ResearchConnect.info: An Interactive Web-Based Platform for Building Academic Collaborations.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Radiology is a rapidly evolving field that benefits from continuous innovation and research participation among trainees. Traditional methods for involving residents in research are often inefficient and limited, usually due to the absence of a standardized approach to identifying available research projects. A centralized online platform can enhance networking and offer equal opportunities for all residents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Research Connect is an online platform built with PHP, SQL, and JavaScript. Features include project and collaboration listing as well as advertisement of project openings to medical/undergraduate students, residents, and fellows. The automated system maintains project data and sends notifications for new research opportunities when they meet user preference criteria. Both pre- and post-launch surveys were used to assess the platform's efficacy. RESULTS: Before the introduction of Research Connect, 69% of respondents used informal conversations as their primary method of discovering research opportunities. One year after its launch, Research Connect had 141 active users, comprising 63 residents and 41 faculty members, along with 85 projects encompassing various radiology subspecialties. The platform received a median satisfaction rating of 4 on a 1-5 scale, with 54% of users successfully locating projects of interest through the platform. CONCLUSION: Research Connect addresses the need for a standardized method and centralized platform with active research projects and is designed for scalability. Feedback suggests it has increased the visibility and accessibility of radiology research, promoting greater trainee involvement and academic collaboration.

Longitudinal Monitoring of Clinician-Patient Video Visits During the Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Adoption and Sustained Challenges in an Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

BACKGROUND: Numerous prior opinion papers, administrative electronic health record data studies, and cross-sectional surveys of telehealth during the pandemic have been published, but none have combined assessments of video visit success monitoring with longitudinal assessments of perceived challenges to the rapid adoption of video visits during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantify (1) the use of video visits (compared with in-person and telephone visits) over time during the pandemic, (2) video visit successful connection rates, and (3) changes in perceived video visit challenges. METHODS: A web-based survey was developed for the dual purpose of monitoring and improving video visit implementation in our health care system during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey included questions regarding rates of in-person, telephone, and video visits for clinician-patient encounters; the rate of successful connection for video visits; and perceived challenges to video visits (eg, software, hardware, bandwidth, and technology literacy). The survey was distributed via email to physicians, advanced practice professionals, and clinicians in May 2020. The survey was repeated in March 2021. Differences between the 2020 and 2021 responses were adjusted for within-respondent correlation across surveys and tested using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: A total of 1126 surveys were completed (511 surveys in 2020 and 615 surveys in 2021). In 2020, only 21.7% (73/336) of clinicians reported no difficulty connecting with patients during video visits and 28.6% (93/325) of clinicians reported no difficulty in 2021. The distribution of the percentage of successfully connected video visits ("Over the past two weeks of scheduled visits, what percentage did you successfully connect with patients by video?") was not significantly different between 2020 and 2021 (P=.74). Challenges in conducting video visits persisted over time. Poor connectivity was the most common challenge reported by clinicians. This response increased over time, with 30.5% (156/511) selecting it as a challenge in 2020 and 37.1% (228/615) in 2021 (P=.01). Patients not having access to their electronic health record portals was also a commonly reported challenge (109/511, 21.3% in 2020 and 137/615, 22.3% in 2021, P=.73). CONCLUSIONS: During the pandemic, our health care delivery system rapidly adopted synchronous patient-clinician communication using video visits. As experience with video visits increased, the reported failure rate did not significantly decline, and clinicians continued to report challenges related to general network connectivity and patient access to technology.

