Quality of Life in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Treated With Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: In the BEST-CLI trial (Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia), a prespecified secondary objective was to assess the effects of revascularization strategy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia were randomized to surgical bypass (Bypass) or endovascular intervention (Endo) in 2 parallel trials. Cohort 1 included patients with single-segment great saphenous vein; cohort 2 included those lacking suitable single-segment great saphenous vein. HRQoL was assessed over the trial duration using Vascular Quality-of-Life (VascuQoL), European Quality-of-Life-5D (EQ-5D), the Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), SF-12 Mental Component Summary (SF-12 MCS), Utility Index Score (SF-6D R2), and numeric rating scales of pain. HRQoL was summarized by cohort and compared within and between groups using mixed-model linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 1193 and 335 patients in cohorts 1 and 2 with a mean follow-up of 2.9 and 2.0 years, respectively, were analyzed. In cohort 1, HRQoL significantly improved from baseline to follow-up for both groups across all measures. For example, mean (SD) VascuQoL scores were 3.0 (1.3) and 3.0 (1.2) for Bypass and Endo at baseline and 4.7 (1.4) and 4.8 (1.5) over follow-up. There were significant group differences favoring Endo when assessed with VascuQoL (difference, -0.14 [95% CI, -0.25 to -0.02]; P=0.02), SF-12 MCS (difference, -1.03 [95% CI, -1.89 to -0.18]; P=0.02), SF-6D R2 (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.02 to -0.001]; P=0.03), numeric rating scale pain at present (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49]; P=0.03), usual level during previous week (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48]; P=0.02), and worst level during previous week (difference, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.56]; P=0.04). There was no difference between treatment arms on the basis of EQ-5D (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.004]; P=0.12) or SF-12 PCS (difference, -0.41 [95% CI, -1.2 to 0.37]; P=0.31). In cohort 2, HRQoL also significantly improved from baseline to the end of follow-up for both groups based on all measures, but there were no differences between Bypass and Endo on any measure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia deemed eligible for either Bypass or Endo, revascularization resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL. In patients with an available single-segment great saphenous vein for bypass, but not among those without one, Endo was statistically superior on some HRQoL measures; however, these differences were below the threshold of clinically meaningful difference.

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.

Study design and baseline profile for adults with type 2 diabetes in the once-weekly subcutaneous SEmaglutide randomized PRAgmatic (SEPRA) trial.

INTRODUCTION: Once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, is approved in the USA as an adjunct to diet and exercise for adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) to improve glycemic control and reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in people with T2D and established cardiovascular disease. The Semaglutide Unabated Sustainability in Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN) phase III clinical trial program demonstrated the efficacy and safety of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide; however, determining its effectiveness in a real-world setting could support decision-making by clinicians, payers and policy makers in routine clinical practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: SEmaglutide PRAgmatic (SEPRA) is an ongoing open-label, randomized, pragmatic clinical trial designed to compare the effects of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide versus standard of care in US health-insured adults with T2D and physician-determined inadequate glycemic control. The primary end point is the proportion of participants achieving glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0% at year 1; other key outcomes include glycemic control, weight loss, healthcare utilization, and patient-reported outcomes. Individual-level data will be collected from routine clinical practice and health insurance claims. The last patient last visit is expected by June 2023. RESULTS: Between July 2018 and March 2021, 1278 participants were enrolled from 138 study sites across the USA. At baseline, 54% were male with mean±SD age 57.4±11.1 years and body mass index 35.7±8.0 kg/m2. Mean diabetes duration was 7.4±6.0 years and mean HbA1c was 8.5±1.6%. At baseline, concomitant antidiabetes medications included metformin, sulfonylureas, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. The majority of participants had hypertension and dyslipidemia. The trial design was self-assessed using the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 tool by the study steering group and was scored 4-5 in all domains suggesting a highly pragmatic study. CONCLUSIONS: SEPRA, a highly pragmatic ongoing study, will provide data on the effects of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide in a real-world setting when used during routine management of T2D. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03596450.

Baseline modern medical management in the BEST-CLI trial.

