The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prescription of multiple sclerosis medication in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Real-word evidence from diverse data sources is increasingly important in terms of generating rapid insights to effectively manage patient populations, especially during major public health disruptions such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with chronic and inflammatory diseases - such as multiple sclerosis (MS) - were reported to experience potentially negative effects due to the use of immunosuppressive drugs in combination with a COVID-19 infection. In this research, we explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medication use in patients with MS in Germany. METHODS: Patient-level pharmacy dispensing data from the Permea platform - covering approximately 44% of all community pharmacy dispensing in Germany - were analysed from 2019 - 2021. Longitudinal use patterns of MS medication and antidepressants and patient demographics were assessed. Daily variation in MS medication use was specifically studied around the dates of the first and second lockdowns in Germany. RESULTS: We included data from 539,400 prescriptions which included at least 1 MS drug. The medication data showed a stable level of monthly prescriptions for MS medication at 2.02 ± 0.03 prescriptions per pharmacy during the study period. Although there was a sharp increase in daily prescriptions before the first lockdown (from an average 660.08 ± 137.59 daily prescriptions in the observed period to a maximum dispensing number of 998 daily prescriptions), the overall number of prescriptions remained at pre-pandemic levels (603 ± 90.31 daily prescriptions in 2019). Similar trends were observed for monthly co-prescribed antidepressant use per pharmacy (0.10 ± 0.01 in 2019-0.11 ± 0.02 in 2020). CONCLUSION: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of MS medications and co-prescribed antidepressants was stable. These insights from real-world data demonstrate the value of evidence-based insights for managing patient care.

Durability of Protection Post-Primary COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States.

The durability of immune responses after COVID-19 vaccination will drive long-term vaccine effectiveness across settings and may differ by vaccine type. To determine durability of protection of COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S) following primary vaccination in the United States, a matched case-control study was conducted in three cohorts between 1 January and 7 September 2021 using de-identified data from a database covering 168 million lives. Odds ratios (ORs) for developing outcomes of interest (breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, or intensive care unit admission) were determined for each vaccine (no direct comparisons). In total, 17,017,435 individuals were identified. Relative to the baseline, stable protection was observed for Ad26.COV2.S against infections (OR [95% confidence interval (CI)], 1.31 [1.18-1.47]) and hospitalizations (OR [95% CI], 1.25 [0.86-1.80]). Relative to the baseline, protection waned over time against infections for BNT162b2 (OR [95% CI], 2.20 [2.01-2.40]) and mRNA-1273 (OR [95% CI], 2.07 [1.87-2.29]) and against hospitalizations for BNT162b2 (OR [95% CI], 2.38 [1.79-3.17]). Baseline protection remained stable for intensive care unit admissions for all three vaccines. Calculated baseline VE was consistent with published literature. This study suggests that the three vaccines in three separate populations may have different durability profiles.

Durability of Protection Post–Primary COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States

The durability of immune responses after COVID-19 vaccination will drive long-term vaccine effectiveness across settings and may differ by vaccine type. To determine durability of protection of COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S) following primary vaccination in the United States, a matched case-control study was conducted in three cohorts between 1 January and 7 September 2021 using de-identified data from a database covering 168 million lives. Odds ratios (ORs) for developing outcomes of interest (breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, or intensive care unit admission) were determined for each vaccine (no direct comparisons). In total, 17,017,435 individuals were identified. Relative to the baseline, stable protection was observed for Ad26.COV2.S against infections (OR [95% confidence interval (CI)], 1.31 [1.18–1.47]) and hospitalizations (OR [95% CI], 1.25 [0.86–1.80]). Relative to the baseline, protection waned over time against infections for BNT162b2 (OR [95% CI], 2.20 [2.01–2.40]) and mRNA-1273 (OR [95% CI], 2.07 [1.87–2.29]) and against hospitalizations for BNT162b2 (OR [95% CI], 2.38 [1.79–3.17]). Baseline protection remained stable for intensive care unit admissions for all three vaccines. Calculated baseline VE was consistent with published literature. This study suggests that the three vaccines in three separate populations may have different durability profiles.

Durability of the Single-Dose Ad26.COV2.S Vaccine in the Prevention of COVID-19 Infections and Hospitalizations in the US Before and During the Delta Variant Surge.

