Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 331
Filtrar
1.
Res Pract Thromb Haemost ; 6(5): e12753, 2022 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35859579

RESUMO

Background and Objectives: Current clinical guidelines recommend thromboprophylaxis for adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet it is unknown whether higher doses of thromboprophylaxis offer benefits beyond standard doses. Methods: We studied electronic health records from 50 091 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 in the United States between February 2020 and February 2021. We compared standard (enoxaparin 30 or 40 mg/day, fondaparinux 2.5 mg, or heparin 5000 units twice or thrice per day) versus intermediate (enoxaparin 30 or 40 mg twice daily, or up to 1.2 mg/kg of body weight daily, heparin 7500 units thrice per day or heparin 10 000 units twice or thrice per day) thromboprophylaxis. We separately examined risk of escalation to therapeutic anticoagulation, severe disease (first occurrence of high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation), and death. To summarize risk, we present hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using adjusted time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: People whose first dose was high intensity were younger, more often obese, and had greater oxygen support requirements. Intermediate dose thromboprophylaxis was associated with increased risk of therapeutic anticoagulation (HR, 3.39; 95% CI, 3.22-3.57), severe disease (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.17-1.28), and death (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.21-1.55). Increased risks associated with intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis persisted in subgroup and sensitivity analyses varying populations and definitions of exposures, outcomes, and covariates. Conclusions: Our findings do not support routine use of intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis to prevent clinical worsening, severe disease, or death among adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

2.
Am J Manag Care ; 28(7): e255-e262, 2022 07 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35852888

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To examine the use of step therapy, prior authorization, and Part D formulary exclusion by 4 large Medicare Advantage (MA) insurers to manage 20 physician-administered drugs with the highest total Medicare expenditures (top 20 drugs). STUDY DESIGN: We collected data for United Healthcare, CVS/Aetna, Humana, and Kaiser plans to create a database of 2020 Part B coverage restrictions and conducted a retrospective analysis of 2018-2020 Part D formularies. METHODS: For each insurer, we calculated the number of top 20 physician-administered drugs subject to prior authorization and step therapy. For physician-administered drugs for which there were no similar or interchangeable alternatives, we examined which insurers required prior authorization or step therapy. Finally, we examined whether insurers restricted access to physician-administered drugs by reducing coverage on Part D formularies. RESULTS: Of the top 20 physician-administered drugs, 17 were subject to prior authorization and 10 were subject to step therapy by at least 1 insurer. For 5 physician-administered drugs without a similar or interchangeable alternative, none were subject to step therapy and all were subject to prior authorization by at least 1 insurer. Across the 4 insurers, 16 physician-administered drugs were covered on all or some of the Part D formularies in 2018, which decreased to 6 in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Four large MA insurers managed access to expensive physician-administered drugs with a combination of prior authorization, step therapy, and Part D formulary design. When a low-cost alternative exists, these tools can help reduce wasteful spending, but the administrative barriers may also reduce access.


Assuntos
Medicare Part C , Medicare Part D , Médicos , Idoso , Humanos , Seguradoras , Autorização Prévia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
3.
Pharmacotherapy ; 42(7): 567-579, 2022 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35665948

RESUMO

Ketamine, an anesthetic available since 1970, and esketamine, its newer S-enantiomer, provide a novel approach for the treatment of depression and other psychiatric disorders. At subanesthetic doses, the two drugs, along with their older congener, phencyclidine (PCP), induce a transient, altered mental state by blocking the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor for glutamate, the primary excitatory neurotransmitter in the mammalian central nervous system. This multidisciplinary review examines the pharmacology/direct effects on consciousness, effectiveness in depression and acute suicidality, and safety of these fast-acting NMDA antagonists. To capture the essence of 60 years of peer-reviewed literature, we used a semi-structured approach to the subtopics, each of which required a different search strategy. We review the evidence for the three primary reported benefits of the two clinical drugs when used for depression: success in difficult-to-treat patients, rapid onset of action within a day, and immediate effects on suicidality. Key safety issues include the evidence-and lack thereof-for the effects of repeatedly inducing this altered mental state, and whether an adequate safety margin exists to rule out the neurotoxic effects seen in animal studies. This review includes evidence from multiple sources that raise substantial questions about both safety and effectiveness of ketamine and esketamine for psychiatric disorders.