OBJECTIVES: The use of optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) has not been well-studied. The Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with CLTI study (BEST-CLI) is a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial sponsored by the National Institutes of Health comparing revascularization strategies in patients with CLTI. We evaluated the use of guideline-based OMT among patients with CLTI at the time of their enrollment into the trial. METHODS: A multidisciplinary committee defined OMT criteria related to blood pressure and diabetic management, lipid-lowering and antiplatelet medication use, and smoking status for patients enrolled in BEST-CLI. Status reports indicating adherence to OMT were provided to participating sites at regular intervals. Baseline demographic characteristics, comorbid medical conditions, and use of OMT at trial entry were evaluated for all randomized patients. A linear regression model was used to identify the relationship of predictors to the use of OMT. RESULTS: At the time of randomization (n = 1830 total enrolled), 87% of patients in BEST-CLI had hypertension, 69% had diabetes, 73% had hyperlipidemia, and 35% were currently smoking. Adherence to four OMT components (controlled blood pressure, not currently smoking, use of one lipid-lowering medication, and use of an antiplatelet agent) was modest. Only 25% of patients met all four OMT criteria; 38% met three, 24% met two, 11% met only one, and 2% met none. Age ≥80 years, coronary artery disease, diabetes, and Hispanic ethnicity were positively associated, whereas Black race was negatively associated, with the use of OMT. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients in BEST-CLI did not meet OMT guideline-based recommendations at time of entry. These data suggest a persistent major gap in the medical management of patients with advanced peripheral atherosclerosis and CLTI. Changes in OMT adherence over the course of the trial and their impact on clinical outcomes and quality of life will be assessed in future analyses.

A new wearable diagnostic home sleep testing platform: comparison with available systems and benefits of multinight assessments.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: We assessed the real-world performance of the ANNE Sleep system against 2 Food and Drug Administration-cleared home sleep testing platforms and the intraindividual night-to-night variability of respiratory event index measured by ANNE Sleep. METHODS: We evaluated the home performance of the ANNE Sleep system compared with 2 Food and Drug Administration-cleared home sleep testing platforms (WatchPAT: n = 29 and Alice NightOne: n = 46) during a synchronous night with unsupervised patient application. Additionally, we evaluated night-to-night variability of respiratory event index and total sleep time using the ANNE Sleep system (n = 30). RESULTS: For the diagnosis of moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnea, the ANNE Sleep system had a positive percent agreement of 58% (95% confidence interval, 28-85%) and a negative percent agreement of 100% (95% confidence interval, 80-100%) compared to WatchPAT. The positive and negative percent agreement for ANNE Sleep vs Alice NightOne was 85% (95% confidence interval, 66-96%) and 95% (95% confidence interval, 74-100%). There were no differences in mean total sleep time or respiratory event index across multiple nights of monitoring with ANNE. There were no differences consistent with a first-night effect but testing multiple nights reclassified obstructive sleep apnea severity in 5 (17%) individuals and detected 3 additional cases of moderate disease, with only a 12% (standard deviation, 28%) mean fluctuation in respiratory event index from the first night of testing compared to a mean of multiple nights. Overall, 80% of users found ANNE comfortable and easy to use. CONCLUSIONS: ANNE Sleep exhibited stronger concordance with Alice NightOne compared to WatchPAT. While we illustrated low night-to-night variability for ANNE Sleep, the results suggest multiple nights increased detection of moderate or severe obstructive sleep apnea. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: ANNE Diagnostic Agreement With Home Sleep Testing; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05421754; Identifier: NCT05421754. CITATION: Walter J, Lee JY, Blake S, et al. A new wearable diagnostic home sleep testing platform: comparison with available systems and benefits of multinight assessments. J Clin Sleep Med. 2023;19(5):865-872.

