Challenges of dispensing costly tablets with short shelf-life.

Afatinib, trametinib and regorafenib are three costly oral oncology drugs with a short shelf-life after the original container has been opened. Their short shelf-lives are due to degradation on exposure to moisture. Therefore, manufacturers recommend them to be dispensed in the original packaging with the desiccant. However, the prescribed quantities do not always match the quantities in the original packaging, usually because of dose modifications for toxicities. This leads to potentially significant drug wastage and financial losses. We describe some potential approaches to this issue.

Challenges of securing insurance approval for oral tofacitinib for the treatment of alopecia areata: a multi-institution retrospective review.

Alopecia areata (AA) is a psychologically distressing disorder for which few reliable treatments exist. Although oral tofacitinib has demonstrated efficacy in treating AA, it is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for this indication. To investigate and identify the challenges associated with securing insurance approval for oral tofacitinib for AA. We conducted a retrospective review of patient records from two academic medical centers to identify patients with AA in whom insurance approval was sought for oral tofacitinib from 2015-2019. We recorded information on prior authorization (PA) submissions, appeals, and peer-to-peer reviews. We noted whether patients were documented to experience negative impact on mood/QOL or suicidal ideation (SI) due to their disease. We identified 37 patients in whom insurance approval was sought for oral tofacitinib for the treatment of AA. PAs were initially denied for 36/37 (97%) patients. The most commonly cited reason for denial was "tofacitinib not covered for AA/off-label medication use" (n = 26/36; 72%). 26/37 (70%) patients ultimately failed to obtain coverage. Of the 11 (30%) patients who obtained coverage, 10 (91%) were privately insured, 0 (0%) had Medicare and 1 (9%) had Medicaid. 13 patients (34%) experienced documented diminished QOL/mood (including SI) due to their disease burden; 6/13 (46%) of these patients eventually secured insurance approval. Lack of FDA approval of oral tofacitinib for the treatment of AA creates challenges in caring for patients with this disease. Policymakers should consider the negative implications lack of FDA approval may have for patients with recalcitrant dermatologic conditions.

Vehicle non-exhaust emissions - Revealing the pathways from source to environmental exposure.

Brakes, tyres and road deposits have become important contributors to the overall particle emissions of vehicles globally, with constituents in these wear particles considered to be harmful to human health (PM10 and PM2.5). Previous research has documented mass/size distributions, physical and chemical characteristics, emission factors and long-term implications and environmental occurrences. The complex path these pollutants take from their origins to the environment, however, is not fully understood. This is partly owing to the breadth of spatio-temporal scales involved in the advection-diffusion processes (nanometers to meters, microseconds to minutes). These short timescale particle transport mechanisms impact human exposure, such as pedestrians and cyclists, and initiate the long-term interaction of these pollutants with other environmental compartments. Here, we present an analysis for urban driving conditions to highlight the opportunities to reveal these complex pathways and formulate opinions that aim to stimulate future enquiry. We describe important vehicular areas and exposure scenarios where efforts should focus. Future interdisciplinary research into these particle transport mechanisms must be prioritised as it can provide the foundation for developing urgently needed pollution control strategies, transport infrastructure layouts and transport policies that mitigate, or possibly eliminate pollution exposure risks.

Prevalence of Misrepresentation of Nonphysician Clinicians at Dermatology Clinics.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the use of inaccurate terminology used by dermatology practices to describe the training and qualifications of their nonphysician clinicians (NPCs) when new patients are booking appointments. METHODS: Clinics were randomly selected and called to determine the first available appointment for a new patient with a new and changing mole. If the receptionist confirmed the first-offered appointment was with an NPC, the encounter was included in this study. If receptionists used inaccurate terminology to describe the NPCs and their qualifications, this instance was recorded along with the specific language that they used. RESULTS: A total of 344 unique dermatology clinics were contacted on February 27, 2020, in 25 states. Phone calls at 128 clinics (37.2%) met our inclusion criterion. Inaccurate language was used to describe NPCs at 23 (18%) unique clinic locations across 12 states, with "dermatologist," "doctor," "physician," and "board-certified" being used to describe NPCs as the most common inaccurate terms. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that front office staff at dermatology clinics use inaccurate and potentially misleading terminology to refer to NPCs working in their clinics. While we cannot establish whether this is intentional or due to a lack of training, additional focus should be placed on accurately representing provider qualifications to patients.

