Hospital healthcare resource utilization and costs for chimeric antigen T-cell therapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplant in patients with large B-cell lymphoma in the United States.

The efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is well-established. This study, using the Premier PINC AI Healthcare Database, assessed hospital costs and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) between CAR T-cell therapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT) for 733 LBCL patients from 01/01/2017-04/30/2021 (166 CAR T and 567 AHCT from 37 US hospital systems. CAR T-cell therapy had higher index costs but lower non-pharmacy costs, shorter hospital stays, lower ICU utilization than AHCT. The CAR T-cell cohort also presented fewer preparatory costs and HRU. At a 180-day follow-up, AHCT had lower hospitalization rates and costs. Overall, despite higher index costs, CAR T-cell therapy has lower non-pharmacy costs and HRU during the index procedure and requires less preparation time with lower preparation HRUs and costs than AHCT. This has important implications for resource management and informed decision-making for stakeholders.

Network meta-analysis of CAR T-Cell therapy for the treatment of 3L+ R/R LBCL after using published comparative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Studies have compared chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies and salvage chemotherapy in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) patients, but further evidence of their relative effectiveness is warranted. METHODS: Our systematic review identified studies comparing efficacy and safety outcomes of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) trials to salvage chemotherapy cohorts in LBCL patients with ≥2 prior lines of treatment; and an extended evidence network included indirect comparisons comparing CAR T-cell therapies. We conducted network meta-analyzes using Bayesian hierarchical modeling. RESULTS: Three studies comparing ZUMA-1 (axi-cel), TRANSCEND (liso-cel) and JULIET (tisa-cel) trials to salvage chemotherapy within the SCHOLAR-1 cohort were identified. Axi-cel (odds ratio [OR]:5.63; 95% credible interval [CrI]:2.66-12.42) and liso-cel (OR:4.26; 95%CrI:2.33-7.93) showed a significant increased overall response rate compared to tisa-cel, but not to one-another. Axi-cel demonstrated significant improvements in overall survival relative to liso-cel (hazard ratio [HR]:0.54; 95%CrI:0.37-0.79) and tisa-cel (HR:0.47; 95%CrI:0.26-0.88). Higher rates of grade ≥3 neurological events were observed with axi-cel than with tisa-cel and liso-cel. CONCLUSIONS: We highlight important differences in clinical outcomes between CAR T-cell therapies. Axi-cel demonstrated improved overall survival compared to tisa-cel and liso-cel, and both axi-cel and liso-cel showed higher response rates compared to tisa-cel.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Brexucabtagene Autoleucel (ZUMA-2) and Pirtobrutinib (BRUIN) in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma Previously Treated with a Covalent Bruton Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) often require multiple lines of treatment and have a poor prognosis, particularly after failing covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (cBTKi) therapy. Newer treatments such as brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel, chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy) and pirtobrutinib (non-covalent BTKi) show promise in improving outcomes. METHODS: Without direct comparative evidence, an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted to estimate the relative treatment effects of brexu-cel and pirtobrutinib for post-cBTKi R/R MCL. Using logistic propensity score models, individual patient-level data from ZUMA-2 brexu-cel-infused population (N = 68) were weighted to match pre-specified clinically relevant prognostic factors based on study-level data from the BRUIN cBTKi pre-treated cohort (N = 90). The base-case model incorporated the five most pertinent factors reported in ≥ 50% of both trial populations: morphology, MCL International Prognostic Index, number of prior lines of therapy, disease stage, and prior autologous stem cell transplant. A sensitivity analysis additionally incorporated TP53 mutation and Ki-67 proliferation. Relative treatment effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In the base-case model, brexu-cel was associated with higher rates of objective response (OR 10.39 [95% CI 2.81-38.46]) and complete response (OR 10.11 [95% CI 4.26-24.00]), and improved progression-free survival (HR 0.44 [95% CI 0.25-0.75]), compared to pirtobrutinib. Overall survival and duration of response favored brexu-cel over pirtobrutinib but the differences crossed the bounds for statistical significance. Findings were consistent across the adjusted and unadjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that brexu-cel may offer clinically and statistically significant benefits regarding objective response, complete response, and progression-free survival compared to pirtobrutinib among patients with R/R MCL after prior cBTKi therapy. Given the short follow-up and high degree of censoring in BRUIN, an analysis incorporating updated BRUIN data may provide more definitive overall survival results.