Lipid-lowering treatment among older patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: The contemporary uptake of lipid-lowering therapies (LLT), including more intensive treatment with high-intensity statins and non-statin LLT, among U.S. older adults (≥75 years old) with ASCVD is unknown. METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study of a large geographically diverse sample of commercially insured U.S. older adults with ASCVD, we assessed treatment with LLT. Secondary measures included LDL-C above target ≥70 mg/dl, persistence and adherence to therapy. RESULTS: Treatment with statins, high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors was assessed in 194,503 older adults (49.9% female) with known ASCVD on January 31st, 2019. 49.3% of older adults with ASCVD were on any statin, with 16.6% receiving a high-intensity statin and 32.7% on low-or moderate-intensity statins. Treatment with ezetimibe (2.4%) or PCSK9 inhibitors (0.24%) was rare and 62.6% of the overall cohort had an LDL-C above target at ≥70 mg/dl. Patients on high-intensity statins were more frequently male, had a diagnosis of coronary artery disease, and were more frequently seen by a cardiologist compared with those on low-or moderate-intensity statins and untreated individuals (p < 0.0001). The majority of older adults on high-intensity statins remained on therapy at 12 months (91.9%) and 85.7% had ≥75% adherence to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of eligible older adults with ASCVD are on statins and only a minority of patients are receiving more intensive lipid-lowering to improve outcomes.

Relationship between WIfI stage and quality of life at revascularization in the BEST-CLI trial.

OBJECTIVE: The WIfI (Wound, Ischemia, foot Infection) stage measures the extent of wounds, ischemia, and foot infection in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) and has been associated with the risk of major amputation. Patients with CLTI have impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL), which can be multifactorial. We hypothesized that the severity of the limb threat (WIfI stage) would be associated with poor HRQoL among patients with CLTI presenting for revascularization. METHODS: The dataset of the BEST-CLI (best endovascular versus best surgical therapy in patients with CLTI) trial, a prospective, randomized trial comparing open and endovascular revascularization strategies, was queried for HRQoL assessments at patient enrollment. The HRQoL assessments included (1) Vascular Quality of Life; (2) 12-item short form survey (SF-12), containing the utility index score (short-form six-dimension R2 utility index, incorporating physical, emotional, and mental well-being) and mental and physical components; and (3) the EQ-5D. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify the independent associations with the baseline HRQoL assessments. RESULTS: A total of 1568 patients with complete WIfI data were analyzed, of whom 71.5% were men. The WIfI distribution was 35.5% with stage 4, 29.6% with stage 3, 28.6% with stage 2, and 6.3% with stage 1. Patients presenting with WIfI stage 4, compared with stage 1 to 3, were more often men (74.9% vs 69.6%) and current smokers (25.4% vs. 17.6%), had had end-stage renal disease (13.3% vs 8.5%) and diabetes (83.6% vs 60.2%), were not independently ambulatory (56.8% vs 38.5%), and had had higher median morbidity scores (4 vs 3; P < .05 for all). On multivariable analysis, WIfI stage 4, compared with stage 1 to 3, was associated with lower SF-12 mental component scale scores (estimate, -2.43; 95% confidence interval, -3.73 to -1.13; P < .001) and short-form six-dimension R2 utility index scores (estimate, -0.02; 95% confidence interval, -0.03 to 0.001; P = .04). The WIfI stage was not independently associated with the baseline Vascular Quality of Life, SF-12 physical component scale, or EQ-5D assessments. CONCLUSIONS: WIfI stage was independently associated with poorer quality of life because of mental, rather than physical, health for patients with CLTI. Clinicians should be aware of the burden of mental stress borne by those with the greatest limb impairment.

Surgery or Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) require revascularization to improve limb perfusion and thereby limit the risk of amputation. It is uncertain whether an initial strategy of endovascular therapy or surgical revascularization for CLTI is superior for improving limb outcomes. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we enrolled 1830 patients with CLTI and infrainguinal peripheral artery disease in two parallel-cohort trials. Patients who had a single segment of great saphenous vein that could be used for surgery were assigned to cohort 1. Patients who needed an alternative bypass conduit were assigned to cohort 2. The primary outcome was a composite of a major adverse limb event - which was defined as amputation above the ankle or a major limb reintervention (a new bypass graft or graft revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis) - or death from any cause. RESULTS: In cohort 1, after a median follow-up of 2.7 years, a primary-outcome event occurred in 302 of 709 patients (42.6%) in the surgical group and in 408 of 711 patients (57.4%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.79; P<0.001). In cohort 2, a primary-outcome event occurred in 83 of 194 patients (42.8%) in the surgical group and in 95 of 199 patients (47.7%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.06; P = 0.12) after a median follow-up of 1.6 years. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups in the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CLTI who had an adequate great saphenous vein for surgical revascularization (cohort 1), the incidence of a major adverse limb event or death was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the endovascular group. Among the patients who lacked an adequate saphenous vein conduit (cohort 2), the outcomes in the two groups were similar. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BEST-CLI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02060630.).

