Healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with a newly confirmed diagnosis of lupus nephritis in the United States over a 5-year follow-up period.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and healthcare costs in patients with newly confirmed lupus nephritis (LN) in the United States over a 5-year follow-up period. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study (GSK Study 214102) utilized administrative claims data to identify individuals with a newly confirmed diagnosis of LN between August 01, 2011, and July 31, 2018, based on LN-specific International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes. Index was the date of first LN-related diagnosis code claim. HCRU, healthcare costs, and incidence of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares were reported annually among eligible patients with at least 5 years continuous enrollment post-index. RESULTS: Of 2,159 patients with a newly confirmed diagnosis of LN meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, 335 had at least 5 years continuous enrollment post-index. HCRU was greatest in the first year post-LN diagnosis across all categories (inpatient admission, emergency room [ER] visits, ambulatory visits, and pharmacy use), and trended lower, though remained substantial, in the 5-year follow-up period. Among patients with LN and HCRU, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) number of ER visits and inpatient admissions were 3.7 (4.6) and 1.8 (1.5), respectively, in Year 1, which generally remained stable in Years 2-5; the mean (SD) number of ambulatory visits and pharmacy fills were 35.8 (25.1) and 62.9 (43.8), respectively, in Year 1, and remained similar for Years 2-5. Most patients (≥ 91.6%) had ≥ 1 SLE flare in each of the 5 years of follow-up. The proportion of patients who experienced a severe SLE flare was higher in Year 1 (31.6%) than subsequent years (14.3-18.5%). Total costs (medical and pharmacy; mean [SD]) were higher in Year 1 ($44,205 [71,532]) than subsequent years ($29,444 [52,310]-$32,222 [58,216]), driven mainly by inpatient admissions (Year 1: $21,181 [58,886]; subsequent years: $7,406 [23,331]-$9,389 [29,283]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a newly confirmed diagnosis of LN have substantial HCRU and healthcare costs, particularly in the year post-diagnosis, largely driven by inpatient costs. This highlights the need for improved disease management to prevent renal damage, improve patient outcomes, and reduce costs among patients with renal involvement.

The cost of flares among patients with systemic lupus erythematosus with and without lupus nephritis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Assess healthcare costs associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares among patients with and without lupus nephritis (LN). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used medical and pharmacy claims data from the United States-based Optum Clinformatics database to identify adults with SLE between 1 January 2016, and 31 December 2018. Index was the date of a patient's earliest SLE diagnosis claim during the identification period. Patients were categorized based on ICD-9/-10 diagnosis codes into one of two cohorts: SLE with LN (LN) and SLE without LN (non-LN). Baseline characteristics were assessed in the 12 months preceding index (baseline period). The presence, severity, and healthcare costs (in 2019 US dollars) of flares were determined in the 12 months following index (follow-up period). RESULTS: Overall, 11,663 patients with SLE were included (LN, n = 2916; non-LN, n = 8747). During the baseline period, a greater proportion of patients in the LN cohort versus non-LN cohort had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥4 (72.5% vs 13.7%) and inpatient stays (41.0% vs 17.0%). A total of 12,190 flares were identified during the follow-up period (LN, 3494; non-LN, 8696). A greater proportion of flares experienced by patients with LN versus those without LN were moderate (61.2% vs 53.6%) and severe (10.6% vs 5.4%). The mean (standard deviation [SD]) number of moderate and severe flares per patient was greater among the LN cohort than the non-LN cohort (moderate: LN, 1.8 [1.2] and non-LN, 1.4 [1.2]; severe: LN, 0.2 [0.6] and non-LN, 0.1 [0.3]). The mean (SD) total healthcare costs associated with SLE flares of any severity were greater for patients with LN (LN, $5842 [9604]; non-LN, $2600 [4249]). The mean (SD) cost per flare increased with severity (mild: LN, $2753 [4640] and non-LN, $1606 [2710]; moderate: LN, $4561 [7156] and non-LN, $2587 [3720]; severe: LN, $29,148 [27,273] and non-LN, $14,829 [19,533]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SLE with LN have greater healthcare costs than those without LN. Flares among patients with LN were more frequent, severe, and costly than among patients without LN. This highlights the need for treatments that prevent or reduce flares among patients with SLE, both with and without LN.