Insurance Acceptance, Appointment Wait Time, and Dermatologist Access Across Practice Types in the US.

Importance: In the 15 years since dermatology access was last investigated on a national scale, the practice landscape has changed with the rise of private equity (PE) investment and increased use of nonphysician clinicians (NPCs). Objective: To determine appointment success and wait times for patients with various insurance types at clinics with and without PE ownership. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this study, PE-owned US clinics were randomly selected and matched with 2 geographically proximate clinics without PE ownership. Researchers called each clinic 3 times over a 5-day period to assess appointment/clinician availability for a fictitious patient with a new and changing mole. The 3 calls differed by insurance type specified, which were Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) preferred provider organization, Medicare, or Medicaid. Main Outcomes and Measures: Appointment success and wait times among insurance types and between PE-owned clinics and control clinics. Secondary outcomes were the provision of accurate referrals to other clinics when appointments were denied and clinician and next-day appointment availability. Results: A total of 1833 calls were made to 204 PE-owned and 407 control clinics without PE ownership across 28 states. Overall appointment success rates for BCBS, Medicare, and Medicaid were 96%, 94%, and 17%, respectively. Acceptance of BCBS (98.5%; 95% CI, 96%-99%; P = .03) and Medicare (97.5%; 95% CI, 94%-99%; P = .02) were slightly higher at PE-owned clinics (compared with 94.6% [95% CI, 92%-96%] and 92.8% [95% CI, 90%-95%], respectively, at control clinics). Wait times (median days, interquartile range [IQR]) were similar for patients with BCBS (7 days; IQR, 2-22 days) and Medicare (7 days; IQR, 2-25 days; P > .99), whereas Medicaid patients waited significantly longer (13 days; IQR, 4-33 days; P = .002). Clinic ownership did not significantly affect wait times. Private equity-owned clinics were more likely than controls to offer a new patient appointment with an NPC (80% vs 63%; P = .001) and to not have an opening with a dermatologist (16% vs 6%; P < .001). Next-day appointment availability was greater at PE-owned clinics than controls (30% vs 21%; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with Medicaid had significantly lower success in obtaining appointments and significantly longer wait times regardless of clinic ownership. Although the use of dermatologists and NPCs was similar regardless of clinic ownership, PE-owned clinics were more likely than controls to offer new patient appointments with NPCs.

Willingness-to-pay stated preferences in cutaneous lupus erythematosus: a pilot study.

Cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) is a chronic skin disease that significantly impacts quality of life (QOL). This study tested a novel method to measure QOL in CLE using willingness-to-pay (WTP) stated preferences, and aimed to determine which of nine domains of life are most affected by CLE. Twenty-one participants with CLE ranked the domains in order of impact on CLE-related QOL, and then stated how many United States dollars they would be willing to pay for a hypothetical cure for each domain. Eighty-one percent of participants were female; mean age was 42.4 years. Photosensitivity was ranked highest by 71.4% of respondents. Participants were willing to pay the most for a hypothetical cure for CLE specific to photosensitivity (median = $200,000), the least for a cure specific to self-care (median = $0). Participants were willing to pay a median of $1,000,000 for an overall cure for CLE. Limitations include a small sample size for this pilot study and that willingness-to-pay may be influenced by individual perception of money and socioeconomic factors. This study successfully pilot-tested a WTP method and ranking task for health-related QOL. Photosensitivity was the domain of life most affected by CLE, which is a domain unique to our novel tool.