Impact of formulary-related pharmacy claim rejections of cariprazine on health care utilization and treatment patterns among patients with bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Formulary restrictions, intended to limit inappropriate medication use and decrease pharmacy costs, may prevent or delay patients with bipolar I disorder from initiating cariprazine, a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5HT1A receptor partial agonist that is approved to treat manic/mixed or depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. Little is known about the downstream consequences of formulary-related cariprazine prescription rejections. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of formulary-related cariprazine claim rejections on health care resource utilization (HCRU) and treatment patterns among patients newly prescribed cariprazine for bipolar I disorder. METHODS: Symphony Health Integrated Dataverse was used to identify commercially insured adults (aged ≥18 years) with bipolar I disorder and at least 1 pharmacy claim for cariprazine (rejected because of formulary restrictions or approved; date of the first claim is the index date) from March 2015 through October 2020. Formulary-related rejection reasons included noncoverage, prior authorization requirement, and step therapy requirement. Baseline characteristics were evaluated during the 12 months pre-index and balanced between rejected and approved cohorts using 1:2 propensity score matching. HCRU outcomes included all-cause and mental health (MH)-related hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and outpatient visits. Treatment patterns were analyzed descriptively and included treatment delay and atypical antipsychotic use. HCRU was reported per patient-year and compared between cohorts using rate ratios; 95% CIs and P values were calculated using nonparametric bootstrap procedures. RESULTS: The matched rejected and approved cohorts comprised 1,554 and 3,108 patients, respectively. The rejected cohort had 22% more all-cause and 24% more MH-related hospitalizations per patient-year vs the approved cohort (rate ratio [95% CI], all-cause: 1.22 [1.01-1.48], P = 0.024; MH-related: 1.24 [1.01-1.55], P = 0.044). ED and outpatient visits were numerically, but not significantly, greater in the rejected cohort. Of patients in the rejected cohort, 34.7% never received an atypical antipsychotic and 76.8% never received cariprazine. For those who later received cariprazine or another atypical antipsychotic, the average treatment delay was approximately 6 months (188 days) and approximately 4 months (123 days) after the initial rejection, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bipolar I disorder and formulary-related cariprazine claim rejections experienced significantly more hospitalizations than patients whose initial claim was approved; ED and outpatient visits were similar between cohorts. Less than a quarter of patients whose initial claim was rejected later received cariprazine, and more than one-third never received any atypical antipsychotic. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the impact of formulary-related rejections of cariprazine on HCRU and treatment patterns in patients with bipolar I disorder.

Indirect treatment comparison of brexucabtagene autoleucel (ZUMA-2) versus standard of care (SCHOLAR-2) in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma.