A single-arm, open-label, multicenter, and comparative study of the ANNE sleep system vs polysomnography to diagnose obstructive sleep apnea.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Evaluate per-patient diagnostic performance of a wireless dual-sensor system (ANNE sleep) compared with reference standard polysomnography (PSG) for the diagnosis of moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with a minimum prespecified threshold of 80% for both sensitivity and specificity. METHODS: A multicenter clinical trial was conducted to evaluate ANNE sleep vs PSG to diagnose moderate and severe OSA in individuals 22 years or older. For each testing approach, apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) was manually scored and averaged by 3 registered sleep technologists blinded to the other system. Average variations > 15% were adjudicated by a sleep medicine physician. RESULTS: In a total of n = 225 participants (mean age 53 years, range 22-88 years), PSG diagnosed 30% (n = 68) of participants with moderate or severe OSA (AHI ≥ 15 events/h) compared to 29% (n = 65) diagnosed by ANNE sleep (P = .55). The sensitivity and specificity for ANNE sleep were 90% (95% confidence interval: 80-96%) and 98% (95% confidence interval: 94-99%), respectively. Strong correlation was shown in terms of final AHI (r = .93), with an average AHI bias of 0.5 (95% limits of agreement: -12.8 to 11.8). The majority of users noted comfort with using the ANNE sleep in the home setting. No adverse events were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Using PSG as the gold standard, ANNE sleep demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of moderate or severe OSA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Comparative Study of the ANNE™ One System to Diagnose Obstructive Sleep Apnea; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04643782; Identifier: NCT04643782. CITATION: Davies C, Lee JY, Walter J et al. A single-arm, open-label, multicenter, and comparative study of the ANNE sleep system vs polysomnography to diagnose obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2022;18(12):2703-2712.

Factors associated with lower preoperative quality of life in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia in the BEST-CLI trial.

OBJECTIVES: There are few contemporary data regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLI). METHODS: The Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with CLI (BEST-CLI) trial is an ongoing, National Institutes of Health-sponsored, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing revascularization strategies in patients with CLI. BEST-CLI baseline HRQOL measures were evaluated for patient-specific variables that were associated with poor HRQOL and then compared with published outcomes. The HRQOL measures Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire (VascQOL), European Quality of Life 5D (EQ-5D), and the Short Form 12 (SF-12) Index score, physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) were aggregated from preoperative questionnaires completed by trial patients at baseline visits. Multivariable linear regression models were fit to determine which baseline characteristics were associated with poor HRQOL. RESULTS: We randomized 1830 patients into BEST-CLI. The majority (94.9%, 95.8%, and 95.8%) completed the VascQOL, EQ-5D, and SF-12 instruments at baseline, respectively. In the VascQOL, female sex, smoking history, opioid use, and nonindependent ambulation predicted lower HRQOL scores. Overall, VascuQOL scores were similar to those of participants in the Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischemia of the Leg (mean, 3.07 ± 1.2 vs mean, 2.9 ± 1.1; P = .07). In EQ-5D, nonindependent ambulation predicted lower HRQOL scores. In the SF-12, female sex, opioid use, nonindependent ambulation, and a history of smoking predicted lower HRQOL scores. The mean SF-12 PCS for all patients in the study was 33.0 ± 8.5 and for the MCS was 46.4 ± 12.0), significantly lower than the national SF-12 scores for US population ages more than 60 years, which is a PCS of 46.5 ± 11.4 and an MCS of 52.9 ± 8.7. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CLI entering the BEST-CLI trial have very low HRQOL scores, comparable with patients suffering from other chronic conditions characterized by physical limitations and chronic pain. A history of smoking, impaired ambulation, opioid use, and female sex predicted lower HRQOL in patients with CLI, using multiple HRQOL measurement tools.