Assuntos
Depressão , Ketamina , Receptores de N-Metil-D-Aspartato , Animais , Depressão/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Ketamina/efeitos adversos , Mamíferos , N-Metilaspartato , Fenciclidina/farmacologia , Receptores de N-Metil-D-Aspartato/antagonistas & inibidores
4.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35772597

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The comparative safety and efficacy of the biologics currently approved for asthma are unclear. OBJECTIVE: We compared the safety and efficacy of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in individuals with severe eosinophilic asthma. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature published 2000 to 2021. We studied Bayesian network meta-analyses of exacerbation rates, prebronchodilator FEV1, the Asthma Control Questionnaire, and serious adverse events in individuals with eosinophilic asthma. RESULTS: Eight randomized clinical trials (n = 6461) were identified. We found in individuals with eosinophils ≥300 cells/µL the following: in reducing exacerbation rates compared to placebo: dupilumab (risk ratio [RR], 0.32; 95% credible interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.45), mepolizumab (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.45), and benralizumab (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.55); in improving FEV1: dupilumab (mean difference in milliliters [MD] 230; 95% CI, 160 to 300), benralizumab (MD, 150; 95% CI, 100 to 200), and mepolizumab (MD, 150; 95% CI, 66 to 220); and in reducing Asthma Control Questionnaire scores: mepolizumab (MD, -0.63; 95% CI, -0.81 to -0.45), dupilumab (MD, -0.48; 95% CI, -0.83 to -0.14), and benralizumab (MD, -0.32; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.21). In individuals with eosinophils 150-299 cells/µL, benralizumab (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.73) and dupilumab (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.95) were associated with lower exacerbation rates; and only benralizumab (MD, 81; 95% CI, 8 to 150) significantly improved FEV1. These differences were minimal compared to clinically important thresholds. For serious adverse events in the overall population, mepolizumab (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.92) and benralizumab (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.93) were associated with lower odds of a serious adverse event, while dupilumab was not different from placebo (odds ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.4). CONCLUSION: There are minimal differences in the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab in eosinophilic asthma.

5.
J Adolesc Health ; 71(2): 239-241, 2022 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35595609

RESUMO

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) is unknown. METHODS: We used IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription Claims, including US AYAs aged 12-29 with at least 1 buprenorphine fill between January 2018 and August 2020, stratifying by age group and insurance. We compared buprenorphine prescriptions in March-August 2019 to March-August 2020. RESULTS: The monthly buprenorphine prescription rate increased 8.3% among AYAs aged 12-17 but decreased 7.5% among 18- to 24-year-olds and decreased 5.1% among 25- to 29-year-olds. In these age groups, Medicaid prescriptions did not significantly change, whereas commercial insurance prescriptions decreased 12.9% among 18- to 24-year-olds and 11.8% in 25- to 29-year-olds, and cash/other prescriptions decreased 18.7% among 18- to 24-year-olds and 19.9% in 25- to 29-year-olds (p < .001 for all). DISCUSSION: Buprenorphine prescriptions paid with commercial insurance or cash among young adults significantly decreased early in the pandemic, suggesting a possible unmet treatment need among this group.


Assuntos
Buprenorfina , COVID-19 , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Adolescente , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Buprenorfina/uso terapêutico , Combinação Buprenorfina e Naloxona/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Pandemias , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
6.
Value Health ; 25(5): 796-802, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35500949

