a minimum of 169 HHF events, expected to accumulate by year 3 (specific definition) or year 2 (broader definition). CONCLUSION: Baseline information from EMPRISE provided evidence of solid confounding control and adequate exposure accrual with expected powered analyses for the primary outcomes.

Capturing Adult Patient Preferences Toward Benefits and Risks of Second-Line Antihyperglycemic Medications Used in Type 2 Diabetes: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the strength of preferences, relative importance and trade-offs that patients with type 2 diabetes make between characteristics of antihyperglycemic medications. METHODS: We conducted a discrete choice experiment with a sample of Canadians with type 2 diabetes. Respondents completed 14 choice tasks and choose between 2 hypothetical drug alternatives, described by 8 characteristics (cost, efficacy, life expectancy, risk of macrovascular event, risk of microvascular event, risk of severe hypoglycemia, risk of minor side effects and risk of rare but serious side effects). An opt-out option was also provided. Characteristics used to describe the 2 drugs were identified using a literature review, focus groups and interviews. A multinomial mixed logit model was used to estimate choice probabilities. Willingness to pay (WTP) was used to assess trade-offs between characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 502 survey responses were included. The average age of participants was 59±12 years. Participants were 59% men, and 62% had diabetes for at least 6 years. All characteristics were found to significantly influence choice. On average, patients were willing to pay a monthly cost for their therapy of $134 to achieve 3 additional years of life; $49 and $36 for a 20% reduction in their risk of macrovascular and microvascular events, respectively; $34 for a 1% drop in glycated hemoglobin; $29 for a 50% less risk of severe hypoglycemia over 10 years; $29 for a 50% less risk of a minor side effect and $17 for a 50% less risk of a rare but serious side effect over 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: All 8 characteristics were shown to significantly influence choice, with cost and life expectancy carrying the most weight and serious and minor side effects carrying the least weight.

A bronchial-airway gene-expression classifier to improve the diagnosis of lung cancer: Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Bronchoscopy is the safest procedure for lung cancer diagnosis when an invasive evaluation is required after imaging procedures. However, its sensitivity is relatively low, especially for small and peripheral lesions. We assessed benefits and costs of introducing a bronchial gene-expression classifier (BGC) to improve the performance of bronchoscopy and the overall diagnostic process for early detection of lung cancer. We used discrete-event simulation to compare clinical and economic outcomes of two different strategies with the standard practice in former and current smokers with indeterminate nodules: (i) location-based strategy-integrated the BGC to the bronchoscopy indication; (ii) simplified strategy-extended use of bronchoscopy plus BGC also on small and peripheral lesions. Outcomes modeled were rate of invasive procedures, quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Compared to the standard practice, the location-based strategy (i) reduced absolute rate of invasive procedures by 3.3% without increasing costs at the current BGC market price. It resulted in savings when the BGC price was less than $3,000. The simplified strategy (ii) reduced absolute rate of invasive procedures by 10% and improved quality-adjusted life expectancy, producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $10,109 per QALY. In patients with indeterminate nodules, both BGC strategies reduced unnecessary invasive procedures at high risk of adverse events. Moreover, compared to the standard practice, the simplified use of BGC for central and peripheral lesions resulted in larger QALYs gains at acceptable cost. The location-based is cost-saving if the price of classifier declines.

Exact sequential analysis for multiple weighted binomial end points.

Sequential analysis is used in clinical trials and postmarket drug safety surveillance to prospectively monitor efficacy and safety to quickly detect benefits and problems, while taking the multiple testing of repeated analyses into account. When there are multiple outcomes, each one may be given a weight corresponding to its severity. This paper introduces an exact sequential analysis procedure for multiple weighted binomial end points; the analysis incorporates a drug's combined benefit and safety profile. It works with a variety of alpha spending functions for continuous, group, or mixed group-continuous sequential analysis. The binomial probabilities may vary over time and do not need to be known a priori. The new method was implemented in the free R Sequential package for both one- and two-tailed sequential analysis. An example is given examining myocardial infarction and major bleeding events in patients who initiated non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs.