An evaluation of costs associated with overall organ damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 33-50% of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) develop organ damage within 5 years of diagnosis. Real-world studies that capture the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs associated with SLE-related organ damage are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate HCRU and costs associated with organ damage in patients with SLE in the USA. METHODS: This retrospective study (GSK study 208380) used the PharMetrics Plus administrative claims database from 1 January 2008 to 30 June 2019. Patients with SLE and organ damage were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 codes derived from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index. The first observed diagnosis of organ damage was designated as the index date. Selection criteria included: ≥18 years of age; ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims for SLE (≥30 days apart before the index date; ICD-9: 710.0 or ICD-10: M32, excluding M32.0); ≥1 inpatient or ≥3 outpatient claims for organ damage within 6 months for the same organ system code; continuous enrollment of 12 months both pre- and post-index date. The proportion of patients with new organ damage, disease severity, SLE flares, SLE-related medication patterns, HCRU and all-cause costs (2018 US$) were assessed 12 months pre- and post-index date. RESULTS: Of the 360,803 patients with a diagnosis of SLE, 8952 patients met the inclusion criteria for the presence of new organ damage. Mean (standard deviation (SD)) age was 46.4 (12.2) years and 92% of patients were female. The most common sites of organ damage were neuropsychiatric (22.0%), ocular (12.9%), and cardiovascular (11.4%). Disease severity and proportion of moderate/severe flare episodes significantly increased from pre- to post-index date (p < 0.0001). Overall, SLE-related medication patterns were similar pre- versus post-index date. Inpatient, emergency department and outpatient claims increased from pre- to post-index date and mean (SD) all-cause costs were 71% higher post- versus pre-index date ($26,998 [57,982] vs $15,746 [29,637], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The economic impact associated with organ damage in patients with SLE is profound and reducing or preventing organ damage will be pivotal in alleviating the burden for patients and healthcare providers.

Prevalence of Eosinophilic Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis and Associated Health Care Utilization Among Patients With Concomitant Asthma in US Commercial Claims Database.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence and associated disease burden of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) in patients with asthma from a US claims database. METHODS: Two cohorts were defined using enrollees (aged ≥18 years) from the Optum deidentified Clinformatics Datamart claims database 2010-2014, based on validated EGPA case definitions with varying specificity: EGPA 1 (main cohort; more specific; patients with 2 codes [in any combination] within 12 months of each other for eosinophilia, vasculitis, or mononeuritis multiplex) and EGPA 2 (sensitivity analysis cohort; less specific; patients with 2 codes of above conditions and/or neurologic symptoms within 12 months of each other). Patients had 3 or more asthma medications in the 12-month baseline before index date (date of the second code). Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis prevalence, asthma severity during the baseline period, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, and health care utilization during the 12-month follow-up period were determined. RESULTS: Overall, 88 and 604 patients were included in main cohort EGPA 1 and sensitivity analysis cohort EGPA 2, respectively; corresponding annual EGPA prevalence rates were 3.2 to 5.9 and 23.4 to 30.7 cases/million patients. Approximately 75% of patients were prescribed OCS and ~30% experienced 1 or more hospitalization; 75% in EGPA 1 and 52% in EGPA 2 with 1 or more non-OCS prescription in the 90 days before index date had severe asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis prevalence estimates varied based on specificity of the case definition but were generally consistent with previous country-specific estimates. Despite differences in prevalence, both cohorts displayed a generally similar, high burden of OCS use and health care utilization, highlighting the substantial disease burden among patients with EGPA and the need for specific treatments.

Impact of mepolizumab on exacerbations in severe asthma: Results from a U.S. insurance claims data base.

Background: In controlled clinical studies, mepolizumab has been shown to reduce exacerbation rates and the use of oral corticosteroids as well as improve asthma control and health-related quality of life compared with placebo in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. However, real-world data on the impact of mepolizumab on clinical outcomes are limited. Objective: To evaluate the effect of mepolizumab on asthma exacerbations and asthma exacerbation-related costs in patients with severe asthma in U.S. clinical practice. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used U.S. administrative claims data from patients ages ≥12 years and with severe asthma at mepolizumab treatment initiation (index date; identification period, January 2015-June 2017) who had received two or more mepolizumab administrations within 180 days of the index date and had no evidence of treatment with another asthma biologic. The exacerbation rate and exacerbation-related costs were assessed in both the 12 months before mepolizumab initiation (baseline period) and the following 12 months (follow-up period). A clinical trial-like cohort was identified, defined as patients with two or more baseline exacerbations and ≥10 administrations during follow-up. Results: A total of 201 patients were included in the overall population and 74 patients in the clinical trial-like cohort. Mepolizumab significantly reduced the exacerbation rate between the baseline and follow-up periods in both the overall population and the clinical trial-like cohort (p < 0.001), which corresponded to 33.6% and 48.6% reductions, respectively. The rate of exacerbations in patients who required hospitalization between the baseline and follow-up periods was also reduced by 35.3% (p = 0.080) and 68.2% (p = 0.015) in the overall population and in the clinical trial-like cohort, respectively. Cost data were inconclusive. Conclusion: This study, which used real-world data, demonstrated that mepolizumab is associated with reductions in asthma exacerbations, in line with the findings from controlled clinical studies. These results provided further evidence of the effectiveness of mepolizumab in a real-world setting.

Health-related quality of life in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a multinational, cross-sectional study.

