Burden of Illness and Treatment Patterns Among Patients With von Willebrand Disease in US Clinical Practice.

In this retrospective cohort study, data from an integrated US healthcare system containing both electronic medical record data and linked claims data (from 01/2004 to 12/2020) were used to evaluate the clinical burden, treatment patterns, and healthcare resource use (HRU) in patients with von Willebrand disease (VWD). Two patient cohorts were analyzed: the overall VWD population (n = 396) and a subset of these patients (n = 75) who were considered potentially eligible for prophylaxis treatment with von Willebrand factor (VWF) based on a history of severe and frequent bleeding. HRU (hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and emergency department visits) were measured in patients with linked claims data (n = 110, overall VWD patients; n = 23 potentially VWF-prophylaxis-eligible VWD patients). In general, patients with VWD experienced a substantial burden of bleeding events, comorbidities, and HRU. Patients with VWD who were considered potentially eligible for prophylaxis owing to severe and frequent bleeds suffered from a higher clinical burden and HRU than the overall VWD population, and thus may benefit from VWF prophylactic treatment. The findings from this study could help improve clinical outcomes and manage HRU for patients with VWD.

Real-world effectiveness of omadacycline and impact of unapproved omadacycline prescription claims among adult outpatients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia or acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

BACKGROUND: Omadacycline is an amino-methylcycline antibiotic that is indicated for the treatment of adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Like many new antibiotics, there are scant real-world effectiveness data for omadacycline. There is also a high potential that an omadacycline prescription is rejected or reversed, and it is not known whether patients who have an unapproved omadacycline claim are at higher risk for 30-day emergency department (ED)/inpatient (IP) visits. OBJECTIVE: To describe the real-world effectiveness of omadacycline and assess the impact of unapproved omadacycline claims among adult outpatients with CABP or ABSSSIs. METHODS: The study population included patients who received 1 or more omadacycline outpatient prescriptions from a large US claims database (October 2018 to September 2020) and had a diagnosis for CABP or ABSSSI. The approval status of omadacycline claims was determined. The proportion of all-cause 30-day ED/IP visits among patients with an approved vs unapproved claim was compared. RESULTS: 404 patients met the inclusion criteria (CABP: 97; ABSSSI: 307). Of the 404 patients, 146 (36%) had an unapproved claim (CABP: 28; ABSSSI: 118). Overall, the proportion of 30-day ED/IP visits (yes/no) for those with an unapproved and approved claim was 28% vs 17%, respectively (P < 0.05). The overall adjusted 30-day ED/IP visits incidence difference was 11% (95% CI = 2 - 19), corresponding to an adjusted number needed to treat of 9 (95% CI = 5 - 43). CONCLUSIONS: A high incidence (36%) of unapproved omadacydine claims was observed in this study. Patients with unapproved daims had an 11% higher incidence of 30-day all-cause ED/IP visits than patients with approved claims. DISCLOSURES This study was funded by Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc (King of Prussia, PA). Dr Lodise is a consultant to Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and has received consultancy payments. Drs Gunter, Sandor, and Berman are employees and shareholders of Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Mu, Ms Gao, Ms Yang, and Ms Yim are employees of Analysis Group. Analysis Group has received payment from Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc, to conduct part of this study.

The Economic Burden of Eosinophilic Gastritis and Eosinophilic Enteritis in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic gastritis and eosinophilic enteritis (EoG/EoN) are associated with a substantial clinical burden. However, limited information is available regarding the economic burden of EoG/EoN. This study was conducted to compare healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs among patients with EoG/EoN versus without EoG/EoN in the USA. METHODS: Administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits Databases (2009-2019) was used to identify two cohorts of patients. Patients without EoG/EoN were matched 3:1 to patients with EoG/EoN on sex, year of birth, and healthcare plan type. Study measures included demographic characteristics, select comorbidities, all-cause HRU, and costs. Comparisons were made over a 1-year period following EoG/EoN diagnosis for patients with EoG/EoN and an eligible date for patients without EoG/EoN. RESULTS: A total of 2219 patients with EoG/EoN and 6657 patients without EoG/EoN were analyzed. Significantly higher proportions of patients with EoG/EoN versus without EoG/EoN had comorbid conditions. Rates of all-cause HRU were significantly higher among patients with EoG/EoN versus patients without EoG/EoN (adjusted rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: inpatient visits, 6.26 [5.26, 7.46]; outpatient visits, 1.17 [1.16, 1.19]; emergency department visits, 2.11 [1.98, 2.25]; all p < 0.001). Patients with EoG/EoN incurred significantly higher costs versus patients without EoG/EoN (adjusted mean cost difference $31,180; p < 0.001). Cost differences were largely due to outpatient (adjusted mean cost difference $14,018; p < 0.001) and inpatient (adjusted mean cost difference $11,224; p < 0.001) costs. CONCLUSION: The economic burden associated with EoG/EoN is substantial, with patients with EoG/EoN having a higher rate of HRU and incurring $31,180 more than patients without EoG/EoN on average. Most of the cost difference was attributable to outpatient and inpatient costs. Cost-saving strategies to lower the burden of illness in this patient population are needed.

