Provider Specialization in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Quality of Care and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) is complex and variation in care has been well-documented. However, the drivers of practice variation remain unexplored. We examined variation based on the treating gastroenterologist's IBD focus (proportion of outpatient visits for IBD). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort of newly diagnosed patients with IBD using data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (2000-2020). The exposure variable was whether the treating gastroenterologist had an IBD focus (>90th percentile of IBD visits/total outpatient visits). We used adjusted regression models to evaluate associations between provider IBD focus and process measures (use of mesalamine, corticosteroid, biologic, and narcotic medications and endoscopic or radiographic imaging) and clinical outcomes (time to IBD-related hospitalization and bowel resection surgery). We tested for change in treatment patterns over time by including an interaction term for study era (2004-2012 vs 2013-2020). RESULTS: The study included 772 children treated by 493 providers and 2864 adults treated by 2076 providers. In children, none of the associations between provider focus and process or outcome measures were significant. In adults, care from an IBD-focused provider was associated with more use of biologics, combination therapy, and imaging and endoscopy, and less mesalamine use for Crohn's disease (P < .05 for all comparisons) but not with other process measures. Biologics were prescribed more frequently and narcotics less frequently during the later era (P < .05 for both). Hospitalization and surgery rates were not associated with IBD focus or era. CONCLUSIONS: IBD care for adults varies by provider specialization. Given the evolving complexity, novel methods may be needed to standardize care.

Developing a PRogram to Educate and Sensitize Caregivers to Reduce the Inappropriate Prescription Burden in the Elderly with Alzheimer's Disease (D-PRESCRIBE-AD): Trial protocol and rationale of an open-label pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications in older adults, particular those with dementia, can lead to adverse drug events including falls and fractures, worsening cognitive impairment, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Educational mailings from health plans to patients and their providers to encourage deprescribing conversations may represent an effective, low-cost, "light touch", approach to reducing the burden of potentially inappropriate prescription use in older adults with dementia. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the Developing a PRogram to Educate and Sensitize Caregivers to Reduce the Inappropriate Prescription Burden in Elderly with Alzheimer's Disease (D-PRESCRIBE-AD) trial is to evaluate the effect of a health plan based multi-faceted educational outreach intervention to community dwelling patients with dementia who are currently prescribed sedative/hypnotics, antipsychotics, or strong anticholinergics. METHODS: The D-PRESCRIBE-AD is an open-label pragmatic, prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing three arms: 1) educational mailing to both the health plan patient and their prescribing physician (patient plus physician arm, n = 4814); 2) educational mailing to prescribing physician only (physician only arm, n = 4814); and 3) usual care (n = 4814) among patients with dementia enrolled in two large United States based health plans. The primary outcome is the absence of any dispensing of the targeted potentially inappropriate prescription during the 6-month study observation period after a 3-month black out period following the mailing. Secondary outcomes include dose-reduction, polypharmacy, healthcare utilization, mortality and therapeutic switching within targeted drug classes. CONCLUSION: This large pragmatic RCT will contribute to the evidence base on promoting deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications among older adults with dementia. If successful, such light touch, inexpensive and highly scalable interventions have the potential to reduce the burden of potentially inappropriate prescribing for patients with dementia. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05147428.

Risk of Anaphylaxis Among New Users of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess risk of anaphylaxis among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are initiating therapy with a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), with a focus on those starting lixisenatide therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cohort study was conducted in three large, U.S. claims databases (2017-2021). Adult (aged ≥18 years) new users of a GLP-1 RA who had type 2 diabetes mellitus and ≥6 months enrollment in the database before GLP-1 RA initiation (start of follow-up) were included. GLP-1 RAs evaluated were lixisenatide, an insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (FRC), exenatide, liraglutide or insulin degludec/liraglutide FRC, dulaglutide, and semaglutide (injectable and oral). The first anaphylaxis event during follow-up was identified using a validated algorithm. Incidence rates (IRs) and 95% CIs were calculated within each medication cohort. The unadjusted IR ratio (IRR) comparing anaphylaxis rates in the lixisenatide cohort with all other GLP-1 RAs combined was analyzed post hoc. RESULTS: There were 696,089 new users with 456,612 person-years of exposure to GLP-1 RAs. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and use of other prescription medications in the 6 months before the index date were similar across medication cohorts. IRs (95% CIs) per 10,000 person-years were 1.0 (0.0-5.6) for lixisenatide, 6.0 (3.6-9.4) for exenatide, 5.1 (3.7-7.0) for liraglutide, 3.9 (3.1-4.8) for dulaglutide, and 3.6 (2.6-4.9) for semaglutide. The IRR (95% CI) for the anaphylaxis rate for the lixisenatide cohort compared with the pooled other GLP-1 RA cohort was 0.24 (0.01-1.35). CONCLUSIONS: Anaphylaxis is rare with GLP-1 RAs. Lixisenatide is unlikely to confer higher risk of anaphylaxis than other GLP-1 RAs.