Patient Perspectives on the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Skin Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is expanding throughout the field of medicine. In dermatology, researchers are evaluating the potential for direct-to-patient and clinician decision-support AI tools to classify skin lesions. Although AI is poised to change how patients engage in health care, patient perspectives remain poorly understood. Objective: To explore how patients conceptualize AI and perceive the use of AI for skin cancer screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: A qualitative study using a grounded theory approach to semistructured interview analysis was conducted in general dermatology clinics at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and melanoma clinics at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Forty-eight patients were enrolled. Each interview was independently coded by 2 researchers with interrater reliability measurement; reconciled codes were used to assess code frequency. The study was conducted from May 6 to July 8, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Artificial intelligence concept, perceived benefits and risks of AI, strengths and weaknesses of AI, AI implementation, response to conflict between human and AI clinical decision-making, and recommendation for or against AI. Results: Of 48 patients enrolled, 26 participants (54%) were women; mean (SD) age was 53.3 (21.7) years. Sixteen patients (33%) had a history of melanoma, 16 patients (33%) had a history of nonmelanoma skin cancer only, and 16 patients (33%) had no history of skin cancer. Twenty-four patients were interviewed about a direct-to-patient AI tool and 24 patients were interviewed about a clinician decision-support AI tool. Interrater reliability ratings for the 2 coding teams were κ = 0.94 and κ = 0.89. Patients primarily conceptualized AI in terms of cognition. Increased diagnostic speed (29 participants [60%]) and health care access (29 [60%]) were the most commonly perceived benefits of AI for skin cancer screening; increased patient anxiety was the most commonly perceived risk (19 [40%]). Patients perceived both more accurate diagnosis (33 [69%]) and less accurate diagnosis (41 [85%]) to be the greatest strength and weakness of AI, respectively. The dominant theme that emerged was the importance of symbiosis between humans and AI (45 [94%]). Seeking biopsy was the most common response to conflict between human and AI clinical decision-making (32 [67%]). Overall, 36 patients (75%) would recommend AI to family members and friends. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, patients appeared to be receptive to the use of AI for skin cancer screening if implemented in a manner that preserves the integrity of the human physician-patient relationship.

Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Tolerability of Mycophenolate Mofetil and Mycophenolic Acid for the Treatment of Morphea.

Importance: First-line systemic therapy for morphea includes methotrexate with or without systemic corticosteroids. When this regimen is ineffective, not tolerated, or contraindicated, a trial of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or mycophenolic acid (MPA)-referred to herein as mycophenolate-is recommended; however, evidence to support this recommendation remains weak. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of mycophenolate for the treatment of morphea. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2018, among 77 patients with morphea from 8 institutions who were treated with mycophenolate. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was morphea disease activity, severity, and response at 0, 3 to 6, and 9 to 12 months of mycophenolate treatment. A secondary outcome was whether mycophenolate was a well-tolerated treatment of morphea. Results: There were 61 female patients (79%) and 16 male patients (21%) in the study, with a median age at disease onset of 36 years (interquartile range, 16-53 years) and median diagnostic delay of 8 months (interquartile range, 4-14 months). Generalized morphea (37 [48%]), pansclerotic morphea (12 [16%]), and linear morphea of the trunk and/or extremities (9 [12%]) were the most common subtypes of morphea identified. Forty-one patients (53%) had an associated functional impairment, and 49 patients (64%) had severe disease. Twelve patients received initial treatment with mycophenolate as monotherapy or combination therapy and 65 patients received mycophenolate after prior treatment was ineffective (50 of 65 [77%]) or poorly tolerated (21 of 65 [32%]). Treatments prior to mycophenolate included methotrexate (48 of 65 [74%]), systemic corticosteroids (42 of 65 [65%]), hydroxychloroquine (20 of 65 [31%]), and/or phototherapy (14 of 65 [22%]). After 3 to 6 months of mycophenolate treatment, 66 of 73 patients had stable (n = 22) or improved (n = 44) disease. After 9 to 12 months of treatment, 47 of 54 patients had stable (n = 14) or improved (n = 33) disease. Twenty-seven patients (35%) achieved disease remission at completion of the study. Treatments received in conjunction with mycophenolate were frequent. Mycophenolate was well tolerated. Gastrointestinal adverse effects were the most common (24 [31%]); cytopenia (3 [4%]) and infection (2 [3%]) occurred less frequently. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that mycophenolate is a well-tolerated and beneficial treatment of recalcitrant, severe morphea.

Characterization of BshA, bacillithiol glycosyltransferase from Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus subtilis.

The first step during bacillithiol (BSH) biosynthesis involves the formation of N-acetylglucosaminylmalate from UDP-N-acetylglucosamine and l-malate and is catalyzed by a GT4 class glycosyltransferase enzyme (BshA). Recombinant Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus subtilis BshA were highly specific and active with l-malate but the former showed low activity with d-glyceric acid and the latter with d-malate. We show that BshA is inhibited by BSH and similarly that MshA (first enzyme of mycothiol biosynthesis) is inhibited by the final product MSH.