AIM: To estimate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). METHOD: HRQOL was assessed using the Health Utilities Index Questionnaire (HUI) and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) neuromuscular module version 3.0 online. Results were stratified by disease stage (early/late ambulatory/non-ambulatory) and caregivers' perceptions of patients' health and mental status. RESULTS: A total of 770 patient-caregiver pairs (173 German, 122 Italian, 191 UK, and 284 USA) participated. Most caregivers (>84%) perceived their patients as happy/somewhat happy and in excellent/very good/good health, irrespective of current ambulatory class. In contrast, mean patient utility (reflecting public preferences: 0, dead; 1, perfect health) deteriorated with disease course, from 0.75 in early ambulatory males to 0.15 in the most severely affected patients. Mean patient PedsQL scores (0-100, higher score indicating better HRQOL) decreased from 80 to 57 across ambulatory classes. INTERPRETATION: HRQOL in DMD, measured through public preferences, is substantially impaired in relation to the general population and significantly associated with disease progression. Still, most patients are perceived as happy and in good health by their caregivers, indicating that influential domains of HRQOL remain intact through the disease progression. Our findings emphasize the challenges in measuring HRQOL in a rare, progressive childhood condition such as DMD.

Evaluating the real-world effectiveness of belimumab in patients with SLE using SLE-related laboratory values and rheumatoid arthritis-derived disease activity measures: RAPID3, swollen joint count and tender joint count.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the real-world impact of intravenous belimumab treatment among patients with SLE using rheumatoid arthritis-derived disease activity measures and SLE-related laboratory values. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used US electronic medical record data from the United Rheumatology Normalised Integrated Community Evidence (UR-NICE) database. Adult patients with SLE who initiated intravenous belimumab between 1 January 2012 and 3 December 2019 (index), had 12 months of pre-index and 24 months of post-index clinical activity, and had ≥6 infusions of belimumab during the 24 months post-index were included. The primary outcome measure was time to first improvement of minimally important difference (MID) for Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), Patient Pain Index (PPI), swollen joint count, tender joint count (TJC), complement C3 and C4 and anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies during the on-treatment follow-up period of up to 24 months. The secondary outcome measure evaluated the trajectories of these outcome measures for up to 24 months of belimumab treatment. RESULTS: Of 495 patients included, between 21.0% and 52.1% had ≥1 record for each of the disease activity measures or laboratory values in the pre-index and post-index periods and were included in analyses for that measure. The proportion of patients achieving MID for each measure increased rapidly within 3 months, with continued gradual improvement throughout the remaining on-treatment period, up to 24 months. After 6 months, 52.3% and 55.3% of patients had achieved MID in RAPID3 and PPI, respectively. Outcome measure trajectories indicated improved disease activity with belimumab treatment, particularly in RAPID3, TJC and laboratory values. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world effectiveness study, belimumab therapy for SLE resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in rheumatoid arthritis-derived disease activity measures within 3 months of treatment, with patients who remained on belimumab therapy experiencing improvement even up to 24 months of observation.

Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab in preventing hospitalization and mortality in high-risk patients with COVID-19 in the United States: A cohort study from the Mayo Clinic electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: To describe outcomes of high-risk patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated with sotrovimab, other monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), or antivirals, and patients who did not receive early COVID-19 treatment. We also evaluate the comparative effectiveness of sotrovimab versus no treatment in preventing severe clinical outcomes. METHODS: This observational retrospective cohort study analyzed Mayo Clinic electronic health records. Non-hospitalized adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from May 26, 2021 and April 23, 2022 and at high risk of COVID-19 progression were eligible. The primary outcome was 29-day all-cause hospitalization and/or death. Outcomes were described for patients treated with sotrovimab, other mAbs, or antivirals, and eligible but untreated patients, and compared between sotrovimab-treated and propensity score (PS)-matched untreated cohorts. RESULTS: We included 35,485 patients (sotrovimab, 1369; other mAbs, 6488; antivirals, 133; high-risk untreated, 27,495). A low proportion of patients treated with sotrovimab (n = 33/1369, 2.4%), other mAbs (n = 147/6488, 2.3%), or antivirals (n = 2/133, 1.5%) experienced all-cause hospitalization or death. Among high-risk untreated patients, the percentage of all-cause hospitalization or death was 3.3% (n = 910/27,495). In the PS-matched analysis, 2.5% (n = 21/854) of sotrovimab-treated patients experienced all-cause hospitalization and/or death versus 2.8% (n = 48/1708) of untreated patients (difference, -0.4%; p = 0.66). Significantly fewer sotrovimab-treated patients required intensive care unit admission (0.5% vs 1.8%; difference, -1.3%; p = 0.002) or respiratory support (3.5% vs 8.7%; difference, -5.2%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of sotrovimab-treated and PS-matched untreated patients experiencing 29-day all-cause hospitalization or mortality, although significantly fewer sotrovimab-treated patients required intensive care unit admission or respiratory support.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19: Evidence from the US National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been an unprecedented healthcare crisis, one that threatened to overwhelm health systems and prompted an urgent need for early treatment options for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe disease. Randomised clinical trials established the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) early in the pandemic; in vitro data subsequently led to use of the mAbs being discontinued, without clear evidence on how these data were linked to outcomes. In this study, we describe and compare real-world outcomes for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 treated with sotrovimab versus untreated patients. METHODS: Electronic health records from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) were used to identify US patients (aged ≥ 12 years) diagnosed with COVID-19 (positive test or ICD-10: U07.1) in an ambulatory setting (27 September 2021-30 April 2022) who met Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) high-risk criteria. Patients receiving the mAb sotrovimab within 10 days of diagnosis were assigned to the sotrovimab cohort, with the day of infusion as the index date. Untreated patients (no evidence of early mAb treatment, prophylactic mAb or oral antiviral treatment) were assigned to the untreated cohort, with an imputed index date based on the time distribution between diagnosis and sotrovimab infusion in the sotrovimab cohort. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation or death (both all-cause) within 29 days of index, reported as descriptive rate and adjusted [via inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)] odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Of nearly 2.9 million patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the analysis period, 4992 met the criteria for the sotrovimab cohort, and 541,325 were included in the untreated cohort. Before weighting, significant differences were noted between the cohorts; for example, patients in the sotrovimab cohort were older (60 years versus 54 years), were more likely to be white (85% versus 75%) and met more EUA criteria (mean 3.1 versus 2.2) versus the untreated cohort. The proportions of patients with 29-day hospitalisation or death were 3.5% (176/4992) and 4.5% (24,163/541,325) in the sotrovimab and untreated cohorts, respectively (unadjusted OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.91; p = 0.001). In adjusted analysis, sotrovimab was associated with a 25% reduction in the odds of hospitalisation or death compared with the untreated cohort (IPTW-adjusted OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.92; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Sotrovimab demonstrated clinical effectiveness in preventing severe outcomes (hospitalisation, mortality) in the period 27 September 2021-30 April 2022, which included Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants and an early surge of Omicron BA.2 variant.

A cross-sectional survey to assess the migraineur's medication decision-making beliefs: determining when a migraine is triptan-worthy.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the factors that influence a migraineur's beliefs regarding oral triptans for the acute treatment of migraines and to provide further insight into patients' decision-making process when faced with migraine. METHODS: A multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study of subjects currently prescribed an oral triptan medication for the acute treatment of migraine headaches. Subjects were recruited from 6 headache clinics and one primary care practice in the United States. Enrolled subjects completed a questionnaire that could be completed either at the site as part of the visit or at home. The questionnaire comprised 27 questions assessing demographic characteristics, migraine history, migraine frequency and severity, and general beliefs about migraine treatments. The study population was stratified into 2 cohorts (Early Treatment and Delayed Treatment) based on how they typically use their oral triptan to treat a typical migraine. RESULTS: A total 506 subjects were enrolled in the study, of which 502 were stratified into the Early Treatment cohort (41.2%) and Delayed Treatment cohort (58.8%). Demographic and clinical characteristics were generally similar between the 2 cohorts. In terms of general treatment patterns, there were notable differences between the Delayed and Early Treatment cohorts, with the Delayed Treatment cohort significantly more likely to take an over-the-counter (OTC) or non-triptan medication first (P ≤ .001) and only take a triptan if the OTC or non-triptan medication did not work (P ≤ .001). Furthermore, 55% of the Delayed Treatment cohort delayed taking a triptan to be certain that the headache was a migraine (vs 32% of the Early Treatment cohort; P ≤ .001). When asked to specify the reasons for delaying treatment with a triptan, the Delayed Treatment cohort had, in general, greater concerns about using their oral triptan in comparison with the Early Treatment cohort. In particular, respondents were primarily concerned with running out of their triptan medication with 35% of the Delayed Treatment cohort expressing this concern compared with 22% of the Early Treatment cohort (P ≤ .001). Statistically significant differences were also noted for concerns about taking medications (P ≤ .001), side effects (P ≤ .05), expense (P ≤ .01), and taking prescription medications (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: Results build upon previously published studies and suggest that patient beliefs directly influence how migraineurs manage their migraines and have implications for patient outcomes. Such insights should be used to facilitate physician-patient communication and reinforce the need for patient-centered care to improve patient outcomes.