Associations Between Postdischarge Care and Cognitive Impairment-Related Hospital Readmissions for Ketoacidosis and Severe Hypoglycemia in Adults With Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with severe hypoglycemia (SH) or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) experience high hospital readmission after being discharged. Cognitive impairment (CI) may further increase the risk, especially in those experiencing an interruption of medical care after discharge. This study examined the effect modification role of postdischarge care (PDC) on CI-associated readmission risk among U.S. adults with diabetes initially admitted for DKA or SH. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) (2016-2018) to identify individuals hospitalized with a diagnosis of DKA or SH. Multivariate Cox regression was used to compare the all-cause readmission risk at 30 days between those with and without CI identified during the initial hospitalization. We assessed the CI-associated readmission risk in the patients with and without PDC, an effect modifier with the CI status. RESULTS: We identified 23,775 SH patients (53.3% women, mean age 65.9 ± 15.3 years) and 140,490 DKA patients (45.8% women, mean age 40.3 ± 15.4 years), and 2,675 (11.2%) and 1,261 (0.9%), respectively, had a CI diagnosis during their index hospitalization. For SH and DKA patients discharged without PDC, CI was associated with a higher readmission risk of 23% (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.40) and 35% (aHR 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.70), respectively. However, when patients were discharged with PDC, we found PDC was an effect modifier to mitigate CI-associated readmission risk for both SH and DKA patients (P < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that PDC can potentially mitigate the excessive readmission risk associated with CI, emphasizing the importance of postdischarge continuity of care for medically complex patients with comorbid diabetes and CI.

Incident mental health episodes after initiation of gabapentinoids vs. dopamine agonists for early-onset idiopathic restless legs syndrome.

Limited long-term safety information exists for gabapentinoid treatment of idiopathic restless legs syndrome (RLS). We estimated incident mental health-related emergency department visits and hospitalizations with a primary mental health diagnosis (primary outcome) among early-onset idiopathic RLS patients following first-line treatment initiation and examined outcome risk with gabapentinoids compared with dopamine agonists (DAs). A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative claims data from 2012 to 2019. Adults with early-onset (18-44 years) idiopathic RLS initiating either gabapentinoids or DAs within 60 days of new diagnosis were followed up to two years. Incidence rates were calculated and a log-binomial regression model with propensity score weighting estimated relative risk of the outcome and of substance use disorders (SUDs) as a secondary analysis with gabapentinoids. Among a cohort of 6,672 patients, 4,986 (74.7%) initiated DAs and 1,686 (25.3%) gabapentinoids. Incidence of the primary outcome (49.8 [95% CI 40.8-69.3] per 1,000 person-years) and SUDs (49.5 [95% CI 40.6-59.9] per 1,000 person-years) were higher in the gabapentinoid group compared with the DA group. A statistically significant risk of mental health diagnoses with gabapentinoids was not detected, but SUD risk was significant after covariate adjustment. High-risk mental health comorbidities (i.e., SUDs) should be considered when initiating RLS treatments.

Adaptability of High Dimensional Propensity Score Procedure in the Transition from ICD-9 to ICD-10 in the US Healthcare System.

Background: High-Dimensional Propensity Score procedure (HDPS) is a data-driven approach to assist control for confounding in pharmacoepidemiologic research. The transition to the International Classification of Disease (ICD-9/10) in the US health system may pose uncertainty in applying the HDPS procedure. Methods: We assembled a base cohort of patients in MarketScan® Commercial Claims Database who had newly initiated celecoxib or traditional NSAIDs to compare gastrointestinal bleeding risk. We then created bootstrapped hypothetical cohorts from the base cohort with predefined patient selection patterns from the ICD eras. Three strategies for HDPS deployment were tested: 1) split the cohort by ICD era, deploy HDPS twice, and pool the relative risks (pooled RR), 2) consider codes from each ICD era as a separate data dimension and deploy HDPS in the entire cohort (data dimensions) and 3) map ICD codes from both eras to Clinical Classifications Software (CCS) concepts before deploying HDPS in the entire cohort (CCS mapping). We calculated percent bias and root-mean-squared error to compare the strategies. Results: A similar bias reduction was observed in cohorts where patient selection pattern from each ICD era was comparable between the exposure groups. In the presence of considerable disparity in patient selection, we observed a bimodal distribution of propensity scores in the data dimensions strategy, indicating instrument-like covariates. Moreover, the CCS mapping strategy resulted in at least 30% less bias than pooled RR and data dimensions strategies (RMSE: 0.14, 0.19, 0.21, respectively) in this scenario. Conclusion: Mapping ICD codes to a stable terminology like CCS serves as a helpful strategy to reduce residual bias when deploying HDPS in pharmacoepidemiologic studies spanning both ICD eras.