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of systemic treatments for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer from the US healthcare sector perspective with a lifetime horizon. METHODS: We built a partitioned survival model based on a network meta-analysis of 7 clinical trials with 7287 patients aged 36 to 94 years between 2004 and 2018 to predict patient health trajectories by treatment. We tested parameter uncertainties with probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We estimated drug acquisition costs using the Federal Supply Schedule and adopted generic drug prices when available. We measured cost-effectiveness by an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: The mean costs were approximately $392 000 with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone and approximately $415 000, $464 000, $597 000, and $959 000 with docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, and apalutamide, added to ADT, respectively. The mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 3.38 with ADT alone and 3.92, 4.76, 3.92, and 5.01 with docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, and apalutamide, added to ADT, respectively. As add-on therapy to ADT, docetaxel had an ICER of $42 069 per QALY over ADT alone; abiraterone acetate had an ICER of $58 814 per QALY over docetaxel; apalutamide had an ICER of $1 979 676 per QALY over abiraterone acetate; enzalutamide was dominated. At a willingness to pay below $50 000 per QALY, docetaxel plus ADT is likely the most cost-effective treatment; at any willingness to pay between $50 000 and $200 000 per QALY, abiraterone acetate plus ADT is likely the most cost-effective treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the value of abiraterone acetate plus ADT given its relative cost-effectiveness to other systemic treatments for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Próstata , Acetato de Abiraterona/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Androgênios/uso terapêutico , Castração , Análise Custo-Benefício , Docetaxel/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Metanálise em Rede , Neoplasias da Próstata/tratamento farmacológico
7.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35569118

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Many commonly used prescription medications have cardiovascular adverse effects, yet the cumulative risk of cardiovascular events associated with the concurrent use of these medications is unknown. We examined the association between the concurrent use of prescription medications with known risk of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) ("MACE medications") and the risk of such events among older adults. METHODS: A multi-center, population-based study from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study of a cohort of 3669 community-dwelling adults aged 61-86 years with no history of cardiovascular disease who reported the use of at least one medication between September 2006 and August 2013 were followed up until August 2015. Exposure defined as time-varying and time-fixed use of 1, 2 or ≥3 MACE medications with non-MACE medications serving as negative control. Primary outcome was incident MACE defined as coronary artery revascularization, myocardial infarction, fatal coronary heart disease, stroke, cardiac arrest, or death. RESULTS: In fully adjusted models, there was an increased risk of MACE associated with use of 1, 2, or ≥3 MACE medications (1 MACE: hazards ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.57); 2 MACE: HR 1.89, CI 1.42-2.53; ≥3 MACE: HR 2.22, CI 1.61-3.07) compared to use of non-MACE medications. These associations persisted in propensity score-matched analyses and among new users of MACE medications, never users of cardiovascular medications and subgroups of participants with increased risk of MACE. There was no association between the number of non-MACE medications used and MACE. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this community-based cohort of older adults with no prior cardiovascular disease, the use of MACE medications was independently and consistently associated with an increased risk of such events in a dose-response fashion.

8.
Lupus ; 31(7): 773-807, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35467448

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate health care utilization and costs for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) by disease severity. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase from January 2000 to June 2020 for observational studies examining health care utilization and costs associated with SLE among adults in the United States. Two independent reviewers reviewed the selected full-text articles to determine the final set of included studies. Costs were converted to 2020 US $. RESULTS: We screened 9224 articles, of which 51 were included. Mean emergency department visits were 0.3-3.5 per year, and mean hospitalizations were 0.1-2.4 per year (mean length of stay 0.4-13.0 days). Patients averaged 10-26 physician visits/year. Mean annual direct total costs were $17,258-$63,022 per patient and were greater for patients with moderate or severe disease ($19,099-$82,391) compared with mild disease ($12,242-$29,233). Mean annual direct costs were larger from commercial claims ($24,585-$63,022) than public payers (Medicare and Medicaid: $18,302-$27,142). CONCLUSIONS: SLE remains a significant driver of health care utilization and costs. Patients with moderate to severe SLE use more health care services and incur greater direct and indirect costs than those with mild disease.


Assuntos
Lúpus Eritematoso Sistêmico , Adulto , Idoso , Atenção à Saúde , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Humanos , Lúpus Eritematoso Sistêmico/terapia , Medicare , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
9.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(9): e023811, 2022 05 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35475341