The SCHOLAR-2 retrospective study highlighted poor overall survival (OS) with standard of care (SOC) regimens among patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who failed a covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi). In the ZUMA-2 single-arm trial, brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel; autologous anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy) demonstrated high rates of durable responses in patients with R/R MCL who had previous BTKi exposure. Here, we compared OS in ZUMA-2 and SCHOLAR-2 using three different methods which adjusted for imbalances in prognostic factors between populations: inverse probability weighting (IPW), regression adjustment (RA), and doubly robust (DR). Brexu-cel was associated with improved OS compared to SOC across all unadjusted and adjusted comparisons. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 0.38 (0.23, 0.61) for IPW, 0.45 (0.28, 0.74) for RA, and 0.37 (0.23, 0.59) for DR. These results suggest a substantial survival benefit with brexu-cel versus SOC in patients with R/R MCL after BTKi exposure.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons of Brexucabtagene Autoleucel with Alternative Standard Therapies for Relapsed/Refractory B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Adult Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel), a CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, is approved for relapsed/refractory B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults aged 18+/26+ years in the US/European Union (EU), based on efficacy results from the single-arm ZUMA-3 trial. This study aimed to estimate the relative treatment effects of brexu-cel versus inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), blinatumomab (blina), and chemotherapies using unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) methods. METHODS: Individual patient data from ZUMA-3 and published aggregate level data from two randomized controlled trials, INO-VATE (InO versus chemotherapy) and TOWER (blina versus chemotherapy), were used. Patient-level data from ZUMA-3 were weighted to match the mean of the following prognostic variables at baseline, which were pre-specified based on clinical input, for each comparator population: primary refractory disease, duration of first remission < 12 months, prior stem-cell transplantation, age, performance status, salvage status, bone marrow blast, complex karyotype, and Philadelphia chromosome status. The base case analysis was conducted using the modified intention-to-treat population (i.e., received brexu-cel) from ZUMA-3. Relative treatment effects for overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were expressed as hazard ratios (HR) and differences in restricted mean survival time (RMST) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The base case MAIC results suggested brexu-cel improved OS and EFS compared to blina (OS HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.28, 0.75]; EFS HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.25, 0.56]) and pooled INO-VATE/TOWER chemotherapy (OS HR 0.32 [95% CI 0.18, 0.56]; EFS HR 0.27 [0.18, 0.40]). Brexu-cel also improved OS compared to InO (HR 0.45 [95% CI 0.24, 0.85]). The point estimate for EFS favored brexu-cel over Ino but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 0.67 [95% CI 0.41, 1.10]). Findings were consistent between the HR and RMST analyses. CONCLUSION: Despite limitations, these MAIC results suggest that brexu-cel may improve OS and EFS versus currently used therapies in this population.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell treatment patterns in relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma.

Aim: To investigate real-world chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy treatment patterns. Patient & methods: Relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma patients who received CAR T-cell therapy were identified. Patient characteristics, setting of CAR T-cell infusion, incidence of CAR T-cell therapy-associated adverse events and healthcare resource utilization were assessed. Results: Of 1175 patients, 83% were infused inpatient. Within three days postinfusion, inpatient-infused patients had a significantly higher risk of CAR T-associated adverse events (hazard ratio: 2.67; 95% CI: 2.09-3.42) compared with outpatient-infused patients. By day 30, 67% of outpatient-infused patients were hospitalized at least once. Conclusion: These findings suggest that physicians were able to select lower-risk patients for outpatient infusion, but postinfusion hospitalizations still occur.

This study tracks outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma who received chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy between 2017 and 2020. The authors used the Anlitiks All-Payor Claims (AAPC) database, which includes insurance claims of patients covered through Medicare, Medicaid or commercial insurance plans. AAPC includes over 80% of insured patients in the USA healthcare system. The study describes where patients received CAR T-cell therapy (inpatient/outpatient), rates of adverse events potentially related to CAR T-cell treatment and how much healthcare the patients received. In the 3 days after receiving CAR T-cell therapy, rates of CAR T-associated adverse events were significantly higher in patients who received CAR T-cell therapy in the inpatient setting, compared with outpatients. The findings suggest that lower-risk patients may receive CAR T-cell therapy as outpatients, but that most outpatient-infused patients will still require inpatient care.

A 24-month updated analysis of the comparative effectiveness of ZUMA-5 (axi-cel) vs. SCHOLAR-5 external control in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: In the ZUMA-5 trial (Clinical trials identification: NCT03105336), axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) demonstrated high rates of durable response in relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) patients and clear superiority relative to the SCHOLAR-5 external control cohort. We update this comparison using the ZUMA-5 24-month data. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The SCHOLAR-5 cohort is comprised of r/r FL patients who initiated ≥3rd line of therapy after July 2014 and meeting ZUMA-5 eligibility criteria. Groups were balanced for patient characteristics through propensity scoring on prespecified prognostic factors using standardized mortality ratio (SMR) weighting. The overall response rate was compared using a weighted logistic regression. Time-to-event outcomes were evaluated using a Cox regression. RESULTS: For SCHOLAR-5, the sum of weights for the 143 patients was 85 after SMR weighting, versus 86 patients in ZUMA-5. The median follow-up was 29.4 months and 25.4 months for ZUMA-5 and SCHOLAR-5, respectively. The hazard ratios for overall survival and progression-free survival were 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.95) and 0.28 (95% CI: 0.17-0.45), favoring axi-cel. CONCLUSION: This updated analysis, using a longer minimum follow-up than a previously published analysis, shows that the improved efficacy of axi-cel, relative to available therapies, in r/r FL is durable. .