A randomized, controlled trial of gabapentin enacarbil in subjects with neuropathic pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentin enacarbil (GEn), a transported prodrug of gabapentin, provides sustained, dose-proportional gabapentin exposure. The purpose of this study was to investigate the dose response of GEn to select the optimal dose(s) for clinical use in subsequent diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) trials. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial with a study duration of approximately 20 weeks (Clinicaltrials.gov database, Identifier ! NCT00643760). Pregabalin (PGB) (Lyrica(®) ; Pfizer Inc.) was used as an active control to provide assay sensitivity of the trial. A total of 421 adult subjects with DPN were randomized in a ratio of 2:1:1:1:2 to receive oral GEn 3,600 mg/day, GEn 2,400 mg/day, GEn 1,200 mg/day, PGB 300 mg/day, or matching placebo, respectively. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to end of maintenance treatment with respect to the mean 24-hour average pain intensity score based on an 11-point Pain Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (PI-NRS). Safety and tolerability assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratory evaluations, vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECG), neurological examination, and pedal edema. RESULTS: The adjusted mean difference vs. placebo at the end of maintenance treatment with respect to the mean 24-hour average PI-NRS pain intensity score for GEn 1,200 mg (-0.35; [95% CI: -1.02, 0.31]; P = 0.295), GEn 2,400 mg (-0.02; [95% CI: -0.71, 0.66]; P = 0.946), and GEn 3,600 mg (-0.55; [95% CI: -1.10, 0.01]; P = 0.105) was not statistically significant. The active control, PGB (300 mg/day), did not differentiate from placebo. CONCLUSION: Overall, none of the GEn treatment groups differentiated from placebo. Analyses of the secondary endpoints showed comparable results across treatment groups. However, the majority of the endpoints, including all of the pain endpoints, showed the largest numerical treatment difference was between GEn 3,600 mg and placebo. The active control, PGB (300 mg/day), did not differentiate from placebo.

Real-World Clinical Outcomes in Belimumab-Treated US African American and Hispanic Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Retrospective, Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: This analysis aims to describe real-world clinical outcomes in US African American and Hispanic patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) receiving belimumab. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of OBSErve US (GSK Study 117,295) data, patients received intravenous belimumab (10 mg/kg) over 24 months. Outcomes assessed every 6 months after belimumab initiation (index) included: physician-assessed overall clinical response (worse, no improvement, < 20%, 20-49%, 50-79%, ≥ 80% improvement), physician-assessed disease severity (mild, moderate, severe), oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). RESULTS: Of 501 patients enrolled, 123 and 88 were African American and Hispanic respectively; 69 (56.1%) and 43 (48.8%) were receiving belimumab at 24 months. Of those, 88.4%/95.3% (African American/Hispanic) were female; mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 41.6 (12.5)/42.2 (10.5) years. Within 6 months post-index, 91.3%/90.7% of patients still receiving belimumab had a ≥ 20% physician-assessed clinical improvement. Among 24 months completers, proportions of patients with severe SLE fell from 34.8%/25.6% at index to 2.9%/4.7% at Month 6 and 2.9%/0% at Month 24. The proportion of patients receiving OCS and mean (SD) daily OCS dose also decreased, from 82.6%/81.4% and 19.7 (12.8)/18.8 (10.0) mg/day at index to 50.7%/34.9% and 3.1 (3.2)/1.6 (2.4) mg/day at Month 24. Fewer patients were hospitalized or required ancillary care services at 18-24 months post-index versus 6 months pre-index. CONCLUSION: Belimumab treatment for up to 2 years improved clinical outcomes, disease severity, mean OCS dose and HCRU in US African American and Hispanic patients with SLE, providing real-world evidence for enduring belimumab effectiveness in populations that are markedly impacted by SLE.

Retrospective Analysis of the Burden of Illness of Eosinophilic Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis (EGPA) Versus Asthma in Commercially Insured US Patients.

Background and aim Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a rare inflammatory disorder associated with the presence of blood and tissue eosinophilia, extravascular granulomas, and asthma. Currently, the burden of EGPA on the patient and the healthcare system is not well characterized. This study aimed to assess the real-world clinical and economic burden of disease in adult patients with EGPA compared with matched patients with asthma without EGPA. Methods This retrospective cohort study used medical, pharmacy, enrolment, and demographic data from a US administrative claims database (PharMetrics Plus). Patients ≥18 years old, with ≥six months of continuous health plan enrolment in the baseline period, and ≥12 months of continuous health plan enrolment in the follow-up period were eligible for this analysis. Patients with EGPA and patients with asthma without EGPA were identified using diagnosis codes and were subsequently matched 1:5 (e.g., one patient with EGPA matched with five patients with asthma, without EGPA) based on baseline characteristics. The primary outcome measure was all-cause healthcare costs; secondary outcomes included healthcare resource utilization, medication usage, and clinical characteristics. Results In the final matched cohorts, there were 7183 patients with EGPA and 35,915 patients with asthma without EGPA. During the follow-up period, mean total all-cause healthcare costs were significantly higher in patients with EGPA than in those with asthma without EGPA (mean {standard deviation}: $44,405 {$82,060} vs $24,487 {$54,691}; p<0.0001). Patients with EGPA had mean total all-cause healthcare costs that were 73.9% greater than those in patients with asthma without EGPA, even after applying a multivariable analysis to adjust for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics. Medication usage was consistently higher in the EGPA population than in the asthma population (excepting short-acting ß2-agonists). The majority of patients in the EGPA population (83.1%) also experienced ≥one relapse during the study period, with 26.3% of patients in the EGPA population experiencing a major relapse. Conclusions There is a significantly greater economic and clinical burden associated with EGPA compared with asthma without EGPA in adults. These results underscore the unmet need in this patient population for improved disease control strategies that will reduce the burden of EGPA on patients and the healthcare system.