High-Intensity Statin Use Among Patients With Atherosclerosis in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Preventive therapy among patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is generally underused. Whether new guideline recommendations and a focus on implementation have improved the use of high-intensity statins is unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the patterns and predictors of statin use among patients with ASCVD. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, pharmacy and medical claims data from a commercial health plan were queried for patients with established ASCVD between January 31, 2018, and January 31, 2019. Statin use on an index date of January 31, 2019, was evaluated, as was 12-month adherence and discontinuation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine independent associations with statin use of varying intensities. RESULTS: Of the 601,934 patients with established ASCVD, 41.7% were female, and the mean age was 67.5 ± 13.3 years. Overall, 22.5% of the cohort were on a high-intensity statin, 27.6% were on a low- or moderate-intensity statin, and 49.9% were not on any statin. In multivariable analysis, younger patients, female patients, and those with higher Charlson comorbidity score were less likely to be prescribed any statin. Among statin users, female patients, older patients, and those with peripheral artery disease were less likely to be on a high-intensity formulation, whereas a cardiology encounter in the prior year increased the odds. The majority of high-intensity stain users achieved high levels of adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial underuse of statins persists in a large, insured, and contemporary cohort of patients with ASCVD from the United States. In particular, concerning gaps in appropriate statin use remain among younger patients, women, and those with noncoronary ASCVD.

Awareness, Knowledge, and Utility of RCT Data vs RWE: Results From a Survey of US Cardiologists: Real-world Evidence in Clinical Decision Making.

Real-world evidence (RWE) provides a potential rich source of additional information to the body of data available from randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but there is a need to understand the strengths and limitations of RWE before it can be applied to clinical practice. To gain insight into current thinking in clinical decision making and utility of different data sources, a representative sampling of US cardiologists selected from the current, active Fellows of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) were surveyed to evaluate their perceptions of findings from RCTs and RWE studies and their application in clinical practice. The survey was conducted online via the ACC web portal between 12 July and 11 August 2017. Of the 548 active ACC Fellows invited as panel members, 173 completed the survey (32% response), most of whom were board certified in general cardiology (n = 119, 69%) or interventional cardiology (n = 40, 23%). The survey results indicated a wide range of familiarity with and utilization of RWE amongst cardiologists. Most cardiologists were familiar with RWE and considered RWE in clinical practice at least some of the time. However, a significant minority of survey respondents had rarely or never applied RWE learnings in their clinical practice, and many did not feel confident in the results of RWE other than registry data. These survey findings suggest that additional education on how to assess and interpret RWE could help physicians to integrate data and learnings from RCTs and RWE to best guide clinical decision making.

Designing, Conducting, Monitoring, and Analyzing Data from Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trials: Proceedings from a Multi-stakeholder Think Tank Meeting.

In late 2018, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outlined a framework for evaluating the possible use of real-world evidence (RWE) to support regulatory decision-making. This framework was created to facilitate studies that would generate high-quality RWE, including pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs), which are randomized trials designed to inform clinical or policy decisions by assessing the real-world effectiveness of an intervention. There is general agreement among experts that the use of existing healthcare and patient-generated data holds promise for making randomized trials more efficient, less costly, and more generalizable. Yet the benefits of relying on real-world data sources must be weighed against difficulties with ensuring data integrity and completeness. Additionally, appropriately monitoring patient safety in randomized trials of new drugs using healthcare system data that might not be available in real time can be quite difficult. Recognizing that these and other concerns are critical to the development and acceptability of PCTs, a group of stakeholders from academia, industry, professional organizations, regulatory bodies, government agencies, and patient advocates discussed a path forward for PCT growth and sustainability at a think tank meeting entitled "Monitoring and Analyzing Data from Pragmatic Streamlined Randomized Clinical Trials," which took place in January 2019 (Washington, DC). The goals of this meeting were to: (1) evaluate study design and methodological options specific to PCTs that have the potential to yield high-quality evidence; (2) discuss best practices to ensure data quality in PCTs; and (3) identify appropriate methods for study monitoring. Proceedings from the think tank meeting are summarized in this manuscript.