Treatment patterns and outcomes in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: results from the international SCHOLAR-5 study.

The SCHOLAR-5 study examines treatment patterns and outcomes of real-world follicular lymphoma (FL) patients on 3rd line of treatment (LoT) or higher, for whom existing data are limited. SCHOLAR-5 is a retrospective cohort study using data from adults (≥ 18 years) with grade 1-3a FL, initiating ≥3rd LoT after June 2014 at major lymphoma centers in the US and Europe. Objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by LoT. Time-to-event outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Of 128 patients, 87 initiated 3rd LoT, 63 initiated 4th LoT, and 47 initiated 5th LoT. At 1st eligible LoT, 31% progressed within 24-months of 1st LoT anti-CD20 combination therapy, 28% had prior autologous stem cell transplantation, and 31% were refractory to the previous LoT. The most common regimen in each LoT was chemoimmunotherapy; however, experimental drugs were increasingly used at later LoT. In the US, anti-CD20 monotherapy was more common at ≥3rd LoT compared to Europe, where stem cell transplants were more common. ORR at 3rd LoT was 68% (CR 44%), but decreased after each LoT to 37% (CR 22%) in ≥5 LoT. Median OS and PFS at 3rd LoT were 68 and 11 months, respectively, and reduced to 43 and 4 months at ≥5 LoT. Treatments were heterogenous at each LoT in both the US and Europe. Few FL patients achieved CR in later LoT, and duration of response and survival diminished with each subsequent line.

Patient preferences for treatment in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a discrete choice experiment.

Aim: We quantified patient preferences for second-line diffuse large B-cell lymphoma therapies, including attributes of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Materials & methods: Using a discrete choice experiment, we surveyed 224 diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients from the USA and Europe. Patients chose between two treatment options defined by six attributes with predefined levels for overall survival, adverse events (severe cytokine-release syndrome, severe neurological toxicities, severe infection) and time to return to pre-treatment functioning. Results: Increasing the probability of 1-year survival was most important to patients, followed by avoiding risks of cytokine-release syndrome and neurological toxicities. Respondents required a 13-14 percentage point increased 1-year survival probability to accept risks of treatment-associated adverse events. Conclusion: Patients prioritize survival and will accept certain adverse event risks to gain survival improvements.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a new treatment for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. CAR T-cell therapies are made from a patient's own cells, modified in a laboratory and used to attack cancer cells. While CAR T-cell therapies may increase long-term survival, they can also cause temporary but serious side effects, including neurological issues (e.g., headache, confusion, brain swelling) and cytokine-release syndrome (CRS), an inflammatory condition that can cause fever, breathing difficulties and organ dysfunction. To understand how patients' perspectives of CAR T-cell therapy compared with their perspectives on other treatments for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, we surveyed 224 patients in the USA and Europe. They were asked to choose between two treatments in a series of choice sets, each displaying varying levels of aspects of cancer therapies, including survival and risks of serious side effects. Their choices allowed us to measure which factors were most important to patients when making decisions about treatment. We found that increasing the probability of survival was most important, followed by avoiding risks of neurological complications and CRS. Patients were willing to accept increased risks of neurological toxicities and CRS if they could obtain a 13­14 percentage point increase in the probability of surviving for at least 1 year after treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of KTE-X19 CAR T therapy versus real-world standard of care in patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma post BTKi in England.