Clinical and Economic Burden of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in the Years Preceding End-Stage Kidney Disease Diagnosis: A Retrospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to describe the clinical burden, healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) and healthcare costs for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the 12-60 months preceding an end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) diagnosis in the USA. METHODS: This retrospective observational study identified adult patients with SLE with newly diagnosed ESKD between 1 March 2012 and 31 December 2018 using administrative claims data. Clinical characteristics, mean all-cause HCRU (i.e. any HCRU visit and pharmacy fill) and total all-cause healthcare costs (comprising medical and pharmacy costs in 2019 US dollars) were assessed during the 12 months pre-ESKD diagnosis and yearly during the 5 years pre-ESKD diagnosis among patients with ≥ 5 years of continuous health plan enrolment. RESULTS: Of the 1356 patients included, 51.2% had severe SLE, 71.2% had lupus nephritis (LN) and 20.6% underwent kidney biopsy during the 12 months pre-ESKD. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) number of HCRU visits during the 12 months pre-ESKD was 78.0 (64.1) per patient. The mean (SD) total healthcare costs per patient in the 12 months pre-ESKD diagnosis was $64,887 (106,822), driven by medical costs $51,764 (96,458). The proportions of patients with severe SLE, LN and those undergoing biopsy increased from year 5 to year 1 pre-ESKD diagnosis. The mean (SD) number of HCRU visits increased from year 5 (61.6 [54.0]) to year 1 (83.2 [62.1]) pre-ESKD. Mean (SD) total healthcare costs rose year on year from year 5 ($34,890 [74,346]) to year 1 ($73,236 [114,584]) pre-ESKD. CONCLUSION: There were substantial clinical burden and healthcare costs among patients with SLE in the 12 months pre-ESKD diagnosis. The clinical burden and healthcare costs generally increased with each year approaching ESKD diagnosis. Early interventions for patients with SLE could prevent the development of ESKD, mitigating the burden of the disease.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Associated Costs in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Diagnosed With Lupus Nephritis.

BACKGROUND: Lupus nephritis (LN) is among the most severe organ manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), affecting between 31% and 48% of patients, usually within five years of SLE diagnosis. SLE without LN is associated with a high economic burden on the healthcare system, and although data are limited, several studies have shown that SLE with LN could increase this burden.  Aim: We aimed to compare the economic burden of LN versus SLE without LN among patients managed in routine clinical practices in the USA and describe the clinical course of these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage health insurance. It included 2310 patients with LN and 2310 matched patients who had SLE without LN; each patient was followed for 12 months after diagnosis (the patient's index date). Outcome measures included healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), direct healthcare costs, and SLE clinical manifestations.  Results: In all healthcare settings, the mean (SD) use of all-cause healthcare resources was significantly higher in the LN versus SLE without LN cohort, including the mean number of ambulatory visits (53.9 (55.1) vs 33.0 (26.0)), emergency room visits (2.9 (7.9) vs 1.6 (3.3)), inpatient stays (0.9 (1.5) vs 0.3 (0.8)), and pharmacy fills (65.0 (48.3) vs 51.2 (42.6)) (all p<0.001). Total all-cause costs per patient in the LN cohort were also significantly higher compared with the SLE without LN cohort ($50,975 (86,281) vs $26,262 (52,720), p<0.001), including costs for inpatient stays and outpatient visits. Clinically, a significantly higher proportion of patients with LN experienced moderate or severe SLE flares compared with the SLE without LN cohort (p<0.001), which may explain the difference in HCRU and healthcare costs. CONCLUSION: All-cause HCRU and costs were higher for patients with LN than for matched patients with SLE without LN, highlighting the economic burden associated with LN.