RESUMO

Background Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) mitigate cardiovascular risk in individuals with type 2 diabetes, but most eligible patients do not receive them. We characterized temporal trends in SGLT2i and GLP-1RA use by cardiologists compared with other groups of clinicians. Methods and Results We conducted a descriptive analysis of serial, cross-sectional data derived from IQVIA's National Prescription Audit, a comprehensive audit capturing ≈90% of US retail prescription dispensing and projected to population-level data, to estimate monthly SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs dispensed from January 2015 to December 2020, stratified by prescriber specialty and molecule. We also used the American Medical Association's Physician Masterfile to calculate average annual SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs dispensed per physician. Between January 2015 and December 2020, a total of 63.2 million SGLT2i and 63.4 million GLP-1RA prescriptions were dispensed in the United States. Monthly prescriptions from cardiologists increased 12-fold for SGLT2is (from 2228 to 25 815) and 4-fold for GLP-1RAs (from 1927 to 6981). Nonetheless, cardiologists represented only 1.5% of SGLT2i prescriptions and 0.4% of GLP-1RA prescriptions in 2020, while total use was predominated by primary care physicians/internists (57% of 2020 SGLT2is and 52% of GLP-1RAs). Endocrinologists led in terms of prescriptions dispensed per physician in 2020 (272 SGLT2is and 405 GLP-1RAs). Cardiologists, but not noncardiologists, increasingly used SGLT2is over GLP-1RAs, with accelerated uptake of empagliflozin and dapagliflozin coinciding with their landmark cardiovascular outcomes trials and subsequent US Food and Drug Administration label expansions. Conclusions While use of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs by cardiologists in the United States increased substantially over a 6-year period, cardiologists still account for a very small proportion of all use, contributing to marked undertreatment of individuals with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk.


Assuntos
Cardiologistas , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Inibidores do Transportador 2 de Sódio-Glicose , Estudos Transversais , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Receptor do Peptídeo Semelhante ao Glucagon 1/agonistas , Glucose , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Sódio , Transportador 2 de Glucose-Sódio , Inibidores do Transportador 2 de Sódio-Glicose/uso terapêutico
10.
J Alzheimers Dis ; 87(3): 1003-1007, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35404287

RESUMO

The controversial approval in June 2021 by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of aducanumab (marketed as Aduhelm), Biogen's monoclonal antibody for patients with Alzheimer's disease, raises significant concerns for the dementia field and drug approval process, considering its lack of adequate evidence for clinical efficacy, safety issues, and cost. On 15 December 2021, an international group of clinicians, basic science experts, psychological and social science researchers, lay people with lived experience of dementia, and advocates for public health met to discuss making a recommendation for whether aducanumab's approval should be withdrawn. Attendees considered arguments both in favor of and in opposition to withdrawal and voted unanimously to recommend that the FDA withdraw its approval for aducanumab and to support the Right Care Alliance's filing of a formal Citizen Petition to this effect.


Assuntos
Doença de Alzheimer , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Doença de Alzheimer/tratamento farmacológico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
11.
Pharmacotherapy ; 42(5): 375-386, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35364622

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation among patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation is challenging due to elevated risk of bleeding and stroke. We characterized use of oral anticoagulants among patients with cancer and non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data and included patients with cancer aged ≥66 years with an incident diagnosis of NVAF from 2010 to 2016. We used a Cox proportional hazard model and multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with anticoagulant use versus no use and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin use, respectively. RESULTS: Of 27,702 patients with cancer and NVAF, 4469 (16.1%) used DOACs and 3577 (12.9%) used warfarin. Among 8046 anticoagulant users, DOACs use increased from 21.8% in 2011 to 76.2% in 2016, with a corresponding decline in warfarin use from 78.2% to 23.8%. Nearly 7 out of 10 patients with cancer and NVAF did not initiate anticoagulation in 2016. Anticoagulant use was more likely among those with higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.90 for score ≥6 vs. 1) or with lower HAS-BLED scores (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.67-2.30 for score 1 vs. ≥6). Among anticoagulant users, DOAC use was less likely than warfarin in those with higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores (odds ratio [OR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.84 for score ≥6 vs. 1). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 7 out of 10 patients with cancer and NVAF did not receive anticoagulation. Use of DOACs increased from 2010 to 2016, with a corresponding decline in warfarin use. DOACs are used less than warfarin among those at higher risk of stroke.


Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Neoplasias , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Administração Oral , Idoso , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Fibrilação Atrial/complicações , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Fibrilação Atrial/epidemiologia , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/complicações , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Medicare , Neoplasias/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Varfarina/efeitos adversos
12.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 227(1): 68.e1-68.e24, 2022 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35248573

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial reductions in the past decade, prescription opioids continue to cause widespread morbidity and mortality in the United States. Little is known regarding patterns and predictors of opioid use among women undergoing benign hysterectomy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the incidence and predictors of new persistent opioid use after benign hysterectomy among opioid-naïve women from a set of demographic, operative, and opioid prescription characteristics of patients. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified women undergoing benign hysterectomy from 2011 to 2016 using a validated national insurance claims database (IBM MarketScan Commercial Database). After excluding women with prevalent opioid use (from 365 to 31 days preoperatively), we identified patients who received a perioperative opioid prescription (30 days before to 14 days after hysterectomy) and evaluated them for new persistent opioid use, defined as at least 1 prescription from 15 to 90 days and at least 1 prescription from 91 to 365 days postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine demographic, clinical, operative, and opioid prescription-related factors associated with new persistent use. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, and Clinical Classification Software codes were used to identify hysterectomies, preoperative pain and psychiatric diagnoses, surgical indications, and surgical complications included as covariates. RESULTS: We identified 114,260 women who underwent benign hysterectomy and were not prevalent opioid users, of which 93,906 (82.2%) received at least 1 perioperative opioid prescription. Of 93,906 women, 4334 (4.6%) developed new persistent opioid use. Logistic regression demonstrated that new persistent use odds is significantly increased by younger age (18-34 years; adjusted odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-2.30), southern geographic location (adjusted odds ratio, 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.79-2.27), preoperative psychiatric and pain disorders (anxiety: adjusted odds ratio, 1.20 [95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.33]; arthritis: adjusted odds ratio, 1.30 [95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.40]), >1 perioperative prescription (adjusted odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-1.88), mood disorder medication use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-1.64), tobacco smoking (adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-1.89), and surgical complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-2.00). Although statistically nonsignificant, total morphine milligram equivalent of ≥300 in the first perioperative prescription increased persistent use likelihood by 9% (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.17). Dispensing of a first perioperative prescription before the surgery, as opposed to after, increased new persistent use odds by 61% (95% confidence interval, 1.50-1.72). Each additional perioperative day covered by a prescription increased the likelihood of persistent use by 2% (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.03). In contrast, minimally invasive hysterectomy (laparoscopic: adjusted odds ratio, 0.89 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.88]; vaginal: adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.93]) and a more recent surgery year (2016 vs reference 2011: adjusted odds ratio 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.65) significantly decreased its likelihood. CONCLUSION: New persistent opioid use after hysterectomy was associated with several patient, operative, and opioid prescription-related factors. Considering these factors may be beneficial in counseling patients and shared decision-making about perioperative prescription to decrease the risk of persistent opioid use.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Adolescente , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Humanos , Histerectomia , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/epidemiologia , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
16.
Ann Intern Med ; 175(5): 617-627, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35286141

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is concern that state laws to curb opioid prescribing may adversely affect patients with chronic noncancer pain, but the laws' effects are unclear because of challenges in disentangling multiple laws implemented around the same time. OBJECTIVE: To study the association between state opioid prescribing cap laws, pill mill laws, and mandatory prescription drug monitoring program query or enrollment laws and trends in opioid and guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatment among commercially insured adults, including a subgroup with chronic noncancer pain conditions. DESIGN: Thirteen treatment states that implemented a single law of interest in a 4-year period and unique groups of control states for each treatment state were identified. Augmented synthetic control analyses were used to estimate the association between each state law and outcomes. SETTING: United States, 2008 to 2019. PATIENTS: 7 694 514 commercially insured adults aged 18 years or older, including 1 976 355 diagnosed with arthritis, low back pain, headache, fibromyalgia, and/or neuropathic pain. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription or guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatment per month, and mean days' supply and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of prescribed opioids per day, per patient, per month. RESULTS: Laws were associated with small-in-magnitude and non-statistically significant changes in outcomes, although CIs around some estimates were wide. For adults overall and those with chronic noncancer pain, the 13 state laws were each associated with a change of less than 1 percentage point in the proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription and a change of less than 2 percentage points in the proportion receiving any guideline-concordant nonopioid treatment, per month. The laws were associated with a change of less than 1 in days' supply of opioid prescriptions and a change of less than 4 in average monthly MME per day per patient prescribed opioids. LIMITATIONS: Results may not be generalizable to non-commercially insured populations and were imprecise for some estimates. Use of claims data precluded assessment of the clinical appropriateness of pain treatments. CONCLUSION: This study did not identify changes in opioid prescribing or nonopioid pain treatment attributable to state laws. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Drug Abuse.