Role of health plan administrative claims data in participant recruitment for pragmatic clinical trials: An Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) example.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to evaluate HealthCore/Anthem Research Network recruitment strategies, compare response and enrollment rates for different recruitment strategies, and describe demographic and clinical characteristics of responders and enrollees. METHODS: HealthCore/Anthem Research Network, a part of the Health Plan Research Network of the Patient-Centered Clinical Data Research Network, used administrative claims data to identify eligible health plan members for potential participation in the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness study. We approached health plan members, identified with a validated Patient-Centered Clinical Data Research Network common data model computable phenotype, and their clinical providers during November 2017 to August 2018. Providers were offered the option to exclude their patients' participation in Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness prior to our direct patient (member) outreach. Member identification was in two phases: Phase 1: 1 January 2006 to 1 April 2017, and Phase 2: 1 January 2006 to 2 February 2018. Phase 1 consisted of two batches of mail and one phone call per patient. In Phase 2, which included two similar batches of patients, outreach was via either mail or brochure and one phone call. RESULTS: Phase 1 and Phase 2 included 133,373 and 51,777 members, respectively. We engaged 28,593 providers in Phase 1, and 5077 in Phase 2. In Phase 1, 264,158 mixed email/mail messages were delivered to 133,373 members, followed by 90,481 phone calls from November 2017 to February 2018. In Phase 2, after simple randomization to letter or brochure, 51,777 members were sent email/mail or mailed brochure in three waves from May 2018 to July 2018. In this 9-week period, 51,623 communications were sent to 25,914 members in the email/mail group, and 50,160 brochures to 25,863 in the brochure group. Following email/mail or mailed brochure outreach, 16,624 and 16,580 calls were made to the groups, respectively. Overall, 1549 health plan members visited the study portal by 1 September 2018; 355 electronically signed the Informed Consent Form and enrolled. Mailed brochures drove more portal visits in Phase 2, but a lower percentage of responders enrolled. Recruitment was better in Phase 2-2.3 enrollees per 1000 outreach members versus 1.8 in Phase 1. CONCLUSION: This study showed the ability of a health plan within Patient-Centered Clinical Data Research Network to identify potential study participants with administrative claims, and use different outreach methods to facilitate recruitment and enrollment for pragmatic clinical trials.

Administrative claims data to support pragmatic clinical trial outcome ascertainment on cardiovascular health.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Health plan administrative claims data present a cost-effective complement to traditional trial-specific ascertainment of clinical events typically conducted through patient report or a single health system electronic health record. We aim to demonstrate the value of health plan claims data in improving the capture of endpoints in longitudinal pragmatic clinical trials. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study paralleled the design of the ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness) trial designed to compare the effectiveness of two doses of aspirin. We applied the ADAPTABLE identification query in claims data from Anthem, an American health insurance company, and identified health plan members who met the ADAPTABLE trial criteria. Among the ADAPTABLE eligible members, we selected overlapping members with PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks in the 2 years prior to the index date (1 April 2014). PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks consist of network partners (or healthcare systems) that store their electronic health record data in the same format to support multi-institutional research. ADAPTABLE outcome events-cardiovascular hospitalizations including admissions for myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiac procedures; hospitalizations for major bleeding; and in-hospital deaths-were evaluated for a 2-year follow-up period. Events were classified as within or outside PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks using facility identifiers affiliated with each hospital stay. Patient characteristics were examined with descriptive statistics, and incidence rates were reported for available Clinical Data Research Networks and claims data. RESULTS: Among 884,311 ADAPTABLE eligible health plan members, 11,101 patients overlapped with PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks. Average age was 70 years, 71% were male, and average follow-up was 20.7 months. Patients had 1521 cardiovascular hospitalizations (571 (37.5%) occurred outside PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks), 710 for major bleeding (296 (41.7%) outside PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks), and 196 in-hospital deaths (67 (34.2%) outside PCORnet Clinical Data Research Networks). Incidence rates (events per1000 patient-months) differed between available network partners and claims data: cardiovascular hospitalizations, 4.1 (95% confidence interval: 3.9, 4.4) versus 6.6 (95% confidence interval: 6.3, 7.0), major bleeding, 1.8 (95% confidence interval: 1.6, 2.0) versus 3.1 (95% confidence interval: 2.9, 3.3), and in-hospital death, 0.56 (95% confidence interval: 0.47, 0.67) versus 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.74, 0.98), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the value of supplementing longitudinal site-based clinical studies with administrative claims data. Our results suggest that claims data together with network partner electronic health record data constitute an effective vehicle to capture patient outcomes since >30% of patients have non-fatal and fatal events outside of enrolling sites.