Prolonged oral corticosteroid treatment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: An evaluation of 12-month economic and clinical burden.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged, high-dose corticosteroid treatment for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is associated with substantial health care costs, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and adverse events (AEs). OBJECTIVE: To compare all-cause health care costs, HCRU, and oral corticosteroid (OCS)-related AEs among patients with prevalent OCS use and patients without OCS use. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study (GSK study 214100) used claims data from the IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims - US, IQVIA, Inc, database between January 1, 2006, and July 31, 2019, to identify patients with SLE. Patients with at least 1 OCS pharmacy claim during the study period and continuous OCS use during the 6-month pre-index (baseline) period (index date is the date of the first OCS claim following 6 months' continuous use) formed the "prevalent OCS use cohort." This cohort was subdivided based on the level of OCS exposure during the 12-month observation period, ie, the number of 6-month periods of greater than 5 mg/day OCS use (0, 1, or 2). Patients without OCS claims formed the "no OCS use cohort." All patients had continuous enrollment during the baseline and observation periods, had at least 1 inpatient or at least 2 outpatient SLE diagnosis codes during baseline, and were aged at least 5 years at index. A 2-part model, a generalized linear regression model with a negative binomial distribution, and a multivariate logistic regression model were used to compare health care costs, HCRU, and the odds of developing an OCS-related AE between cohorts, respectively. RESULTS: The no OCS use and prevalent OCS use cohorts included 21,517 and 16,209 patients, respectively. Adjusted health care cost differences (95% CI) were significantly lower for the no OCS use cohort vs all prevalent OCS use exposure categories ($5,439 [$4,537-$6,371] vs $17,856 [$16,368-$19,498]), driven by inpatient stays and outpatient visits; HCRU was also significantly lower (adjusted incidence rate ratios vs no OCS use cohort [95% CI]: 1.20 [1.16-1.23] vs 1.47 [1.41-1.52]). Health care costs and HCRU increased with increasing length of OCS exposure. OCS-related AEs occurred more frequently for all prevalent OCS use exposure categories vs the no OCS use cohort (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.39 [1.25-1.55] vs 2.32 [2.02-2.68]), driven by hematologic/oncologic and immune system-related AEs. The mean (SD) average daily dose of OCS increased with increasing periods of prevalent OCS use (2.5 [1.3], 6.9 [31.1], and 34.6 [1,717.3] mg/day, respectively, for patients with 0, 1, and 2 periods of OCS use). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalent OCS use incurs a substantial clinical and economic burden, highlighting the need for restricted OCS doses and durations. DISCLOSURES: This study (GSK Study 214100) was funded by GSK. GSK was involved in designing the study, contributing to the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, supporting the authors in the development of the manuscript, and funding the medical writing assistance. All authors, including those employed by GSK, approved the content of the submitted manuscript and were involved in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Dr DerSarkissian, Dr Duh, and Mr Benson are employees of Analysis Group, which received research funding from GSK to conduct this study. Dr Wang, Ms Gu, and Mr Vu are former employees of Analysis Group. Mr Bell is an employee of GSK and holds stocks and shares in the company. Ms Averell and Dr Huang are former employees of GSK and held stocks and shares in the company at the time of the study.

Clinical and Economic Burden in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus During the First Year After Initiating Oral Corticosteroids: A Retrospective US Database Study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize health care resource utilization (HCRU), health care costs, and adverse events (AEs) among patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) initiating oral corticosteroids (OCS) versus patients without OCS use. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study (GSK Study 213061), eligible patients (aged ≥5 years at first OCS claim) with SLE from the IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims-US database (January 2006 to July 2019) had continuous enrollment during the 6-month preindex (baseline) and 12-month postindex (observation) periods and one or more inpatient or emergency department SLE diagnosis codes or two or more outpatient SLE diagnosis codes during baseline. The "OCS-initiator cohort" comprised patients with one or more OCS pharmacy claims during the study period and no evidence of preindex OCS use and was classified into three exposure categories based on the number of 6-month periods of more than 5 mg/day of OCS use (0, 1, 2). The "no-OCS-use cohort" comprised patients without OCS claims, although patients may have received OCS prior to the study period. Clinical and economic outcomes were reported over the observation period. RESULTS: Adjusted health care costs differed significantly ($6542 [95% confidence interval (CI): $5761-$7368], $19,149 [95% CI: $16,954-$21,471], $28,985 [95% CI: $25,546-$32,885]). HCRU incidence rates were significantly greater for all OCS-initiator exposure categories (n = 16,216) versus the no-OCS-use cohort (n = 11,137; adjusted incidence rate ratios [95% CI]: 1.22 [1.19-1.24], 1.39 [1.34-1.43], 1.66 [1.60-1.73]). OCS-related AEs were experienced by 67.1% to 74.1% of patients with OCS initiation, most commonly affecting the immune system. CONCLUSION: Within 12 months of OCS initiation, patients with SLE experienced substantial clinical and economic burden, which may imply a need to minimize OCS use.