AIMS: The objective of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of KTE-X19 versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) post-Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) treatment from a UK healthcare perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-state partitioned survival model (pre-progression, post-progression and death) with a cycle length of one month was used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survival over a lifetime horizon. Population inputs along with KTE-X19 (brexucabtagene autoleucel) efficacy and safety data were derived from the single-arm trial ZUMA-2 (NCT02601313). The composition of SoC was informed by a literature-based meta-analysis, SoC efficacy data were obtained from the SCHOLAR-2 real-world study. Survival was modelled using standard parametric curves for SoC and a mixture-cure methodology for KTE-X19. It was assumed that patients whose disease had not progressed after five years experienced long-term remission. Costs, resource use and utility, and adverse event disutility inputs were obtained from published literature and publicly available data sources. An annual discount rate of 3.5% was applied to costs and health outcomes. Modelled outcomes for KTE-X19 and SoC included expected life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and total costs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Estimated median survival was 5.96 years for KTE-X19 and 1.38 for SoC. Discounted LYs, QALYs and lifetime costs were 8.27, 5.99 and £385,765 for KTE-X19 versus 1.98, 1.48 and £79,742 for SoC, respectively. The KTE-X19 versus SoC cost per QALY was £67,713 and the cost per LY was £48,645. Influential scenario analyses use alternative KTE-X19 survival curves and discount rates, and shorter time horizons. CONCLUSION: Considering the survival and quality of life benefits compared to SoC, KTE-X19 for R/R MCL appears as a cost-effective treatment in the real-world UK setting.

Burden of Illness and Treatment Patterns in Second-line Large B-cell Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: This study examined real-world treatment patterns with curative intent, adverse events, and health care resource utilization and costs in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) to understand the unmet medical need in the United States. METHODS: Adult patients with ≥2 LBCL diagnoses between January 1, 2012, and March 31, 2019, were identified (index date was the date of the earliest LBCL diagnosis) from MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Patients had ≥1 claim for any LBCL treatment, ≥6 months of data before (baseline) and ≥12 months of data after (follow-up period) the index date, and no baseline LBCL diagnosis. Treatment patterns, adverse events, and all-cause and LBCL-related health care resource utilization and costs were examined. All patients had received first-line therapy of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone with or without rituximab; etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin hydrochloride with or without rituximab; or regimens with anthracycline and second-line therapy with stem cell transplant (SCT)-intended intensive therapy or platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients who received an SCT-intended second-line regimen or received an SCT regardless of second-line regimen were considered SCT eligible. FINDINGS: A total of 188 patients met the criteria of eligibility for SCT. Among the 119 patients who received a second-line regimen intended for SCT, only 22.7% received an SCT. Patients eligible for SCT started first-line therapy within 1 month of their LBCL index date, and the mean duration of first-line therapy was 4.1 months. The mean gap in therapy between first- and second-line therapy was 6.6 months, and the mean duration of second-line therapy was 3.0 months. During the second-line therapy treatment window (mean duration with SCT, 12.4 months; mean duration without SCT, 4.8 months), the most common regimens for patients eligible for SCT were ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide with or without rituximab and gemcitabine and oxaliplatin with or without rituximab; the top 4 most common treatment-related adverse events were febrile neutropenia (56.4%), anemia (49.5%), thrombocytopenia (42.6%), and nausea and vomiting (36.2%), which were similar regardless of receipt of SCT; mean (SD) per-patient-per-month all-cause costs were $46,174 ($49,057) for patients with SCT and $45,780 ($52,813) for patients without SCT. IMPLICATIONS: Treatment patterns among patients with relapsed or refractory LBCL eligible for SCT were highly varied. Only 22.7% of patients who received an SCT-preparative regimen ultimately received SCT, which highlights the magnitude of unmet needs in this population. The occurrence of treatment-related adverse events was similar regardless of SCT status. Per-patient-per-month all-cause costs were also similar with upfront SCT costs averaged during a longer follow-up.

Cost-effectiveness for KTE-X19 CAR T therapy for adult patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma in the United States.