Assuntos
Analgésicos não Narcóticos , Dor Crônica , Programas de Monitoramento de Prescrição de Medicamentos , Adulto , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Prescrições de Medicamentos , Humanos , Manejo da Dor , Padrões de Prática Médica , Estados Unidos
17.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 70(6): 1685-1694, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35129210

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite controversy among experts regarding aducanumab's approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, little is known about public opinion on this matter. METHODS: We conducted a representative survey of U.S. adults ages 35 and older to (1) determine opinions regarding aducanumab's approval, (2) identify any evidence of reputational injury to the Food and Drug Administration, and (3) explore opinions regarding policy responses available to policymakers, such as those relating to a national coverage determination by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The survey was administered online and in English and Spanish using a probability-based sample derived from the National Opinion Research Center's AmeriSpeak® panel. Selection probabilities in the panel and survey design account for differences in population distribution and expected response rates by demographic. The survey was analyzed using survey weights to adjust for selection probabilities and non-response. RESULTS: A total of 1025 respondents completed the survey. While approximately three-quarters of respondents were initially unfamiliar with aducanumab, respondents were less supportive of the drug's approval once given information about the drug's potential clinical and economic impact. Sixty-three percent of respondents support restricting aducanumab access to patients most likely to benefit. Seventy-one percent indicated a willingness to enroll a family member with mild Alzheimer's disease in a "waitlist"-style trial to further study aducanumab; sixty percent indicated a willingness to enroll a family member in a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Eighty-one percent agree aducanumab should be withdrawn from the market if confirmatory trials fail. The median respondent was willing to pay $1-5 in higher Part B premiums to cover aducanumab. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate support for a range of proposed policies in response to aducanumab's approval. The opinions of an informed public ought to be considered when developing policies in response to aducanumab's approval.


Assuntos
Doença de Alzheimer , Opinião Pública , Idoso , Doença de Alzheimer/tratamento farmacológico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Medicare , Políticas , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
18.
Am J Manag Care ; 28(2): e63-e68, 2022 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35139298

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Deaths from prescription opioids have reached epidemic levels in the United States, yet little is known about how insurers' coverage policies may affect rates of fatal and nonfatal overdose among individuals filling an opioid prescription. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using 2010-2016 Medicare claims data for beneficiaries with 1 or more filled prescriptions for a Schedule II opioid. METHODS: Outcomes were opioid volume dispensed in morphine milligram equivalents (MME), number of days supplied, and number of pills dispensed on each prescription and emergency department or inpatient stay associated with an opioid overdose during a prescription or within 7 days of the end of the prescription. RESULTS: A total of 7.03 million prescriptions for Schedule II opioids were dispensed over 1.87 million Part D beneficiary-years. The 7.03 million opioid prescriptions were associated with 8.5 opioid overdoses per 10,000 prescriptions. Prior authorization was associated with larger opioid volumes per prescription (103.6 MME; 95% CI, 36.2-171.0). Step therapy was associated with a greater number of days supplied (0.62 days; 95% CI, 0.10-1.13) and more pills dispensed (6.12 pills; 95% CI, 2.17-10.1). Quantity limits were associated with smaller opioid volumes (24.3 MME; 95% CI, 12.3-36.3) and fewer pills dispensed (2.35 pills; 95% CI, 1.77-2.93). In adjusted models, beneficiaries filling an opioid requiring prior authorization experienced 3.3 fewer overdoses per 10,000 prescriptions (95% CI, 0.41-6.2). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid utilization management among these beneficiaries was associated with mixed effects on opioid prescribing, and prior authorization was associated with a decreased likelihood of subsequent overdose. Further work exploring the impact of utilization management and insurer policies is needed.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Overdose de Drogas , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Overdose de Drogas/tratamento farmacológico , Overdose de Drogas/epidemiologia , Humanos , Medicare , Padrões de Prática Médica , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
19.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 4(1): e33-e41, 2022 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34806036