A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not have adequate glycemic control, leading to poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs. OBJECTIVE: This prospective pragmatic clinical trial evaluated V-Go, a wearable insulin delivery device, compared with standard treatment optimization (STO) among insulin-treated patients with T2DM in a real-world, community-based practice setting. METHODS: Study sites, rather than individual patients, were randomized to V-Go or STO via cluster randomization. Patients were treated according to routine clinical practice and followed up to 4 months. T2DM medications and supplies were purchased utilizing usual insurance and co-pay systems. The primary analysis was an unadjusted treatment group comparison of glycosylated hemoglobinA1c (HbA1c) change from baseline to end of study (EOS). A cost of therapy analysis was completed on patients who had received comparable baseline T2DM treatment with multiple daily basal-bolus insulin injections (MDI). RESULTS: Analysis included 415 patients (169 V-Go, 246 STO) enrolled from 52 US sites. Mean baseline HbA1c (9.6%) was higher in V-Go (9.9%, range 8.0% - 14.2%) than STO (9.3%, range 7.9% - 13.9%, p <.001). HbA1c decreased from baseline to EOS in both V-Go (-1.0%, p<.001) and STO (-0.5%, p<.001); V-Go had significantly larger decrease (p=.002). V-Go had a significant reduction (p<.001) in mean insulin total daily dose (TDD; 0.76 U/kg baseline, 0.57 U/kg EOS), not seen in STO (0.72 U/kg baseline and EOS). The MDI group included 95 (56.2%) V-Go and 113 STO (45.9%) patients. Mean baseline HbA1c was significantly higher in V-Go (9.9%) than STO (9.4%). V-Go also experienced larger decrease in HbA1c from baseline (-1.0%) than STO (-0.36%) (p=.006) with a decrease in TDD, while STO TDD remained unchanged. EOS mean per patient per day cost of diabetes treatment was lower for V-Go ($30.59) vs STO ($32.20) (p=.006). V-Go was more cost effective than STO ($24.02 per 1% drop in HbA1c vs $58.86, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This pragmatic clinical trial demonstrated improved HbA1c levels, lower cost, and decreased insulin dose in patients with T2DM initiating V-Go vs STO in a real-world community-based practice setting. Observed baseline HbAlc indicated use of V-Go in more difficult to manage diabetes patients.

Clinical characteristics, patterns of lipid-lowering medication use, and health care resource utilization and costs among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate real-world patient characteristics, medication use, and health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients with clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) as defined by 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, to examine burden of disease and unmet needs, such as potential undertreatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized a nationally representative managed care database to identify newly diagnosed ASCVD patients between January 1, 2007, and November 30, 2012 (index = first ASCVD diagnosis date) in the USA. Patients had ≥12-month pre-index (baseline) and ≥12-month post-index (follow-up) health plan enrollment and no baseline lipid-lowering medication (LLM). Patient characteristics, LLM utilization patterns, HCRU, and costs were examined for all patients and by subgroups based on LLM use pattern and/or follow-up low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. RESULTS: A total of 128,017 ASCVD patients were identified with a mean (SD) age of 59 (13) years, 43.1% female, and 48.8% with ≥36-month follow-up. Within 12-month follow-up, 10.6% had high-intensity statins and 56.9% had no LLM fills. Baseline mean (SD) all-cause costs were $8,852 ($25,608). At 12-month follow-up, mean (SD) all-cause and ASCVD-related costs were $31,443 ($54,040) and $20,289 ($45,159), respectively. The 36-month analyses showed similar distributions. Multivariable analyses showed that age, gender, region, health insurance type, baseline comorbidities, baseline use of specific medications, baseline lipid profiles, and index ASCVD type were significantly associated with all-cause and ASCVD-related health care costs. CONCLUSION: Patients have nonoptimal treatment for ASCVD and substantial HCRU and costs associated with residual risk. Unmet needs and cost burdens of ASCVD patients merit additional investigation.