AIMS: The objective of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of KTE-X19 versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients from a US healthcare perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-state partitioned-survival model (pre-progression, post-progression, and death) with a cycle length of 1 month was used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survival (OS) over a lifetime horizon. Due to the long tail of the OS curve, OS was modeled applying a mixture-cure methodology, using the assumption that patients whose disease had not progressed after 5 years experienced long-term remission. Population inputs were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial. This was also the source of KTE-X19 efficacy and safety data, while this data was obtained from the literature for SoC. Costs and resource use inputs were derived from the published literature and publicly available data sources. Health state utilities were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial (NCT02601313), applying the US tariff. Adverse event disutilities were derived from the published literature. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3% per year. The model estimated expected life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and total costs for KTE-X19 vs SoC. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Median survival was 9.71 years for KTE-X19 and 2.13 for SoC. Discounted LYs, QALYs, and lifetime costs were 8.99, 7.39, and $693,832 for KTE-X19 vs 4.47, 3.65, and $574,263 for SoC, respectively. The KTE-X19 vs SoC cost per QALY was $31,985. The most influential model parameter was the utility for patients with long-term remission. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability that KTE-X19 was cost-effective was 99%. CONCLUSION: The treatment of R/R MCL with KTE-X19 presents a potentially cost-effective alternative to the current SoC, deriving its value from incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life benefits.

Unintended Consequences Following the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Change for Palivizumab Prophylaxis among Infants Born at Less than 29 Weeks' Gestation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare outpatient respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunoprophylaxis (IP) use and relative RSV hospitalization (RSVH) rates for infants <29 weeks' gestational age (wGA) versus term infants before and after the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy change. STUDY DESIGN: Infants were identified in the MarketScan Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases. Outpatient RSV IP receipt and relative <29 wGA/term hospitalization risks in 2012 to 2014 and 2014 to 2016 were assessed using rate ratios and a difference-in-difference model. RESULTS: Outpatient RSV IP receipt by infants <29 wGA and aged <3 months in the Commercial and Medicaid populations and those aged 3 to <6 months in the Medicaid population declined after 2014. Relative RSVH risks for infants <29 wGA were numerically greater after 2014, with infants aged <3 months and Medicaid infants experiencing the greatest increases. Difference-in-difference results indicated a significantly increased relative risk of RSVH for infants <29 wGA versus term (both cohorts aged 0 to <6 months) in the Medicaid-insured population (1.68, p = 0.0054). A nonsignificant increase of similar magnitude occurred in the commercially insured population (1.57, p = 0.2867). CONCLUSION: The 2014 policy change was associated with a decrease in RSV IP use and an increase in RSVH risk among otherwise healthy infants <29 wGA.

Update on respiratory syncytial virus hospitalizations among U.S. preterm and term infants before and after the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics policy on immunoprophylaxis: 2011-2017.

Palivizumab is the only licensed respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunoprophylaxis (IP) available to prevent severe RSV disease in high-risk pediatric populations, including infants born at 29-34 weeks' gestational age (wGA). In 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) stopped recommending RSV IP use for otherwise healthy 29-34 wGA infants and stated that 29-34 wGA infants and term infants have similar RSV hospitalization (RSVH) rates. This study aimed to compare RSV IP use and RSVH rates in 29-34 wGA infants and term infants during the 3 RSV seasons before and after the 2014 AAP policy change. RSV IP use in otherwise healthy infants 29-30, 31-32, and 33-34 wGA was estimated from pharmacy or outpatient medical claims for palivizumab. RSVH rates in the first 6 months of life were calculated per 100 infant-seasons. RSVH rate ratios were used to compare preterm infants and term infants before and after the policy change. Across infant cohorts (29-34 wGA) and chronologic age groups (<3 months and 3-<6 months), absolute decreases in RSV IP use between the combined 2011-2014 seasons and 2014-2017 seasons ranged from 7% to 38% and from 68% to 97%, respectively. Compared with 2011-2014, the RSVH risk increased 2.09-fold (P< .001) and 1.76-fold (P< .001) in 2014-2017 for infants born at 29-34 wGA and aged <6 months with commercial and Medicaid insurance, respectively. Overall, RSV IP use declined in the RSV seasons following the 2014 RSV IP policy change, and RSVH increased among 29-34 wGA infants aged <6 months.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs in the 12 months following hospitalization for respiratory syncytial virus or unspecified bronchiolitis among infants.