Protocol of a Combined Cohort and Cross-Sectional Study of Persons Receiving Medical Cannabis in Florida, USA: The Medical Marijuana and Me (M3) Study.

Significant knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness and safety of medical cannabis (MC) create clinical challenges for MC physicians, making treatment recommendations and patients choosing treatment among the growing number of options offered in dispensaries. Additionally, data describing the characteristics of people who use MC and the products and doses they receive are lacking. The Medical Marijuana and Me (M3) Study was designed to collect patient-centered data from MC users. We aim to describe preferred MC use patterns that patients report as "most effective" for specific health conditions and symptoms, identify user characteristics associated with such use patterns, characterize adverse effects, including cannabis use disorder, identify products and patient characteristics associated with adverse effects, describe concurrent prescription medication use, and identify concomitant medication use with potential drug-MC interaction risk. Among MC initiators, we also aim to quantify MC use persistence and identify reasons for discontinuation, assess MC utilization pattern trajectories over time, describe outcome trajectories of primary reasons for MC use and determine factors associated with different trajectories, track changes in concomitant substance and medication use after MC initiation, and identify factors associated with such changes. M3 is a combined study comprised of: (1) a prospective cohort of MC initiators completing surveys at enrollment, 3 months, and 9 months after MC initiation and (2) a cross-sectional study of current MC users. A multidisciplinary committee including researchers, physicians, pharmacists, patients, and dispensary personnel designed and planned study protocols, established study measures, and created survey questionnaires. M3 will recruit 1,000-1,200 participants aged ≥18 years, with ∼50% new and ∼50% current MC patients from MC clinics across Florida, USA. Study enrollment started in May 2022 and will continue until the target number of patients is achieved. Survey domains include sociodemographic characteristics, physical and mental health, cannabis use history, reasons for MC use and discontinuation, MC products and use patterns, concurrent use of prescription medications and other substances, and side effects. Data collected in the M3 Study will be available for interested researchers affiliated with the Consortium for Medical Marijuana Clinical Outcomes Research. The M3 Study and Databank will be the largest cohort of current and new MC users in Florida, USA, which will provide data to support MC-related health research necessary to inform policy and clinical practice and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Assessing the Clinical Treatment Dynamics of Antiplatelet Therapy Following Acute Coronary Syndrome and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the US.

Importance: A platelet ADP P2Y12 receptor (P2Y12) inhibitor plus aspirin is standard therapy for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor are associated with superior antiatherothrombotic effects but increased bleeding risk; with recent guideline updates, it is important to describe current treatment patterns and the role of bleeding risk in treatment choice. Objective: To describe secular trends and determinants of initial P2Y12 inhibitor choice and switching, including deescalation (switch from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used MarketScan Commercial Claims Data from 2010 to 2019 for patients aged 18 years or older who underwent PCI for ACS, had no P2Y12 inhibitor use in the past year, and filled a P2Y12 inhibitor prescription within 30 days after PCI hospitalization discharge. Data were analyzed from February to May 2022. Exposures: Clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor, with determinants including bleeding risk measured using Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk criteria, sociodemographic characteristics, P2Y12 inhibitor copays, and bleeding events during follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prevalence of each P2Y12 inhibitor among patients who initiated the drugs and the prevalence of switching within 12 months after PCI were evaluated. The association between baseline bleeding risk and bleeding manifestations during follow-up and initial treatment and deescalation were calculated using multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: Between 2010 and 2019, 62 423 patients were identified who initiated P2Y12 inhibitors (females, 22.4%; males, 77.6%; mean [SD] age, 54.32 [7.13] years). The prevalence of clopidogrel as initial therapy decreased from 77.5% in 2010 to 29.6% in 2019, while initial use of prasugrel or ticagrelor increased from 22.5% to 60.4%. Within 1 year after PCI, 11.0% of patients switched therapy, mostly for deescalation. Deescalation prevalence increased from 1.8% in 2010 to 12.6% in 2018. Between 2016 and 2018, 8588 of 22 886 (37.5%) patients had major baseline bleeding risk, which decreased the selection of prasugrel or ticagrelor as initial therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.74-0.84). Among 11 285 patients who initiated prasugrel or ticagrelor, major bleeding risk at baseline (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.23) and the occurrence of bleeding during follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.42; 95% CI, 3.62-5.93) were associated with deescalation. Conclusions and Relevance: A strong shift in preference for prasugrel and ticagrelor as initial therapy following PCI for ACS was observed. Deescalation increased over the study period. Major bleeding risk at baseline was moderately associated with initial treatment choice but had a limited association with deescalation. The increasing use of more potent P2Y12 inhibitors emphasizes opportunities to enhance preemptive patient-centered treatment strategies to maintain optimal antiplatelet activity while reducing bleeding risk during the subacute period following PCI for ACS.