Pediatric Medical Subspecialist Use in Outpatient Settings.

Importance: A first step toward understanding whether pediatric medical subspecialists are meeting the needs of the nation's children is describing rates of use and trends over time. Objectives: To quantify rates of outpatient pediatric medical subspecialty use. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study of annual subspecialist use examined 3 complementary data sources: electronic health records from PEDSnet (8 large academic medical centers [January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2021]); administrative data from the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD) (14 commercial health plans [January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2021]); and administrative data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) (44 state Medicaid programs [January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019]). Annual denominators included 493 628 to 858 551 patients younger than 21 years with a general pediatric visit in PEDSnet; 5 million beneficiaries younger than 21 years enrolled for at least 6 months in HIRD; and 35 million Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance Program beneficiaries younger than 19 years enrolled for any amount of time in T-MSIS. Exposure: Calendar year and type of medical subspecialty. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual number of children with at least 1 completed visit to any pediatric medical subspecialist in an outpatient setting per population. Use rates excluded visits in emergency department or inpatient settings. Results: Among the study population, the proportion of girls was 51.0% for PEDSnet, 51.1% for HIRD, and 49.3% for T-MSIS; the proportion of boys was 49.0% for PEDSnet, 48.9% for HIRD, and 50.7% for T-MSIS. The proportion of visits among children younger than 5 years was 37.4% for PEDSnet, 20.9% for HIRD, and 26.2% for T-MSIS; most patients were non-Hispanic Black (29.7% for PEDSnet and 26.1% for T-MSIS) or non-Hispanic White (44.9% for PEDSnet and 43.2% for T-MSIS). Annual rates for PEDSnet ranged from 18.0% to 21.3%, which were higher than rates for HIRD (range, 7.9%-10.4%) and T-MSIS (range, 7.6%-8.6%). Subspecialist use increased in the HIRD commercial health plans (annual relative increase of 2.4% [95% CI, 1.6%-3.1%]), but rates were essentially flat in the other data sources (PEDSnet, -0.2% [95% CI, -1.1% to 0.7%]; T-MSIS, -0.7% [95% CI, -6.5% to 5.5%]). The flat PEDSnet growth reflects a balance between annual use increases among those with commercial insurance (1.2% [95% CI, 0.3%-2.1%]) and decreases in use among those with Medicaid (-0.9% [95% CI, -1.6% to -0.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that among children, 8.6% of Medicaid beneficiaries, 10.4% of those with commercial insurance, and 21.3% of those whose primary care is received in academic health systems use pediatric medical subspecialty care each year. There was a small increase in rates of subspecialty use among children with commercial but not Medicaid insurance. These data may help launch innovations in the primary-specialty care interface.

