Exacerbations, treatment patterns, utilization, and costs before and after initiating of benralizumab for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the number of exacerbations, counts of eosinophils, and asthma-related symptoms 1 year before and after initiating benralizumab for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. METHODS: Patients with prior exacerbations and newly initiating benralizumab were identified in the claims-based Healthcare Integrated Research Database. Claims were used to assess benralizumab treatment patterns, exacerbations, healthcare resource utilization, and other asthma medication used. Among a subset of patients, medical records were abstracted for Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores and asthma symptoms. RESULTS: There were 506 patients meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria for claims-based analyses and 123 for medical-record analyses. The number of patients experiencing exacerbations significantly decreased from baseline to follow-up (40% reduction, McNemar's χ2 = 204.00, p < .001). The mean number of exacerbations also decreased from 3.2 (1.5) to 1.2 (1.4) (paired t = 24.45, p < .001; Cohen's D = 1.09). The effects were larger among patients with eosinophils ≥300 cells/µL. Among patients with an ACT available for baseline and follow-up (n = 47), there was a significant reduction in the number of patients with scores <19 (72% vs. 45%, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with benralizumab resulted in fewer exacerbations, reduced utilization, and improved ACT scores. This study demonstrates that benralizumab is an effective treatment option for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma.

Adherence and persistence among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating dulaglutide compared with semaglutide and exenatide BCise: 6-month follow-up from US real-world data.

AIM: To compare 6-month adherence, persistence and treatment patterns among patients initiating once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), dulaglutide versus semaglutide, and dulaglutide versus exenatide BCise, using claims from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years, with type 2 diabetes, ≥1 claim for dulaglutide, semaglutide or exenatide BCise during the index period February 2018 to December 2018 (index date = earliest GLP-1RA fill date), no claim for GLP-1RAs in the 6-month pre-index period, and continuous enrolment 6 months pre- and post-index were included. Dulaglutide users were propensity-matched 1:1 to semaglutide users (3852 pairs) or exenatide BCise users (1879 pairs). The proportions of adherent (proportion of days covered ≥80%) patients were compared using chi-squared tests. Persistence, measured as days to discontinuation, was analysed using a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Matched cohorts (dulaglutide:semaglutide and dulagutide:exenatide BCise) were balanced in baseline characteristics and the mean age was 54 and 55 years, respectively, with approximately 51% and 49% women, respectively. At 6 months, significantly more dulaglutide users were adherent than semaglutide (59.7% vs. 42.7%; P <0.0001) or exenatide BCise users (58.1% vs. 40.3%; P <0.0001). Cox regression showed that dulaglutide users were less likely to discontinue therapy than semaglutide (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66, 0.76) or exenatide BCise users (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.53, 0.65; P <0.0001, both). CONCLUSION: At 6-month follow-up, a higher proportion of patients initiating dulaglutide were adherent to and persistent with their treatment, compared to matched patients initiating either semaglutide or exenatide BCise.

Comparative Effectiveness of Persistent Use of a Name-Brand Levothyroxine (Synthroid®) vs. Persistent Use of Generic Levothyroxine on TSH Goal Achievement: A Retrospective Study Among Patients with Hypothyroidism in a Managed Care Setting.

