Economic and Clinical Burden of Acute Myeloid Leukemia Episodes of Care in the United States: A Retrospective Analysis of a Commercial Payer Database.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, the incidence of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has steadily increased over the last decade; in 2019, it was estimated that AML would affect 21,450 new patients and lead to 10,920 deaths. Detailed real-world cost estimates and comparisons of key AML treatment episodes, such as in high-intensity chemotherapy (HIC), low-intensity chemotherapy (LIC), hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), and relapsed/refractory (R/R), are scarce in the commercially insured U.S. OBJECTIVE: To examine health resource utilization (HRU), clinical burden, and direct health care costs across various AML treatment episodes in a large sample of commercially insured U.S. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted. Patients with newly diagnosed AML were followed to identify the key active treatment episodes across the course of their disease. Data were obtained from 2 sources: IQVIA's Real-World Data (RWD) Adjudicated Claims Database - U.S. (formerly known as PharMetrics Plus), which comprises adjudicated claims for more than 150 million unique enrollees across the United States, and IQVIA Charge Detail Master Hospital Database, which has detailed data regarding services received in an inpatient setting. Calculation of all-cause HRU was based on physician office visits, nonphysician office visits, emergency department visits, inpatient visits, and outpatient pharmacy utilization. Calculation of all-cause health care costs was based on total allowed costs and reported by the following cost components: physician office visits, nonphysician office visits, emergency department visits, inpatient visits, and outpatient pharmacy utilization. Symptom and toxicity events were estimated via proxies such as diagnosis codes, procedures, and treatments administered. RESULTS: The final study sample consisted of 1,542 HIC-induction (HIC-I), 591 HIC-consolidation (HIC-C), 628 LIC, 1,000 patients with HSCT, and 707 patients with R/R AML. Total mean episode costs were highest in R/R episodes ($439,104), followed by HSCT ($329,621), HIC-I ($198,657), HIC-C ($73,428), and LIC ($53,081) episodes. Across all treatment episodes, hospitalization was the largest contributor to cost with mean hospitalization costs ranging from $308,978 in the R/R setting to $49,580 for patients receiving LIC; of these, costs related to intensive care unit admission were a noteworthy contributor. In patients with R/R AML and HSCT, expenditures related to pharmacy utilization averaged $24,640 and $12,203, respectively, and expenditures related to physician office visits averaged $10,926 and $6,090, respectively; these expenditures were much lower across other episodes. Across all categories of symptom and toxicity events, cardiovascular events was the only category of event that was a significant predictor of higher cost across all episodes. Symptom and toxicity events commonly associated with AML were associated with significantly increased costs, especially in R/R episodes. CONCLUSIONS: This resource utilization and direct health care cost analysis highlights the substantial economic burden associated with key AML treatment episodes in the United States, specifically during HIC-I, HSCT, and R/R episodes. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Astellas Pharma. Astellas employees were involved in the study design, interpretation of data, writing of the manuscript, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Pandya and Wilson are employees of Astellas Pharma U.S. Walsh was an employee of Astellas Pharma U.S. while the study was conducted. Chen, McGuiness, and Wade are employees of IQVIA, which received funding from Astellas Pharma U.S. Madeiros was employed at Stanford University while this study was conducted and received a consulting fee from Astellas for work on this study. Data discussed in this study were previously presented at the 59th Annual American Society for Hematology Meeting & Exposition, 2017; December 9-12, 2017; Atlanta, GA.

Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs Associated with Corticosteroid Use in Patients with Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: An Administrative Claims Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are used in the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) to reduce tumor-related symptoms because of CRPC therapies. Since corticosteroids have been associated with a range of toxicities, their use may increase the economic burden sustained by patients with CRPC. However, the economic impact of using corticosteroids in patients with CRPC has not been well characterized. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of previous corticosteroid use on health care resource utilization (HRU) and health care costs among men with CRPC. METHODS: Using administrative claims data (2007-2016), adult chemotherapy-naive patients who initiated CRPC treatment following surgical or medical castration were identified. Based on the cumulative corticosteroid dose during the 12 months before CRPC treatment initiation, patients were grouped into 4 cohorts: no corticosteroid (0 gm), low corticosteroid (< 0.5 gm), medium corticosteroid (0.5-2.0 gm), and high corticosteroid (> 2.0 gm). All-cause HRU and costs (2017 U.S. dollars) were compared between cohorts during the 1-year study period following CRPC treatment initiation using the no corticosteroid cohort as reference. Multivariable regression models were used to adjust for baseline covariates, including age, region, index year, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, presence of bone metastases, baseline all-cause HRU, and corticosteroid-related clinical events during baseline. RESULTS: 9,425 patients were included (no corticosteroid = 6,765, low corticosteroid = 1,660, medium corticosteroid = 655, and high corticosteroid = 345). On average, patients in the no corticosteroid cohort were older and had a lower baseline HRU and comorbidity burden than patients in the other 3 cohorts. During the study period, patients with corticosteroid exposure (across all corticosteroid cohorts) had significantly more inpatient admissions (high corticosteroid vs. no corticosteroid adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.56; P < 0.001), emergency department visits (high corticosteroid vs. no corticosteroid adjusted IRR = 1.30; P = 0.001), and outpatient visits (high corticosteroid vs. no corticosteroid adjusted IRR = 1.11; P < 0.001). In addition, compared with the no corticosteroid cohort, patients with corticosteroid exposure had significantly higher monthly total costs (high corticosteroid vs. no corticosteroid adjusted difference = $2,600; P < 0.001), including medical service costs (high corticosteroid vs. no corticosteroid adjusted difference = $1,564; P < 0.001) and pharmacy costs (high corticosteroid vs. no corticosteroid adjusted difference = $825; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative corticosteroid exposure before CRPC treatment initiation was associated with significantly higher HRU and costs. This increase in economic burden was more prominent among patients with annual cumulative corticosteroid doses of more than 2.0 gm. These results suggest that previous corticosteroid use may result in a higher economic burden among patients with CRPC. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Astellas Pharma (Northbrook, IL) and Medivation, a Pfizer Company (San Francisco, CA), the codevelopers of enzalutamide. The study sponsor was involved in the study design, data interpretation, and review. All authors contributed to the development of the manuscript and maintained control over the final content. Schultz and Wilson are employed by Astellas Pharma. Schultz owns stock in Gilead Sciences and Shire. Song and Yang are employed by Analysis Group, which received consultancy fees from Astellas Pharma. Ramaswamy is employed by Pfizer, and Lowentritt is employed by Chesapeake Urology and has served as a speaker and consultant for Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Bayer, Dendreon, and Janssen. A synopsis of the current research was presented in poster format at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2019, which took place in San Diego, CA, on March 25-28, 2019.

Quantitative Proteomics Identifies DNA Repair as a Novel Biological Function for Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 4α in Colorectal Cancer Cells.

Hepatocyte nuclear factor 4α (HNF4α) is a transcription factor that acts as a master regulator of genes for several endoderm-derived tissues, including the intestine, in which it plays a central role during development and tumorigenesis. To better define the mechanisms by which HNF4α can influence these processes, we identified proteins interacting with HNF4α using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC)-based quantitative proteomics with either immunoprecipitation of green fluorescent protein (GFP) or with proximity-dependent purification by the biotin ligase BirA (BioID), both fused to HNF4α. Surprisingly, these analyses identified a significant enrichment of proteins characterized with a role in DNA repair, a so far unidentified biological feature of this transcription factor. Several of these proteins including PARP1, RAD50, and DNA-PKcs were confirmed to interact with HNF4α in colorectal cancer cell lines. Following DNA damage, HNF4α was able to increase cell viability in colorectal cancer cells. Overall, these observations identify a potential role for this transcription factor during the DNA damage response.