Real-world Evidence Comparing Tofacitinib and Vedolizumab in Anti-TNF-experienced Patients With Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) inhibitors are first-line treatment among patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). With time, patients tend to lose response or become intolerant, necessitating switching to small cell biologics such as tofacitinib or vedolizumab. In this real-world study of a large, geographically diverse US population of TNF-experienced patients with UC, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of newly initiating treatment with tofacitinib vs vedolizumab. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study using secondary data from a large US insurer (Anthem, Inc.). Our cohort included patients with UC newly initiating treatment with tofacitinib or vedolizumab. Patients were required to have evidence of treatment with anti-TNF inhibitors in the 6 months prior to cohort entry. The primary outcome was treatment persistence >52 weeks. Additionally, we evaluated the following secondary outcomes as additional measures of effectiveness and safety: (1) all-cause hospitalization; (2) total abdominal colectomy; (3) hospitalization for infection; (4) hospitalization for malignancy; (5) hospitalization for cardiac events; and (6) hospitalization for thromboembolic events. We used fine stratification by propensity scores to control for confounding by demographics, clinical factors, and treatment history at baseline. RESULTS: Our primary cohort included 168 new users of tofacitinib and 568 new users of vedolizumab. Tofacitinib was associated with lower treatment persistence (adjusted risked ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 -0.99). Differences in secondary measures of effectiveness or safety between tofacitinib initiators vs vedolizumab initiators were not statistically significant (all-cause hospitalization, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.83-1.84; total abdominal colectomy, adjusted HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 0.93-3.44;and hospitalization for any infection, adjusted HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.83-4.52). DISCUSSION: Ulcerative colitis patients with prior anti-TNF experience initiating tofacitinib demonstrated lower treatment persistence compared with those initiating vedolizumab. This finding is in contrast to other recent studies suggesting superior effectiveness of tofacitinib. Ultimately, head-to-head randomized, controlled trials that focus on directly measured end points may be needed to best inform clinical practice.

Anti-TNF-experienced patients with UC initiating vedolizumab demonstrated higher treatment persistence compared with those initiating tofacitinib in this real-world evaluation of comparative effectiveness. Ultimately, head-to-head randomized trials that focus on directly measured end points are needed to best inform clinical practice.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Management of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Analysis of United States Commercial Insurance Data.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Given limited information on health care and treatment utilization for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) during the pandemic, we studied JIA-related health care and treatment utilization in a commercially insured retrospective US cohort. METHODS: We studied rates of outpatient visits, new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) initiations, intra-articular glucocorticoid injections (iaGC), dispensed oral glucocorticoids and opioids, DMARD adherence, and DMARD discontinuation by quarter in March 2018-February 2021 (Q1 started in March). Incident rate ratios (IRR, pandemic vs prepandemic) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable Poisson or Quasi-Poisson models stratified by diagnosis recency (incident JIA, <12 months ago; prevalent JIA, ≥12 months ago). RESULTS: Among 1294 children diagnosed with JIA, total and in-person outpatient visits for JIA declined during the pandemic (IRR, 0.88-0.90), most markedly in Q1 2020. Telemedicine visits, while higher during the pandemic, declined from 21% (Q1) to 13% (Q4) in 2020 to 2021. During the pandemic, children with prevalent JIA, but not incident JIA, had lower usage of iaGC (IRR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.34-1.07), oral glucocorticoids (IRR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.67), and opioids (IRR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.75). Adherence to and discontinuation of DMARDs was similar before and during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: In the first year of the pandemic, visits for JIA dropped by 10% to 12% in commercially insured children in the United States, declines partly mitigated by use of telemedicine. Pandemic-related declines in intra-articular glucocorticoids, oral glucocorticoids, and opioids were observed for children with prevalent, but not incident, JIA. These changes may have important implications for disease control and quality of life.

Corticosteroids but not Anti-TNF Are Associated With Increased COVID-19 Complications in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Immunosuppressed individuals are at higher risk for COVID-19 complications, yet data in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are limited. We evaluated the risk of COVID-19- severe sequelae by medication utilization in a large cohort of patients with IBD. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing insurance claims data between August 31, 2019, and August 31, 2021.We included IBD patients identified by diagnosis and treatment codes. Use of IBD medications was defined in the 90 days prior to cohort entry. Study outcomes included COVID-19 hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, and inpatient death. Patients were followed until the outcome of interest, outpatient death, disenrollment, or end of study period. Due to the aggregate nature of available data, we were unable to perform multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We included 102 986 patients (48 728 CD, 47 592 UC) with a mean age of 53 years; 55% were female. Overall, 412 (0.4%) patients were hospitalized with COVID-19. The incidence of hospitalization was higher in those on corticosteroids (0.6% vs 0.3%; P < .0001; 13.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.8-16.9) and lower in those receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor α therapy (0.2% vs 0.5%; P < .0001; 3.9 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 2.7-5.4). Older age was associated with increased hospitalization with COVID-19. Overall, 71 (0.07%) patients required mechanical ventilation and 52 (0.05%) died at the hospital with COVID-19. The proportion requiring mechanical ventilation (1.9% vs 0.05%; P < .0001; 3.9 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 2.5-5.9) was higher among users of corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with IBD, those on corticosteroids had more hospitalizations and mechanical ventilation with COVID-19. Anti-tumor necrosis factor α therapy was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization. These findings reinforce previous guidance to taper and/or discontinue corticosteroids in IBD.