Initiation Patterns of Statins in the 2 Years After Release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Cholesterol Management Guideline in a Large US Health Plan.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to characterize changes in statin utilization patterns in patients newly initiated on therapy in the 2 years following the release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cholesterol management guideline in a large US health plan population. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective, observational study used administrative medical and pharmacy claims data to identify patients newly initiated on statin therapy over 4 quarters prior to and 8 quarters following the release of the guideline (average N/quarter=3596). Patients were divided into the 4 statin benefit groups (SBGs) based on risk factors and laboratory lipid levels as defined in the guideline: SBG1 (with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease [ASCVD]; N=1046/quarter), SBG2 (without ASCVD, with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥190 mg/dL; N=454/quarter), SBG3 (without ASCVD, aged 40-75 years, with diabetes mellitus, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 70-189 mg/dL; N=1391/quarter), SBG4 (no ASCVD or diabetes mellitus, age 40-75 years, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 70-189 mg/dL, estimated 10-year ASCVD risk of ≥7.5%; N=705/quarter). Demographic variables, statin utilization patterns, lipid levels, and comorbidities were analyzed for pre- and postguideline periods. Postguideline, gradually increased high-intensity statin initiation occurred in SBG1, SBG2, and in SBG3 patients with 10-year ASCVD risk ≥7.5%. Moderate- to high-intensity statin initiation gradually increased among SBG4 patients. Recommended-intensity statin choice changed to a greater degree among patients treated by specialty care physicians. Regarding sex, target-intensity statin initiation was lower in women in all groups before and after guideline release. CONCLUSIONS: Prescriber implementation of the guideline recommendations has gradually increased, with the most marked change in the increased initiation of high-intensity statins in patients with ASCVD and in those treated by a specialist.

Barriers to PCSK9 inhibitor prescriptions for patients with high cardiovascular risk: Results of a healthcare provider survey conducted by the National Lipid Association.

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy is recommended for reducing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Significant risk can remain because of insufficient clinical response or statin intolerance. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type-9 (PCSK9) therapy lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and has recently been shown to lower ASCVD events. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the barriers and challenges experienced with the access and approval reimbursement process for PCSK9 inhibitor prescriptions. METHODS: In 2016, the National Lipid Association conducted an online survey on PCSK9 inhibitor use and barriers to prescription among experienced healthcare workers who provide care to high-risk patients with ASCVD or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). RESULTS: There were 434 respondent healthcare workers with extensive experience in treating lipid disorders. PCSK9 inhibitors are considered by 71.3% of respondent providers with statin-intolerant patients. There were high rates (>85%) of initial denial. The major barriers to approvals were insurer processes, provider documentation (inadequate documentation of maximally tolerated statin dose, diagnostic criteria for FH, number of statins failed if statin intolerant and most recent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), and administrative burden (time, staff, paperwork, and appeals). Provider approval rates for getting ≥75% patients approved were higher for FH (43%) than for ASCVD patients (36%). Among providers with good approval rates, documentation was the most critical factor. Barriers more difficult to overcome include perceived higher threshold requirements by payers, drugs not on formulary, and drug costs. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare providers encounter significant barriers to PCSK9 inhibitor prescriptions; many of these are related to documentation issues and can be overcome with checklists, staff support, and experience.