Quantifying the impact of adherence to screening strategies on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Current recommendations of The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies are based on models that assume 100% adherence. Since adherence can have a large effect on screening outcomes, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of CRC screening strategies under reported adherence rates at the population level. We developed and validated a microsimulation model to assess the effectiveness of colonoscopy (COL), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), high-sensitivity guaiac fecal occult blood-test (HS-gFOBT), fecal immunochemical test (FIT), multitarget stool DNA test (FIT-DNA), computed tomography colonography (CTC), and methylated SEPT9 DNA test (SEPT9) in terms of CRC incidence and mortality, incremental life years gained (LYG), number of colonoscopies, and adverse events for men and women 50 years or older over their lifetime. We assessed outcomes under 100% adherence rates and reported adherence rates. We also performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of varying adherence levels on CRC outcomes. Assuming 100% adherence, FIT-DNA, FIT, HS-gFOBT, and SEPT9 averted 42-45 CRC cases and 25-26 CRC deaths, COL 46 cases and 26 deaths, CTC 39 cases and 23 deaths, FS 32 cases and 19 deaths per 1000 individuals. Assuming reported adherence, SEPT9 averted 37 CRC cases and 23 CRC deaths, COL 34 cases and 20 deaths, FIT-DNA, FIT, CTC and HS-gFOBT 16-25 cases and 10-16 deaths per 1000 individuals. LYG reflected the effectiveness of each strategy in reducing CRC cases and deaths. Adverse events were more common for COL (3.7 per 1000 screened) and annual SEPT9 (3.4 per 1000 screened), and proportional to the number of colonoscopies. Among the screening strategies recommended by USPSTF, colonoscopy results in the largest benefit when we account for adherence. Adherence rates higher than 65%-70% would be required for any stool or blood-based screening modality to match the benefits of colonoscopy.

Competition and price among brand-name drugs in the same class: A systematic review of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: Some experts have proposed combating rising drug prices by promoting brand-brand competition, a situation that is supposed to arise when multiple US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved brand-name products in the same class are indicated for the same condition. However, numerous reports exist of price increases following the introduction of brand-name competition, suggesting that it may not be effective. We performed a systematic literature review of the peer-reviewed health policy and economics literature to better understand the interplay between new drug entry and intraclass drug prices. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched PubMed and EconLit for original studies on brand-brand competition in the US market published in English between January 1990 and April 2019. We performed a qualitative synthesis of each study's data, recording its primary objective, methodology, and results. We found 10 empirical investigations, with 1 study each on antihypertensives, anti-infectives, central nervous system stimulants for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis, histamine-2 (H2) blockers, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors; 2 studies on cancer medications; and 2 studies on all marketed or new drugs. None of the studies reported that brand-brand competition lowers list prices of existing drugs within a class. The findings of 2 studies suggest that such competition may help restrain how new drug prices are set. Other studies found evidence that brand-brand competition was mediated by the relative quality of competing drugs and the extent to which they are marketed, with safer or more effective new drugs and greater marketing associated with higher intraclass list prices. Our investigation was limited by the studies' use of list rather than net prices and the age of some of the data. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that policies to promote brand-brand competition in the US pharmaceutical market, such as accelerating approval of non-first-in-class drugs, will likely not result in lower drug list prices absent additional structural reforms.

Spending on World Health Organization essential medicines in Medicare Part D, 2011-15: retrospective cost analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the trends, drivers, and potential modifiers of increased spending by US Medicare beneficiaries on medicines deemed essential by the World Health Organization. DESIGN: Retrospective cost analysis of Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File, detailing annual generic and brand name drug prescribing and spending from 2011 through 2015 by Medicare Part D participants who filled prescriptions for WHO essential medicines. SETTING: US Medicare System. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total and per beneficiary Medicare spending, total and per beneficiary out-of-pocket patient spending, cumulative beneficiary count, claim count, and per unit drug cost. All spending measures were adjusted for inflation and reported in 2015 US dollars. RESULTS: Medicare Part D expenditures on 265 WHO essential medicines between 2011 and 2015 was $87.2bn (£68.4bn; €76.5bn), with annual spending increasing from $11.9bn in 2011 to $25.8bn in 2015 (116%). Patients' out-of-pocket spending for essential medicines over the same period was $12.1bn. Total annual out-of-pocket spending increased from $2.0bn to $2.9bn (47%), and annual per beneficiary out-of-pocket spending on these drugs increased from $20.42 to $21.17 (4%). Total prescription count increased from 376.1m to 498.9m (33%), and cumulative beneficiary count grew from 95.9m to 135.8m (42%). Of the essential medicines included in the study, the per unit cost of 133 (50%) agents increased faster than the average inflation rate during this period. Overall, approximately 58% of the increase in total spending during this period can be attributed to the introduction of novel agents. CONCLUSIONS: Spending associated with essential medicines grew substantially from 2011 to 2015, driven largely by the increased use of two expensive novel drugs used in treating hepatitis C. Approximately 22% of increased total spending during this period can be attributed to increases in per unit cost of existing drugs. These trends may limit patients' access to essential drugs while also increasing healthcare system costs.