Incidence, Prevalence, and Racial and Ethnic Distribution of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We sought to estimate the incidence, prevalence, and racial-ethnic distribution of physician-diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in the United States. METHODS: The study used 4 administrative claims data sets: a 20% random sample of national fee-for-service Medicare data (2007 to 2017); Medicaid data from Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and California (1999 to 2012); and commercial health insurance data from Anthem beneficiaries (2006 to 2018) and Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart (2000 to 2017). We used validated combinations of medical diagnoses, diagnostic procedures, and prescription medications to identify incident and prevalent diagnoses. We computed pooled age-, sex-, and race/ethnicity-specific insurance-weighted estimates and pooled estimates standardized to 2018 United States Census estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The age- and sex-standardized incidence of IBD per 100,000 person-years was 10.9 (95% CI, 10.6-11.2). The incidence of IBD peaked in the third decade of life, decreased to a relatively stable level across the fourth to eighth decades, and declined further. The age-, sex- and insurance-standardized prevalence of IBD was 721 per 100,000 population (95% CI, 717-726). Extrapolated to the 2020 United States Census, an estimated 2.39 million Americans are diagnosed with IBD. The prevalence of IBD per 100,000 population was 812 (95% CI, 802-823) in White, 504 (95% CI, 482-526) in Black, 403 (95% CI, 373-433) in Asian, and 458 (95% CI, 440-476) in Hispanic Americans. CONCLUSIONS: IBD is diagnosed in >0.7% of Americans. The incidence peaks in early adulthood and then plateaus at a lower rate. The disease is less commonly diagnosed in Black, Asian, and Hispanic Americans.

Pragmatic guidance for embedding pragmatic clinical trials in health plans: Large simple trials aren't so simple.

BACKGROUND: There are unique opportunities related to the design and conduct of pragmatic trials embedded in health insurance plans, which have longitudinal data on member/patient demographics, dates of coverage, and reimbursed medical care, including prescription drug dispensings, vaccine administrations, behavioral healthcare encounters, and some laboratory results. Such trials can be large and efficient, using these data to identify trial-eligible patients and to ascertain outcomes. METHODS: We use our experience primarily with the National Institutes of Health Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory Distributed Research Network, which comprises health plans that participate in the US Food & Drug Administration's Sentinel System, to describe lessons learned from the conduct and planning of embedded pragmatic trials. RESULTS: Information is available for research on more than 75 million people with commercial or Medicare Advantage health plans. We describe three studies that have used or plan to use the Network, as well as a single health plan study, from which we glean our lessons learned. CONCLUSIONS: Studies that are conducted in health plans provide much-needed evidence to drive clinically meaningful changes in care. However, there are many unique aspects of these trials that must be considered in the planning, implementation, and analytic phases. The type of trial best suited for studies embedded in health plans will be those that require large sample sizes, simple interventions that could be disseminated through health plans, and where data available to the health plan can be leveraged. These trials hold potential for substantial long-term impact on our ability to generate evidence to improve care and population health.

Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Anti-TNF Experienced Patients With Ulcerative Colitis Initiating Vedolizumab Versus Tofacitinib.