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Many individuals take long-term immunosuppressive medications. We evaluated whether these individuals have worse outcomes when hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with non-immunosuppressed individuals. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), the largest longitudinal electronic health record repository of patients in hospital with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 in the USA, between Jan 1, 2020, and June 11, 2021, within 42 health systems. We compared adults with immunosuppressive medications used before admission to adults without long-term immunosuppression. We considered immunosuppression overall, as well as by 15 classes of medication and three broad indications for immunosuppressive medicines. We used Fine and Gray's proportional subdistribution hazards models to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation, with the competing risk of death. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate HRs for in-hospital death. Models were adjusted using doubly robust propensity score methodology. FINDINGS: Among 231 830 potentially eligible adults in the N3C repository who were admitted to hospital with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 during the study period, 222 575 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 59 years [SD 19]; 111 269 [50%] male). The most common comorbidities were diabetes (23%), pulmonary disease (17%), and renal disease (13%). 16 494 (7%) patients had long-term immunosuppression with medications for diverse conditions, including rheumatological disease (33%), solid organ transplant (26%), or cancer (22%). In the propensity score matched cohort (including 12 841 immunosuppressed patients and 29 386 non-immunosuppressed patients), immunosuppression was associated with a reduced risk of invasive ventilation (HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·83-0·96) and there was no overall association between long-term immunosuppression and the risk of in-hospital death. None of the 15 medication classes examined were associated with an increased risk of invasive mechanical ventilation. Although there was no statistically significant association between most drugs and in-hospital death, increases were found with rituximab for rheumatological disease (1·72, 1·10-2·69) and for cancer (2·57, 1·86-3·56). Results were generally consistent across subgroup analyses that considered race and ethnicity or sex, as well as across sensitivity analyses that varied exposure, covariate, and outcome definitions. INTERPRETATION: Among this cohort, with the exception of rituximab, there was no increased risk of mechanical ventilation or in-hospital death for the rheumatological, antineoplastic, or antimetabolite therapies examined. FUNDING: None.

20.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 114(2): 191-202, 2022 02 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33830214

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: For nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), 3 drugs under patent protection-apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide-were approved based on randomized, placebo-controlled trials; 1 drug with generic availability, abiraterone acetate, showed efficacy in a single-arm trial and is commonly prescribed. Lacking head-to-head trials, the optimal treatment for nmCRPC is unknown, despite widely varied treatment costs. We compared the efficacy and safety of nmCRPC treatments. METHODS: We searched bibliographic databases, regulatory documents, and trial registries for nmCRPC trials. We included published results and, when available, original data. We performed matching-adjusted indirect comparison and network meta-analysis and compared treatments regarding metastasis-free survival, overall survival, and serious adverse events. RESULTS: We analyzed 5 trials with 4360 participants. Compared with placebo, abiraterone acetate engendered the lowest hazard of metastasis and death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.22, 95% credible interval [CrI] = 0.12-0.41), followed by apalutamide (HR = 0.28, 95% CrI = 0.23-0.34), enzalutamide (HR = 0.30, 95% CrI = 0.25-0.36), and darolutamide (HR = 0.41, 95% CrI = 0.34-0.49); darolutamide led to the lowest hazard of death (HR = 0.69, 95% CrI = 0.53-0.90), followed by enzalutamide (HR = 0.73, 95% CrI = 0.61-0.87) and apalutamide (HR = 0.75, 95% CrI = 0.59-0.95); darolutamide resulted in the lowest odds of serious adverse events (odds ratio [OR] = 1.32, 95% CrI = 1.02-1.70), followed by enzalutamide (OR =1.43, 95% CrI = 1.08-1.89), apalutamide (OR = 1.58, 95% CrI = 1.23-2.03), and abiraterone acetate (OR = 1.94, 95% CrI = 1.17-3.22). CONCLUSIONS: For nmCRPC, darolutamide offered optimal efficacy and safety among approved drugs, and abiraterone acetate may offer comparable metastasis-free survival benefit with cost savings from generic availability. Future research is needed to more fully examine the benefit of abiraterone acetate.


Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Humanos , Masculino , Metanálise em Rede , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...