Assessment of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for Phentermine-Topiramate to Prevent Exposure During Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved phentermine-topiramate for obesity in 2012 and required a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to prevent prenatal exposure. No such requirement was introduced for topiramate. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of prenatal exposure, contraceptive use, and pregnancy testing among patients with phentermine-topiramate compared with topiramate or other antiobesity medications (AOMs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide health insurance claims database. PARTICIPANTS: Females aged 12 to 55 years with no infertility diagnosis or sterilization procedure. Patients with other indications for topiramate were excluded to identify a cohort that was likely treated for obesity. MEASUREMENTS: Patients initiated use of phentermine-topiramate, topiramate, or an AOM (liraglutide, lorcaserin, or bupropion-naltrexone). Pregnancy at treatment initiation, conception during treatment, contraceptive use, and pregnancy testing outcomes were ascertained. Measurable confounders were adjusted for, and extensive sensitivity analyses were done. RESULTS: A total of 156 280 treatment episodes were observed. Adjusted prevalence of pregnancy at treatment initiation was 0.9 versus 1.6 per 1000 episodes (prevalence ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.95]) for phentermine-topiramate versus topiramate. The incidence rate of conception during treatment was 9.1 versus 15.0 per 1000 person-years (rate ratio, 0.61 [CI, 0.40 to 0.91]) for phentermine-topiramate versus topiramate. Both outcomes were similarly lower for phentermine-topiramate compared with AOM. Prenatal exposure was marginally lower in topiramate users compared with AOM users. Approximately 20% of patients in all cohorts had at least 50% of treatment days covered by contraceptives. Few patients had pregnancy tests before treatment (≤5%), but this was more common among phentermine-topiramate users. LIMITATIONS: Outcome misclassification; unmeasured confounding due to lack of prescriber data to account for possible clustering and spillover effects. CONCLUSION: Prenatal exposure seemed to be significantly lower among phentermine-topiramate users under the REMS. Pregnancy testing and contraceptive use appeared to be inadequate for all groups, which deserves attention to prevent the remaining potential exposures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Comparison of Pimavanserin Versus Quetiapine for Hospitalization and Mortality Risk Among Medicare Beneficiaries with Parkinson's Disease Psychosis.