Background: Primary and secondary nonresponse to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy is common in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), yet limited research has compared the effectiveness of subsequent biological therapy. Objective: We sought to compare the effectiveness of vedolizumab and tofacitinib in anti-TNF experienced patients with UC, focusing on patient-prioritized patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study nested within the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation's IBD Partners and SPARC IBD initiatives. We identified anti-TNF experienced patients with UC initiating vedolizumab or tofacitinib and analyzed PROs reported approximately 6 months later (minimum 4 months, maximum 10 months). Co-primary outcomes were Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains of Fatigue and Pain Interference. Secondary outcomes included PRO2, treatment persistence, and need for colectomy. Results: We compared 72 vedolizumab initiators and 33 tofacitinib initiators. At follow-up, Pain Interference (P = .04), but not Fatigue (P = .53) was lower among tofacitinib initiators. A trend toward higher Social Role Satisfaction was not significant. The remainder of secondary outcomes (PRO2, treatment persistence, colectomy) did not differ between treatment groups. Conclusions: Among anti-TNF experienced patients with UC, Pain Interference 4-10 months after treatment initiation was lower among tofacitinib users as compared with vedolizumab users. Many, but not all, secondary endpoints and subanalyses also favored tofacitinib. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to further evaluate these findings.

Development and Validation of Claims-Based Definitions to Identify Incident and Prevalent Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Administrative Healthcare Databases.

BACKGROUND: To facilitate inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) research in the United States, we developed and validated claims-based definitions to identify incident and prevalent IBD diagnoses using administrative healthcare claims data among multiple payers. METHODS: We used data from Medicare, Medicaid, and the HealthCore Integrated Research Database (Anthem commercial and Medicare Advantage claims). The gold standard for validation was review of medical records. We evaluated 1 incidence and 4 prevalence algorithms based on a combination of International Classification of Diseases codes, National Drug Codes, and Current Procedural Terminology codes. The claims-based incident diagnosis date needed to be within ±90 days of that recorded in the medical record to be valid. RESULTS: We reviewed 111 charts of patients with a potentially incident diagnosis. The positive predictive value (PPV) of the claims algorithm was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 81%-97%). We reviewed 332 charts to validate prevalent case definition algorithms. The PPV was 94% (95% CI, 86%-98%) for ≥2 IBD diagnoses and presence of prescriptions for IBD medications, 92% (95% CI, 85%-97%) for ≥2 diagnoses without any medications, 78% (95% CI, 67%-87%) for a single diagnosis and presence of an IBD medication, and 35% (95% CI, 25%-46%) for 1 physician diagnosis and no IBD medications. CONCLUSIONS: Through a combination of diagnosis, procedural, and medication codes in insurance claims data, we were able to identify incident and prevalent IBD cases with high accuracy. These algorithms can be useful for the ascertainment of IBD cases in future studies.

Childhood asthma diagnoses declined during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have documented declines in pediatric asthma exacerbations and asthma-related health care utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic, but less is known about the incidence of asthma during the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of children under age 18 without a prior diagnosis of asthma within a large US commercial claims database. Incident asthma was defined using a combination of diagnosis codes, location of services, and medication dispensing. Crude quarterly rates of asthma diagnosis per 1000 children were calculated, and the incidence rate ratio and 95% confidence interval were estimated for newly diagnosed asthma during versus before the pandemic using negative binomial regression, adjusted for age, sex, region, and season. RESULTS: Compared with 3 years prior to the pandemic, crude incident diagnosis rates of asthma decreased by 52% across the first four quarters of the US pandemic. The covariate-adjusted pandemic-associated incidence rate ratio was 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.43, 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: New diagnoses of childhood asthma in the US declined by half during the first year of the pandemic. These findings raise important questions whether pandemic-related changes in infectious or other triggers truly altered the incidence of childhood asthma beyond the well-described disruptions in healthcare access.