A 5-Year Retrospective, Observational Study Assessing Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Outcome Measures to Characterize Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Burden in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the use of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease measures in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in a US community-based rheumatology physician network over 5 years. METHODS: This retrospective, observational cohort study (GSK Study 213818) of patients with SLE utilized electronic medical records (01 January 2010-31 December 2019) from the United Rheumatology Normalized Integrated Community Evidence database. The index was the date of first SLE diagnosis recorded in the database; the observation period was 5 years post-index. RA disease measures evaluated were: Pain Index, Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MD-HAQ), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), Physician Global Assessment (PGA), Swollen Joint Count (SJC), Tender Joint Count (TJC), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS-28). The number of patients with measures utilized, the score on each measure, and proportion of patients per disease activity category were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 5990 patients with SLE were included. The most frequently used measures were Pain Index, SJC, TJC, MD-HAQ, PtGA, RAPID3, and PGA (cumulative use over Years 1-5: 23.9-71.3%). For all measures, frequency of use was lowest in Year 1, followed by a general increase from Year 1 to Year 5. Scores remained relatively stable for most measures, and the proportion of patients in remission or with low/moderate disease activity per RAPID3 increased. CONCLUSION: RA disease measure utilization in SLE was generally infrequent but increased over time. Pain Index and MD-HAQ were the most commonly applied cumulatively across 5 years of follow-up. The rationale for the increased use of these measures in SLE over time requires further exploration. In the absence of a clinically applicable SLE-specific measure, the use of RA measures, for example in conjunction with SLE measures, may provide an alternative approach for measuring disease activity, representing an opportunity to improve patient outcomes.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19 During SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Waves in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Sotrovimab, a recombinant human monoclonal antibody (mAb) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had US Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization for the treatment of high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from 26 May 2021 to 5 April 2022. Real-world clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab in reducing the risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and/or mortality was evaluated for the period when the prevalence of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants changed between Delta and Omicron in the USA. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of de-identified patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 September 2021 to 30 April 2022 in the FAIR Health National Private Insurance Claims database. Patients meeting high-risk criteria were divided into two cohorts: sotrovimab and not treated with a mAb ("no mAb"). All-cause hospitalizations and facility-reported mortality ≤ 30 days of diagnosis ("30-day hospitalization or mortality") were identified. Multivariable and propensity score-matched Poisson and logistic regressions were conducted to estimate the adjusted relative risk (RR) and odds of 30-day hospitalization or mortality in each cohort. RESULTS: Compared with the no mAb cohort (n = 1,514,868), the sotrovimab cohort (n = 15,633) was older and had a higher proportion of patients with high-risk conditions. In the no mAb cohort, 84,307 (5.57%) patients were hospitalized and 8167 (0.54%) deaths were identified, while in the sotrovimab cohort, 418 (2.67%) patients were hospitalized and 13 (0.08%) deaths were identified. After adjusting for potential confounders, the sotrovimab cohort had a 55% lower risk of 30-day hospitalization or mortality (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.41-0.49) and an 85% lower risk of 30-day mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.08-0.29). Monthly, from September 2021 to April 2022, the RR reduction for 30-day hospitalization or mortality in the sotrovimab cohort was maintained, ranging from 46% to 71% compared with the no mAb cohort; the RR estimate in April 2022 was uncertain, with wide confidence intervals due to the small sample size. CONCLUSION: Sotrovimab was associated with reduced risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and mortality versus no mAb treatment. Clinical effectiveness persisted during Delta and early Omicron variant waves and among all high-risk subgroups assessed.

Health Care Costs With Sustained Oral Corticosteroid Use in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to compare health care costs, health care resource utilization, and adverse events associated with sustained oral corticosteroid (OCS) use versus no OCS use in systemic lupus erythematosus. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used claims data (January 1, 2006-July 31, 2019) from patients with systemic lupus erythematosus aged ≥5 years with ≥24 months of continuous enrollment. Health care costs, health care resource utilization, and OCS-related adverse events were assessed. The sustained OCS cohort (defined as ≥12 months of continuous OCS use) was divided into exposure categories based on the number of 6-month classification periods with >5 mg/d OCS (0, 1-2, or 3-4). FINDINGS: Of the 6234 patients in the sustained OCS use cohort, there were 1587 (25.5%) patients with 0 periods of >5 mg/d OCS use, 2087 (33.5%) patients with 1 to 2 periods of >5 mg/d OCS use, and 2560 (41.1%) patients with 3 to 4 periods of >5 mg/d OCS use; the no OCS use cohort included 7828 patients. Adjusted health care cost differences (95% CIs) were significantly greater for patients with 0, 1 to 2, and 3 to 4 periods of OCS use >5 mg/d versus the no OCS use cohort ($7774 [5426-10,223], $21,738 [18,898-25,321], and $30,119 [26,492-33,774], respectively). A higher proportion of patients in all OCS exposure categories required health care resource utilization (≥99.7% vs 93.4%) and experienced OCS-related adverse events (94.3%-96.8% vs 82.6%) versus the no OCS use cohort, with more periods of OCS use >5 mg/d associated with increased health care resource utilization and adverse events. IMPLICATIONS: Sustained OCS use in systemic lupus erythematosus was associated with high economic burden, health care resource utilization, and OCS-related adverse events. These data highlight the need for health care providers to carefully consider OCS use in systemic lupus erythematosus.