Real-world effectiveness after initiating fremanezumab treatment in US patients with episodic and chronic migraine or difficult-to-treat migraine.

BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb; IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for migraine prevention have been demonstrated in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Real-world effectiveness data are needed to complement clinical trial data. This study assessed the effectiveness of fremanezumab across different subgroups of adult patients with episodic migraine (EM), chronic migraine (CM), or difficult-to-treat (DTT) migraine in real-world clinical settings. METHODS: This retrospective, panel-based online chart review used electronic case report forms. Patient inclusion criteria were a physician diagnosis of EM or CM; age ≥ 18 years at the time of first fremanezumab initiation; ≥ 1 dose of fremanezumab treatment; ≥ 1 follow-up visit since first initiation; and ≥ 2 measurements of monthly migraine days (MMD; with 1 within a month before or at first initiation and ≥ 1 after first initiation). Changes in MMD and monthly headache days were assessed during the follow-up period. These endpoints were evaluated in subgroups of patients by migraine type (EM/CM) and in subgroups with DTT migraine (diagnosis of medication overuse [MO], major depressive disorder [MDD], generalized anxiety disorder [GAD], or prior exposure to a different CGRP pathway-targeted mAb [CGRP mAb]). RESULTS: Data were collected from 421 clinicians and 1003 patients. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MMD at Month 6 were - 7.7 (77.0%) in EM patients, - 10.1 (68.7%) in CM patients, - 10.8 (80.6%) in the MO subgroup, - 9.9 (68.3%) in the MDD subgroup, - 9.5 (66.4%) in the GAD subgroup, and - 9.0 (68.7%) in the prior CGRP mAb exposure subgroup. Improvements in MDD or GAD severity were reported by 45.5% and 45.8% of patients with comorbid MDD or GAD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, fremanezumab demonstrated effectiveness for migraine regardless of migraine type or the presence of factors contributing to DTT migraine (MO, GAD, MDD, or prior exposure to a different CGRP mAb).

Real-world effectiveness of fremanezumab in migraine patients initiating treatment in the United States: results from a retrospective chart study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and tolerability of fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults, have been demonstrated in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Real-world data can further support those clinical trial data and demonstrate the full clinical benefits of fremanezumab. This chart review assessed the effectiveness of fremanezumab for improving clinical outcomes in adult patients with migraine treated according to real-world clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective, panel-based, online physician chart review study used electronic case report forms with US physicians. Patient inclusion criteria were a physician diagnosis of migraine, fremanezumab treatment initiation at ≥ 18 years of age after US Food and Drug Administration approval, ≥ 1 dose of fremanezumab treatment, and ≥ 2 assessments of monthly migraine days (MMD; 1 within 30 days before treatment initiation and ≥ 1 after initiation). Changes from baseline in MMD, monthly headache days (MHD), and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores were assessed over 6 months. These endpoints were evaluated in the overall population and subgroups divided by dosing schedule and number of prior migraine preventive treatment failures. RESULTS: This study included data from 421 clinicians and 1003 patients. Mean age at fremanezumab initiation was 39.7 years, and most patients were female (75.8%). In the overall population, mean baseline MMD and MHD were 12.7 and 14.0, respectively. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MMD and MHD, respectively, were - 4.6 (36.2%) and - 4.7 (33.6%) at Month 1, - 6.7 (52.8%) and - 6.8 (48.6%) at Month 3, and - 9.2 (72.4%) and - 9.8 (70.0%) at Month 6. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MIDAS and HIT-6 scores also increased over the 6-month study period, from - 6.2 (21.6%) and - 8.4 (14.0%) at Month 1 to - 18.1 (63.1%) and - 16.2 (27.0%) at Month 6, respectively. Improvements in these outcomes over 6 months were observed across all evaluated subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study demonstrated effectiveness of fremanezumab treatment for up to 6 months, irrespective of dosing regimen or number of prior migraine preventive treatment failures, reflecting ongoing, clinically meaningful improvements in patient outcomes.