INTRODUCTION: Levothyroxine monotherapy (Synthroid® or multiple generic levothyroxine [GL] formulations) is standard treatment for hypothyroidism. Our objective was to compare effectiveness (as measured by achievement of thyroid-stimulating hormone [TSH] levels) and economic outcomes of Synthroid vs. any one of multiple GLs in patients with hypothyroidism. METHODS: Data for this retrospective cohort study were obtained from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database®. All study patients had ≥ 2 claims between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2017 with ICD-9/10-CM diagnosis codes for hypothyroidism; were persistent users of Synthroid vs. any GL; and had ≥ 1 TSH laboratory result during 12-month follow-up. Patients were divided into one of two cohorts based on index medication and were 1:1 matched using propensity scores. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with last TSH laboratory result during follow-up within the reference range (0.3-4.12 mIU/L). Secondary outcomes included all-cause and hypothyroidism-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, the Synthroid and GL cohorts each contained 18,382 patients. At follow-up, significantly more patients receiving Synthroid were in the TSH reference range vs. GL (78.5% vs. 77.2%, respectively, p = 0.002). HCRU and costs were broadly similar between the cohorts in terms of all-cause inpatient hospitalizations, emergency department visits, outpatient services, and pharmacy fills. Irrespective of index medication, patients with TSH within the reference range had significantly lower hypothyroidism-related medical and total costs compared to those outside the range. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world data study showed Synthroid was associated with better TSH target achievement vs. GL in a US managed care population. Achieving TSH goals may provide substantial economic value by reducing hypothyroidism-related HCRU and costs.

Treatment Experiences with CDK4&6 Inhibitors Among Women with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: To describe patients' perspectives on the use of and potential challenges and barriers with adherence/persistence to cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4&6i's) to treat metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: This qualitative study consisted of 60-minute semi-structured telephone interviews with patients with MBC in the US who were either current or recent CDK4&6i users, identified from administrative claims of survey-eligible commercial and Medicare Advantage patients in the HealthCore Integrated Research Database between November 1, 2018 and November 1, 2019. Patients were recruited by email and/or mailed letter. The 60-minute telephone interviews were conducted by a trained facilitator using a study-developed interview discussion guide that included topics impacting treatment choice and adherence/persistence. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: All 462 eligible patients were sent a recruitment email and/or letter to which 36 patients responded, consented to participate, and met study inclusion criteria; 25 patients scheduled interviews, and 24 completed them. Study participants were predominately white, non-Hispanic (96%) with a mean age of 59.5 years. Participants reported a largely positive experience and mentioned very few adherence/persistence issues. They further reported appreciating the ease and convenience of oral oncolytics, coped with side effects, had strong medical and social support, and experienced few cost issues. CONCLUSION: The few adherence/persistence issues reported by participants contrasts with other findings of suboptimal oral oncolytic use. Interview themes indicated several factors that likely contributed to the lack of adherence/persistence issues: trusted relationship with oncologist, belief in importance of medication, positive medication views, strong medical and social support, and minimal personal drug cost. Future research should focus on whether and how much these factors impact adherence/persistence in more diverse populations. If adherence/persistence issues are identified in these populations, then it would be appropriate to study the development of interventions that target factors associated with better adherence/persistence.

Ethnomedicine in Himalaya: a case study from Dolpa, Humla, Jumla and Mustang districts of Nepal.

Traditional plant use in Nepal has been documented for millennia. The importance of plants as medicine has not diminished in any way in recent times, and traditional medicines are still the most important health care source for the vast majority of the population. This paper examines the ethnobotany and traditional use of plants extracted from the vulnerable alpine zone in the Dolpa, Humla, Jumla and Mustang districts of Nepal. The results of this ethnobotanical study indicate that a very large number of plant species is used as traditional medicines. There were 107, 59, 44 and 166 species of ethnomedicinal importance in surveyed areas of Dolpa, Humla, Jumla and Mustang district respectively. Of these, 84 common species, used at least in two districts, were selected to enumerate their ethnomedicinal properties. The 84 species belonged to 75 genera and 39 families. The commonest species in this pharmacopoeia were: Allium wallichii, Cordyceps sinensis, Dactylorhiza hatagirea, and Rheum australe. A total of 21 species were most common in three districts and 59 in two districts. The genera Aconitum, Allium, Arisaema, Berberis, Corydalis, Gentiana, Hippophae, Juniperus and Rhododendron each possessed two species with ethnomedicinal use. Labiatae was the most medicinally important family with five species used, followed by Araceae, Compositae, Liliaceae, Polygonaceae, Ranunculaceae, Scrophulariaceae and Umbelliferae, each contributing four species.