Aims: To examine healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs within 12 months after hospitalization for respiratory syncytial virus (RSVH) or unspecified bronchiolitis (UBH) in infants.Materials and methods: Infants born July 1, 2009-June 30, 2015 were identified in the MarketScan Medicaid and Commercial databases and were assigned to one of three cohorts: RSVH (with/without UBH), UBH, or comparator (no RSVH or UBH). Each infant was identified as pre-term (5 groups) or term (2 groups) based on weeks gestational age (wGA). Index dates were the first admission dates for RSVH or UBH infants and were randomly assigned to comparator infants based on time from birth to index in the RSVH cohort. HRU, all-cause costs, and incremental cost differences between hospitalized and comparator infants were assessed over 12 months post-index with and without the index hospitalization. Results were propensity score weighted to balance pre-index characteristics across hospitalization cohorts.Results: This study identified 15,872 RSVH infants, 6,081 UBH infants, and 986,087 comparator infants in the Medicaid population and 5,755 RSVH infants, 1,888 UBH infants, and 696,302 comparator infants in the commercial population. HRU in follow-up was greater for RSVH and UBH infants relative to comparator infants in both populations, including hospitalizations (commercial: 7.4%, 11.0%, 1.7%; Medicaid: 12.3%, 15.3%, 3.2%) and emergency department visits (commercial: 33.0%, 33.3%, 17.2%; Medicaid: 65.8%, 68.5%, 51.4%). HRU was highest among RSVH and UBH infants born at <29 wGA. Hospitalized infants had numerically higher follow-up costs than comparator infants, with incremental differences reaching $19,896 among Medicaid UBH infants and $37,417 among commercial RSVH infants.Limitations: RSV/UB may be miscoded in claims data.Conclusions: Infants hospitalized for RSV or UB largely had greater subsequent HRU and costs in the first year after index hospitalization than comparator infants. Absolute and incremental follow-up costs relative to comparator infants were highest among infants <29 wGA.

Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor exposure and radiographic outcomes in Veterans with rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to estimate the impact of TNF inhibitor (TNFi) exposure on radiographic disease progression in US Veterans with RA during the first year after initiating therapy. METHODS: This historical longitudinal cohort design used clinical and claims data to evaluate radiographic progression after initiation of TNFi. US Veterans with RA initiating TNFi treatment (index date), ≥ 6 months pre-index and ≥ 12 months post-index VA enrolment/activity, and initial (6 months pre-index to 30 days post-index) and follow-up (10-18 months post-index) bilateral hand radiographs were eligible. The cumulative TNFi exposure and change in modified Sharp score (MSS) between initial and follow-up radiographs were calculated. The percentage of patients with clinically meaningful change in MSS (≥ 5) for each month of exposure was assessed using a longitudinal marginal structural model with inverse probability of treatment weights. Mean values and CIs were generated using 1000 bootstrapped samples. RESULTS: For 246 eligible patients, the mean (s.d.) age was 58 (11) years; 81% were male. The mean (s.d.) initial MSS was 19.6 (33.4) (range 0-214). The mean change (s.d.) in MSS was 0.3 (3.6) (median 0, range -19 to 22). Patients with the greatest exposure had the least radiographic progression for both crude and adjusted model analyses. Adjusted rates of MSS change ≥ 5 points (95% CI) were 10.6% (9.8%, 11.4%) for patients with 3 months of exposure compared with 5.4% (5.1%, 5.7%) for patients with 12 months of exposure. CONCLUSION: One-year changes in radiographic progression were small. Patients with the greatest cumulative TNFi exposure experienced the least progression.

Characteristics and health care utilization of otherwise healthy commercially and Medicaid-insured preterm and full-term infants in the US.