Real-World Evidence Comparing Vedolizumab and Ustekinumab in Antitumor Necrosis Factor-Experienced Patients With Crohn's Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Many patients with Crohn's disease (CD) lose response or become intolerant to antitumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy and subsequently switch out of class. We compared the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab to vedolizumab in a large, geographically diverse US population of TNF-experienced patients with CD. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using longitudinal claims data from a large US insurer (Anthem, Inc.). We identified patients with CD initiating vedolizumab or ustekinumab with anti-TNF treatment in the prior 6 months. Our primary outcome was treatment persistence for >52 weeks. Secondary outcomes included (i) all-cause hospitalization, (ii) hospitalization for CD with surgery, (iii) hospitalization for CD without surgery, and (iv) hospitalization for infection. Propensity score fine stratification was used to control for demographic and baseline clinical characteristics and prior treatments. RESULTS: Among 885 new users of ustekinumab and 490 new users of vedolizumab, we observed no difference in treatment persistence (adjusted risk ratio 1.09 [95% confidence interval 0.95-1.25]). Ustekinumab was associated with a lower rate of all-cause hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio 0.73 [0.59-0.91]), nonsurgical CD hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio 0.58 [0.40-0.83]), and hospitalization for infection (adjusted hazard ratio 0.56 [0.34-0.92]). DISCUSSION: This real-world comparative effectiveness study of anti-TNF-experienced patients with CD initiating vedolizumab or ustekinumab showed similar treatment persistence rates beyond 52 weeks, although secondary outcomes such as all-cause hospitalizations, nonsurgical CD hospitalizations, and hospitalizations for infection favored ustekinumab initiation. We, therefore, advocate for individualized decision making in this medically refractory population, considering patient preference and other factors such as cost and route of administration.

Effect of Mailing Educational Material to Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Their Clinicians on Use of Oral Anticoagulants: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Only about half of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are at increased risk for stroke are treated with an oral anticoagulant (OAC), despite guideline recommendations for their use. Educating patients with AF about prevention of stroke with OACs may enable them as agents of change to initiate OAC treatment. Objective: To determine whether an educational intervention directed to patients and their clinicians stimulates the use of OACs in patients with AF who are not receiving OACs. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Implementation of a Randomized Controlled Trial to Improve Treatment With Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (IMPACT-AFib) trial was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, pragmatic randomized clinical trial conducted from September 25, 2017, to May 1, 2019, embedded in health plans that participate in the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System. It used the distributed database comprising health plan members to identify eligible patients, their clinicians, and outcomes. IMPACT-AFib enrolled patients with AF, a CHA2DS2-VASc (cardiac failure or dysfunction, hypertension, age 65-74 [1 point] or ≥75 years [2 points], diabetes, and stroke, transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism [2 points]-vascular disease, and sex category [female]) score of 2 or more, no evidence of OAC prescription dispensing in the preceding 12 months, and no hospitalization-related bleeding event within the prior 6 months. Interventions: Randomization to a single mailing of patient and/or clinician educational materials vs control. Main Outcomes and Measures: Analysis was performed on a modified intention-to-treat basis. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with at least 1 OAC prescription dispensed or at least 4 international normalized ratio test results within 1 year of the intervention. Results: Among 47 333 patients, there were 24 909 men (52.6%), the mean (SD) age was 77.9 (9.7) years, mean (SD) CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.5 (1.7), 22 404 patients (47.3%) had an ATRIA (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) bleeding risk score of 5 or more, and 8890 patients (18.8%) had a history of hospitalization for bleeding. There were 2328 of 23 546 patients (9.9%) in the intervention group with initiation of OAC at 1 year compared with 2330 of 23 787 patients (9.8%) in the control group (adjusted OR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.95-1.07]; P = .79). Conclusions and Relevance: Among a large population with AF with a guideline indication for OACs for stroke prevention who were randomized to a mailed educational intervention or to usual care, there was no clinically meaningful, numerical, or statistically significant difference in rates of OAC initiation. More-intensive interventions are needed to try and address the public health issue of underuse of anticoagulation for stroke prevention among patients with AF. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03259373.

Validity of ICD-10-CM diagnoses to identify hospitalizations for serious infections among patients treated with biologic therapies.