Background: Pimavanserin is currently the only antipsychotic approved for Parkinson's disease (PD) psychosis, yet its relative safety compared with treatment alternatives has not been thoroughly assessed. Objectives: This study aimed to compare hospitalization and mortality risk in Medicare beneficiaries with PD receiving new prescriptions of pimavanserin or quetiapine for PD psychosis. Methods: The study identified new users of pimavanserin and quetiapine from a 15% national sample of Medicare fee-for-service claims collected between May 1, 2016, and December 30, 2018. All-cause hospitalization and mortality were assessed in time-to-event regression models. Standardized mortality ratio weighting balanced pimavanserin and quetiapine users on baseline characteristics. Follow-up was censored at discontinuation, switch, disenrollment, or the end of the study period. Results: There were 844 new pimavanserin users and 2505 new quetiapine users. The adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for hospitalization at 30, 90, 180, and 365 days for pimavanserin versus quetiapine users were 0.59 (0.43-0.81), 0.56 (0.44-0.72), 0.63 (0.52-0.77), and 0.70 (0.60-0.83). The most common reasons for hospitalization were traumatic injury and sepsis. Hospitalizations for heart-related issues were higher with pimavanserin (P < 0.05). The adjusted hazard ratios (95% CIs) for all-cause mortality at 90, 180, and 365 days for pimavanserin versus quetiapine users were 0.73 (0.48-1.13), 0.80 (0.58-1.10), and 0.94 (0.74-1.19). Conclusions: Risk of hospitalization was lower in pimavanserin users compared with quetiapine, and no difference in mortality was observed between pimavanserin and quetiapine. An active comparator analyses with treatment alternatives provided the most clinically relevant information for patients and physicians.

Comparative effectiveness of pegfilgrastim biosimilars vs originator for prevention of febrile neutropenia: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence on the comparative effectiveness of pegfilgrastim biosimilars compared with the originator product is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) among users of pegfilgrastim biosimilars (pegfilgrastim-jmdb and pegfilgrastim-cbqv) and the originator product. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 2019 IBM MarketScan databases to assess comparative effectiveness of pegfilgrastim originator and biosimilars for prevention of FN among patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Patients with cancer, including breast, lung, colorectal, esophageal and gastric, pancreatic, prostate, ovarian, and non-Hodgkin lymphomas, initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy courses were selected. We further selected patients who used pegfilgrastim originator and biosimilars within 3 days of chemotherapy completion. FN-associated hospitalizations were measured by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. After 1:1 propensity score matching, we used equivalence (with a margin of 6%) hypothesis tests to compare FN-related hospitalization risk in the first cycle and across all cycles between biosimilars and originator users. RESULTS: A total of 2,045 patients were included, of which 445 (21.8%) used pegfilgrastim-jmdb, 636 (31.1%) used pegfilgrastim-cbqv, and 964 (47.1%) used pegfilgrastim originator. After matching, 13 out of 445 originator users and 17 out of 445 pegfilgrastim-jmdb users developed FN after the first chemotherapy cycle (risk difference was 0.9%; P < 0.001 for equivalence test indicating statistical equivalence). After matching, 14 out of 633 originator users and 16 out of 633 pegfilgrastim-cbqv users developed FN (risk difference was 0.32%; P < 0.001 for equivalence test indicating statistical equivalence). Results across all cycles (including the first cycle) were consistent with that in the first cycle. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study of patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, there was no difference in FN risk between patients receiving pegfilgrastim originator and biosimilars in the first cycle and across all cycles. These results add further to the current evidence on pegfilgrastim biosimilars and support wider adoption of pegfilgrastim biosimilars among payers, providers, and patients. Future studies assessing the tolerability, side effects, and other safety issues of pegfilgrastim biosimilars are needed.

Anthropomorphic model rigid loading indenter with embedded sensor development for wheelchair cushion standard testing.