PURPOSE: This study examined health care utilization and costs during the first year of life for preterm and full-term infants in the US. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Preterm (<37 weeks gestational age [GA]) and full-term infants born 2003 to 2012 without complex medical conditions were identified in the MarketScan® Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid claims databases using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and diagnosis-related grouping codes. Inpatient and outpatient claims from birth through the first year were analyzed for preterm and full-term subgroups. Results were stratified by payer. RESULTS: There were 1,692,935 commercially insured infants (12.5% preterm) and 1,873,324 Medicaid-insured infants (13.9% preterm). The majority (>75%) of preterm infants were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit during their birth hospitalization. Generally, mean length of stay and costs for birth hospitalizations increased with decreasing GA. The average cost of a birth hospitalization was US $62,931 (SD $134,347) for commercially insured preterm infants and $43,858 (SD $115,412) for Medicaid-insured preterm infants compared to $2,401 (SD $7,399) and $1,894 (SD $5,444) for commercially insured and Medicaid-insured full-term infants, respectively. Post-neonatal hospitalization rates increased as GA decreased (in full-term to <29 weeks GA: commercial =3.3%-19.5%; Medicaid =6.1%-26.2%). Preterm infants had greater average numbers of outpatient office visits and pharmacy claims than full-term infants. Following birth discharge, mean monthly health care costs per infant increased as GA decreased (commercial = $334 to $3,126; Medicaid = $205 to $2,473). CONCLUSION: During the first year of life, post-neonatal hospitalization rates, outpatient office visits, pharmacy claims, and monthly costs increased as GA decreased.

Cardiovascular events and death after myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke in an older Medicare population.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of myocardial infarction (MI) or ischemic stroke (IS) are at high risk for subsequent cardiovascular events. HYPOTHESIS: Older patients with prior MI or IS are at risk for recurrent cardiovascular events, and comorbidities such as diabetes may increase this risk. METHODS: Two cohorts were studied in a retrospective Medicare 20% random sample-a 2008 cohort with up to 6 years of follow-up (MI, N = 26 460; IS, N = 17 566) and a 2012 cohort with 1 year of follow-up (MI, N = 26 548; IS, N = 17 728). RESULTS: In older patients who survived an event of MI or IS (2012 cohort), 7.2% had a recurrent MI and 6.7% had a recurrent IS in the first year; 32% died. Accounting for multiple recurrent events (2012 cohort), the event rates per 100 patient-years were 11.6 and 10.2 for the MI and IS cohorts, respectively. Cumulative incidence of recurrence (2008 cohort) increased from 7.7% at 1 year to 14.3% at 6 years for recurrent MI and from 6.7% at 1 year to 13.4% at 6 years for recurrent IS. Comorbid diabetes (2012 cohort) was significantly associated (adjusted risk ratio) with MI recurrence (1.44) and risk of coronary revascularization (1.23) in the MI cohort and with IS recurrence (1.26) in the IS cohort. CONCLUSION: In this older population with prior MI or IS, high rates of recurrent cardiovascular events and multiple recurrent events were observed. These findings highlight the need for aggressive intervention for secondary prevention and management of comorbidities in high-risk patients, particularly those with diabetes.

An observational study of concomitant immunotherapies and denosumab in patients with advanced melanoma or lung cancer.

After a case report of profound clinical response in a melanoma patient following treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and RANK-ligand inhibitor denosumab, we identified similar patients from electronic health records (EHR) and described patient characteristics and outcomes. This 2017 observational study used Flatiron Health's EHR database from ~255 US cancer clinics. Included were advanced melanoma or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who received denosumab within 30 days of CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) or PD1 (pembrolizumab, nivolumab) inhibitors start with a minimum of 6 months of follow up. Real-world tumor response (rwTR) was analyzed for scans available up to 30 days after concomitant therapy. Preclinical experiments evaluated sequencing of ICI, denosumab vs monotherapy or control. Melanoma (n = 66) patients received concomitant denosumab/ICI for a mean 4.0 months, 3.1 months for NSCLC (n = 241). Two-thirds of patients had best rwTR evaluable (complete [CR], partial response [PR], stable disease [SD], or disease progression [PD]). Longer mean duration of concomitant exposure was associated with overall response rate (ORR; CR+PR) in melanoma (p = 0.0172), NSCLC (p < .0001), and combined cohorts (p < .0001). The disease control rate (ORR plus SD) was 56% amongst melanoma patients and 58% amongst NSCLC patients. Longer concomitant therapy was associated with increased overall survival, primarily in NSCLC (p < .0001). Preclinical data suggest that ICI initiated before or at same time as denosumab was optimal. Results provide proof-of-concept that rwTR is associated with concomitant denosumab/ICI. Crude survival analyses supported the association of concomitant therapy and improved outcomes outside of clinical trials and warrant comparative study.