PURPOSE: Identifying hospitalizations for serious infections among patients dispensed biologic therapies within healthcare databases is important for post-marketing surveillance of these drugs. We determined the positive predictive value (PPV) of an ICD-10-CM-based diagnostic coding algorithm to identify hospitalization for serious infection among patients dispensed biologic therapy within the FDA's Sentinel Distributed Database. METHODS: We identified health plan members who met the following algorithm criteria: (1) hospital ICD-10-CM discharge diagnosis of serious infection between July 1, 2016 and August 31, 2018; (2) either outpatient/emergency department infection diagnosis or outpatient antimicrobial treatment within 7 days prior to hospitalization; (3) inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, or rheumatological diagnosis within 1 year prior to hospitalization, and (4) were dispensed outpatient biologic therapy within 90 days prior to admission. Medical records were reviewed by infectious disease clinicians to adjudicate hospitalizations for serious infection. The PPV (95% confidence interval [CI]) for confirmed events was determined after further weighting by the prevalence of the type of serious infection in the database. RESULTS: Among 223 selected health plan members who met the algorithm, 209 (93.7% [95% CI, 90.1%-96.9%]) were confirmed to have a hospitalization for serious infection. After weighting by the prevalence of the type of serious infection, the PPV of the ICD-10-CM algorithm identifying a hospitalization for serious infection was 80.2% (95% CI, 75.3%-84.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The ICD-10-CM-based algorithm for hospitalization for serious infection among patients dispensed biologic therapies within the Sentinel Distributed Database had 80% PPV for confirmed events and could be considered for use within pharmacoepidemiologic studies.

Burden of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis among children with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

This claims-based retrospective cohort study examined the prevalence and incremental impact of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis among children with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States. Although diagnoses of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis were not common among diabetic children, it was associated with significantly higher incremental healthcare cost and risk of hospitalization.

Underuse of oral anticoagulants in privately insured patients with atrial fibrillation: A population being targeted by the IMplementation of a randomized controlled trial to imProve treatment with oral AntiCoagulanTs in patients with Atrial Fibrillation (IMPACT-AFib).

BACKGROUND: Many studies showing underuse of oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) predated the advent of the non-vitamin K antagonist OACs. We retrospectively examined use of OACs in a large commercially insured population. METHODS: Administrative claims data from 4 research partners participating in FDA-Catalyst, a program of the Sentinel Initiative, were queried in September 2017. Patients were included if they were ≥30 years old with ≥365 days of medical/pharmacy coverage, and had ≥2 diagnosis codes for AF, a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2, absence of contraindications to OAC use, and no evidence of OAC use in the 365 days before the index AF diagnosis. The main outcome measures of the current analysis were rates of OAC use in the prior 12 months of cohort identification and factors associated with non-use. RESULTS: A total of 197,806 AF patients met the eligibility criteria prior to assessment of OAC treatment. Of these, 179,580 (91%) patients were ≥65 years old and 73,286 (37%) patients were ≥80 years old. Half of the patients (98,903) were randomized to the early intervention arm in the IMPACT-AFib trial and constitute the cohort for this analysis. Of these, 32,295 (33%) had no evidence of OAC use in the prior 12 months. Compared with patients with evidence of OAC use in the prior 12 months, patients without OAC use were more likely to be ≥80 years old, women, and have a history of anemia (51% vs 47%) and less likely to have diabetes (41% vs 44%), history of stroke or TIA (15% vs 19%), and history of heart failure (39% vs 48%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high risk of stroke, one-third of privately insured patients with AF and no obvious contraindications to an OAC were not treated with an OAC. There is an unmet need for evidence-based interventions that could lead to greater use of OACs in patients with AF at risk for stroke.

Practical challenges in the conduct of pragmatic trials embedded in health plans: Lessons of IMPACT-AFib, an FDA-Catalyst trial.

IMPACT-AFib was an 80,000-patient randomized clinical trial implemented by five US insurance companies (health plans) aimed at increasing the use of oral anticoagulants by individuals with atrial fibrillation who were at high risk of stroke and not on treatment. The underlying thesis was that patients could be change agents to initiate prescribing discussions with their providers. We tested the effect of mailing information to both patients and their providers. We used administrative medical claims and pharmacy dispensing data to identify eligible patients, to randomize them to an early or delayed intervention, and to assess clinical outcomes. The core data were analysis-ready datasets each site had created and curated for the FDA's Sentinel System, supplemented by updated "fresh" pharmacy and enrollment data to ensure eligibility at the time of intervention. Following mutually agreed upon procedures, sites linked to additional internal source data to implement the intervention-educational information mailed to patients and their providers in the early intervention arm, and to providers of patients in the delayed intervention arm approximately 12 months later. The primary analysis compares the early intervention arm to the delayed intervention arm, prior to the delayed intervention being conducted (i.e. compares intervention to non-intervention). The endpoints of interest were evidence of initiation of anticoagulation (primary) as well as clinical endpoints, including stroke and hospitalization for bleeding. Major challenges, some unanticipated, identified during the planning phase include convening multi-stakeholder investigator teams and advisors, addressing ethical concerns about not intervening in a usual care comparison group, and identifying and avoiding interference with sites' routine programs that were similar to the intervention. Needs and challenges during the implementation phase included the fact that even limited site-specific programming greatly increased time and effort, the need to refresh research data extracts immediately before outreach to patients and providers, potential difficulty identifying low-cost medications such as warfarin that may not be reimbursed by health plans and so not discoverable in dispensing data, the need to develop workarounds when "providers" in claims data were facilities, difficulty addressing clustering of patients by provider because providers can have multiple identifiers within and between health plans, and the need to anticipate loss to follow up because of health plan disenrollment or change in benefits. As pragmatic trials begin to shape evidence generation within clinical practice, investigators should anticipate issues inherent to claims data and working with multiple large sites. In IMPACT-AFib, we found that investing in collaboration and communication among all parties throughout all phases of the study helped ensure common understanding, early identification of challenges, and streamlined actual implementation.