Develop an anthropomorphic model cushion rigid loading indenter with embedded sensors (AMCRLI-ES) to assess compression and shear forces at key locations such as trochanters and ischial tuberosities. The sensor design was optimized using finite element analysis. The AMCRLI-ES was designed with the same dimensions as specified in ISO 16840-2 tests. The AMCRLI-ES is divided into eight independent sections, and each section consists of one 3-axis load cell sensor to measure compression and shear forces normal to the compression direction. Six commercial cushions were tested using the AMCRLI-ES with standard ISO 16840-2 testing procedures. Statistical differences were found for energy dissipation between cushions. Statistical differences (p < 0.001) were found in all stiffness values. Test results showed that energy dissipation (ED) was correlated with hysteresis at 500 N with moderate to high Pearson product correlation r = -0.537, p = 0.022. The hysteresis at 250 N did not show a statistical correlation with ED. The AMCRLI-ES demonstrated the ability to measure compression and shear forces at key locations on the cushion including the thigh, trochanter, ischial tuberosity, and sacral area. It provides in-depth information about how the weight was distributed on the cushions.

Topiramate Utilization After Phentermine/Topiramate Approval for Obesity Management: Risk Minimization in the Era of Drug Repurposing.

INTRODUCTION: The US FDA required a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for phentermine/topiramate, an anti-obesity medication, to prevent congenital malformations. No REMS is required for single-ingredient topiramate, which may be used off-label for the same purpose. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of phentermine/topiramate approval in 2012 on subsequent topiramate use among patients with obesity. METHODS: We used a national insurance claims database to conduct an interrupted time-series study (2009-2015). Enrollees aged 18-65 years in each examined calendar quarter had full insurance benefits during that quarter and the preceding 6 months. We required patients to have an obesity diagnosis and no other conditions warranting topiramate use. We calculated topiramate or comparator drug (atorvastatin, metformin) initiation rates and evaluated changes in trends before and after 2012 (transition period). RESULTS: Among topiramate users, 80% were female, and demographic characteristics remained consistent during the study period. Between 2009 and 2011, the topiramate initiation rate (95% confidence interval) among patients with obesity was 0.85 (0.73-0.98) per 1000 patients, with no significant upward or downward trend. In the first quarter of 2013, this rate had increased more than 2.5-fold (change: + 1.36 [1.19-1.52]). Metformin and atorvastatin initiation rates did not change. Topiramate initiation rates were threefold higher than phentermine/topiramate rates during the post-approval period. CONCLUSION: Phentermine/topiramate approval was associated with increased topiramate use among patients with obesity. Prescribers are encouraged to enhance patient education and monitoring in such clinical use since topiramate prescribing information, compared with REMS for phentermine/topiramate, has less emphasis on preventing prenatal exposure.

Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Aldosterone Antagonists Versus Beta-Blockers as Fourth Agents in Patients With Apparent Resistant Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding long-term effectiveness and safety of aldosterone antagonists (AAs) versus beta blockers (BBs) as fourth-line antihypertensive agents in patients with resistant hypertension (RH). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness and safety of aldosterone AA versus BB. METHODS: We conducted a real-world retrospective cohort study using IBM MarketScan commercial claims and Medicare Supplemental claims (2007-2019). Patients with RH entered the cohort (ie, index date) when they newly initiated either AA or BB. The effectiveness outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events. Safety outcomes were hyperkalemia, gynecomastia, and kidney function deterioration. Potential confounding was addressed by adjustment for baseline characteristics via stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) based on propensity scores. Cox proportional hazards regression with SIPTWs were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% CI comparing risk for outcomes between AA and BB groups. RESULTS: We identified 80 598 patients with RH (mean age: 61 years, 51% males), of which 6626 initiated AA and 73 972 initiated BB as the fourth antihypertensive agent. Among patients with RH, initiation of AA as a fourth-line antihypertensive agent did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular event risk relative to BB initiation (aHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.50-1.19]) but did substantially increase the risk of hyperkalemia (aHR, 3.86 [95% CI, 2.78-5.34]), gynecomastia (aHR, 9.51 [95% CI, 5.69-15.89]), and kidney function deterioration (aHR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.34-1.99]). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical trials powered to assess major adverse cardiovascular events are necessary to understand the risk-benefit trade-off of AA as fourth-line therapy for RH.