Importance: Vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus is critical to control the pandemic. Randomized clinical trials demonstrated efficacy of the single-dose Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine, but data on longer-term protection in clinical practice and effectiveness against variants are needed. Objective: To assess the association between receiving the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and COVID-19-related infections and hospitalizations before and during the Delta variant surge. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included adults aged 18 years and older who were newly Ad26.COV2.S-vaccinated matched to as many as 10 unvaccinated individuals by date, location, age, sex, and comorbidity index. This was followed by 1:4 propensity score matching on COVID-19 risk factors. Data were collected from US insurance claims data from March 1, 2020, through August 31, 2021. Exposures: Vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S vs no vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated for recorded COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization, nationwide and in subgroups by age, high-risk factors, calendar time, and states with high incidences of the Delta variant. VE estimates were corrected for underrecording of vaccinations in insurance data. Results: Among 422 034 vaccinated individuals (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [17.4] years; 236 437 [56.0%] women) and 1 645 397 matched unvaccinated individuals (mean [SD] age, 54.5 [17.5] years; 922 937 [56.1%] women), VE was 76% (95% CI, 75%-77%) for COVID-19 infections and 81% (95% CI, 78%-82%) for COVID-19-related hospitalizations. VE was stable for at least 180 days after vaccination and over calendar time. Among states with high Delta variant incidence, VE during June to August 2021 was 74% (95% CI, 71%-77%) for infections and 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for hospitalizations. VE for COVID-19 was higher in individuals younger than 65 years (78%; 95% CI, 77%-79%) and lower in immunocompromised patients (64%; 95% CI, 59%-68%). All estimates were corrected for vaccination underrecording; uncorrected VE, which served as a lower bound, was 66% (95% CI, 64%-67%) for any recorded COVID-19 infection and 72% (95% CI, 69%-74%) for COVID-19-related hospitalization. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study in US clinical practice showed stable VE of Ad26.COV2.S for at least 6 months before as well as during the time the Delta variant emerged and became dominant.

Real-World Evidence for Assessing Pharmaceutical Treatments in the Context of COVID-19.

The emergence and global spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in an urgent need for evidence on medical interventions and outcomes of the resulting disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating treatments and vaccines for COVID-19 are already in progress, the number of clinical questions of interest greatly outpaces the available resources to conduct RCTs. Therefore, there is growing interest in whether nonrandomized real-world evidence (RWE) can be used to supplement RCT evidence and aid in clinical decision making, but concerns about nonrandomized RWE have been highlighted by a proliferation of RWE studies on medications and COVID-19 outcomes with widely varying conclusions. The objective of this paper is to review some clinical questions of interest, potential data types, challenges, and merits of RWE in COVID-19, resulting in recommendations for nonrandomized RWE designs and analyses based on established RWE principles.

Pharmacotherapy for Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Treatment Patterns by Disease Severity.

BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) depend on disease severity, but the prescribing pattern by severity and drivers of therapeutic choices remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to evaluate pharmacological treatment patterns by COVID-19 severity and identify the determinants of prescribing for COVID-19. METHODS: Using electronic health record data from a large Massachusetts-based healthcare system, we identified all patients aged ≥ 18 years hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from 1 March to 24 May, 2020. We defined five levels of COVID-19 severity at hospital admission: (1) hospitalized but not requiring supplemental oxygen; (2-4) hospitalized and requiring oxygen ≤ 2, 3-4, and ≥ 5 L per minute, respectively; and (5) intubated or admitted to an intensive care unit. We assessed the medications used to treat COVID-19 or as supportive care during hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 2821 patients hospitalized for COVID-19, we found inpatient mortality increased by severity from 5% for level 1 to 23% for level 5. As compared to patients with severity level 1, those with severity level 5 were 3.53 times (95% confidence interval 2.73-4.57) more likely to receive a medication used to treat COVID-19. Other predictors of treatment were fever, low oxygen saturation, presence of co-morbidities, and elevated inflammatory biomarkers. The use of most COVID-19 relevant medications has dropped substantially while the use of remdesivir and therapeutic anticoagulants has increased over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Careful consideration of disease severity and other determinants of COVID-19 drug use is necessary for appropriate conduct and interpretation of non-randomized studies evaluating outcomes of COVID-19 treatments.