Testosterone Therapy in Relation to Prostate Cancer in a U.S. Commercial Insurance Claims Database.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a study to assess whether testosterone therapy (TT) alters prostate cancer risk using a large U.S. commercial insurance research database. METHODS: From the HealthCore Integrated Research Database (HIRD), we selected men ages 30 years or greater who were new users of TT during 2007 to 2015. We selected two comparison groups: (i) unexposed (matched 10:1) and (ii) new users of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i). Incident prostate cancer was defined as diagnosis of prostate cancer within 4 weeks following prostate biopsy. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights were used in Poisson regression models to estimate adjusted incidence rates, incidence rate ratios (IRR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analyses included stratification by prostate cancer screening, hypogonadism, and follow-up time. RESULTS: The adjusted prostate cancer IRR was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.86) when comparing TT with the unexposed group and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.91) in comparison with the PDE5i group. Inverse associations between TT and prostate cancer were observed in a majority of subgroup analyses, although in both comparisons estimates generally attenuated with increasing time following initial exposure. Among TT users, duration of exposure was not associated with prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Men who received TT did not have a higher rate of prostate cancer compared with the unexposed or PDE5i comparison groups. The inverse association between TT and prostate cancer could be the result of residual confounding, contraindication bias, or undefined biological effect. IMPACT: This study suggests that limited TT exposure does not increase risk of prostate cancer in the short term.

Drivers of Hospital Length of Stay in Medicaid and Commercially Insured Mother-Infant Pairs With a Diagnosis of Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The occurrence of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) mirrors the growing opioid epidemic in the United States. As Medicaid covers a majority of cases, the commercially insured population has largely been ignored for NAS risk. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine Medicaid and commercially insured mother-infant pairs to determine demographic and clinical characteristics associated with NAS length of stay (LOS). RESEARCH DESIGN: This observational, descriptive case-series study utilized administrative claims from HealthCore Integrated Research Database to measure maternal characteristics for 6 months before delivery, and neonatal characteristics and health care service utilization for 3 months after NAS diagnosis. Bootstrapped regressions were used to model LOS. RESULTS: The sample included 1807 mother-infant pairs. Most infants (79%) had Medicaid coverage (Medicaid: N=1419; Commercial: N=388). Although all infants had NAS, Medicaid-insured mothers had more prevalent drug abuse (70.8% vs. 41.0%; P<0.0001), but fewer used prescription opioids (45.3% vs. 60.8%; P<0.0001) compared with commercially insured mothers. Commercially insured infants were sicker, with a higher prevalence of complex chronic conditions, and yet Medicaid-insured infants were admitted to neonatal intensive care unit at a much higher rate (91.1% vs. 78.9%; P<0.0001). After adjustment, neonatal intensive care unit admission (+6.7 d, 95% confidence interval: 4.5-9.3) and chronic complex conditions (+5.2 d, 95% confidence interval: 3.8-6.6) contributed most to LOS. CONCLUSION: A re-evaluation of obstetrical management towards a focus on the history of possible opioid and substance use regardless of insurance type and demographic background might inform efforts to reduce LOS.