Patient out-of-pocket and payer costs for pegfilgrastim originator vs biosimilars as primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in the first cycle among a commercially insured population.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether using pegfilgrastim biosimilars is cost saving in a real-world setting. OBJECTIVE: To compare medical costs including pegfilgrastim drug costs and febrile neutropenia (FN) treatment and management costs between pegfilgrastim biosimilars (pegfilgrastim-jmdb, pegfilgrastim-cbqv) and originator users for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using 2019 IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases was conducted in adult patients with cancer initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy courses. At least 2 diagnoses of the same cancer (at least 7 days apart) were required within 30 days of the chemotherapy initiation date. Pegfilgrastim (excluding on-body injector) costs included drug costs only (excluding administration fees). FN-related costs included all FN-related health care utilizations that were defined as having neutropenia, fever, or infection diagnosis. Per-patient per-cycle (PPPC) out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, health plan costs, and total costs were compared between originator (excluding on-body injector) and biosimilars users in the first cycle. A generalized linear model and a 2-part model were used. RESULTS: A total of 1,930 patients were included, of whom 884 (45.8%) used pegfilgrastim originator, 427 (22.1%) used pegfilgrastim-jmdb, and 619 (32.1%) used pegfilgrastim-cbqv. Adjusted PPPC OOP pegfilgrastim costs in the first cycle were significantly lower for the biosimilars vs the originator ($182 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb and $159 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv vs $299 for originator, P < 0.0001 for both comparisons). However, there was no difference in health plan costs ($5,783 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb and $5,845 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv vs $5,618 for originator) and total costs. In addition, no difference was observed for adjusted PPPC FN treatment and management OOP costs, health plan costs, and total costs in the first cycle. FN treatment OOP costs were $192 for originator, $197 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb (P = 0.958), and $240 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv (P = 0.680). FN treatment health plan costs were $2,804 for originator, $2,970 for pegfilgrastim-jmdb (P = 0.692), and $2,745 for pegfilgrastim-cbqv (P = 0.879). CONCLUSIONS: In a commercially insured population, using pegfilgrastim biosimilars in the first cycle for primary prophylaxis of FN led to cost savings for patients but not payers. No difference in FN-related costs was observed.

Projected Impact of the Medicare Part D Senior Savings Model on Diabetes-Related Health and Economic Outcomes Among Insulin Users Covered by Medicare.

OBJECTIVE: The Medicare Part D Senior Savings Model (SSM) took effect on 1 January 2021. In this study we estimated the number of beneficiaries who would benefit from SSM and the long-term health and economic consequences of implementing this new policy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data for Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes treated with insulin were extracted from the 2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. A validated diabetes microsimulation model estimated health and economic impacts of the new policy for the 5-year initial implementation period and a 20-year extended policy horizon. Costs were estimated from a health system perspective. RESULTS: Of 4.2 million eligible Medicare beneficiaries, 1.6 million (38.3%) would benefit from the policy, and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs per year per beneficiary would decrease by 61% or $500 on average. Compared with non-White subgroups, the White population subgroups would have a higher proportion of SSM enrollees (29.6% vs. 43.7%) and a higher annual OOP cost reduction (reduction of $424 vs. $531). Among the SSM enrollees, one-third (605,125) were predicted to have improved insulin adherence due to lower cost sharing and improved health outcomes. In 5 years, the SSM would 1) avert 2,014 strokes, 935 heart attacks, 315 heart failure cases, and 344 end-stage renal disease cases; 2) gain 3,220 life-years and 3,381 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY); and 3) increase insulin cost and total medical cost by $3.5 billion and $2.8 billion. In 20 years, the number of avoided clinical outcomes, number of life-years and QALY gained, and the total and insulin cost would be larger. CONCLUSIONS: The Medicare SSM may reduce the OOP costs for approximately one-third of the Medicare beneficiaries treated with insulin, improving health outcomes via increased insulin adherence. However, the SSM will also increase overall Medicare spending for insulin and overall medical costs, which may impact future premiums and benefits. Our findings can inform policy makers about the potential impact of the new Medicare SSM.