Development and electronic health record validation of an algorithm for identifying patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy in US administrative claims.

BACKGROUND: Muscular dystrophies (MDs) comprise a heterogenous group of genetically inherited conditions characterized by progressive muscle weakness and increasing disability. The lack of separate diagnosis codes for Duchenne MD (DMD) and Becker MD, 2 of the most common forms of MD, has limited the conduct of DMD-specific real-world studies. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate administrative claims-based algorithms for identifying patients with DMD and capturing their nonambulatory and ventilation-dependent status. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the statistically deidentified Optum Market Clarity Database (including patient claims linked with electronic health records [EHRs] data) to develop and validate the following algorithms: DMD diagnosis, nonambulatory status, and ventilation-dependent status. The initial study sample consisted of US patients in the database who had a diagnosis code for Duchenne/Becker MD (DBMD) between October 1, 2018, and September 30, 2020, who were male, aged 40 years or younger on their first DBMD diagnosis, and met continuous enrollment and 1-day minimal clinical activities requirement in a 12-month measurement period between October 1, 2017, and September 30, 2020. The algorithms, developed by a cross-functional team of DMD specialists (including patient advocates), were based on administrative claims data with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modifications coding, using information of diagnosis codes for DBMD, sex, age, treatment, and disease severity (eg, evidence of ambulation assistance/support and/or evidence of ventilation support or dependence). Patients who met each algorithm and had EHR notes available were then validated against structured fields and unstructured provider notes from their own linked EHR to confirm patients' DMD diagnoses, nonambulatory status, and ventilation-dependent status. Algorithm performance was assessed by positive predictive value with 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 1,300 patients were included in the initial study sample. Of these, EHR were available and reviewed for 303 patients. The mean age of the 303 patients was 14.8 years, with 61.7% being non-Hispanic White. A majority had a Charlson comorbidity index score of 0 (59.4%) or 1-2 (27.7%). Positive predictive value (95% CI) was 91.6% (85.8%-95.6%) for the DMD diagnosis algorithm, 88.4% (80.2%-94.1%) for the nonambulatory status algorithm, and 77.8% (62.9%-88.8%) for the ventilation-dependent status algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: This work provides the means to more accurately identify patients with DMD from administrative claims data without a specific diagnosis code. The algorithms validated in this study can be applied to assess treatment effectiveness and other outcomes among patients with DMD treated in clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Pfizer, which contracted with Optum to perform the study and provide medical writing assistance. Ms Schrader reports being an employee of Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy. Mr Posner reports being an employee and stockholder of Pfizer and receiving support from Pfizer for attending conferences not related to this manuscript. Dr Dorling reports being an employee and stockholder of Pfizer at the time the study was conducted and is a current employee of Chiesi USA, Inc. Ms Senerchia reports being an employee of Optum and owning stock in Pfizer and UnitedHealth Group, the parent company of Optum. Dr Chen reports being an employee and stockholder of Pfizer. Ms Beaverson reports being an employee of Pfizer and owning stock in Pfizer and Amicus Therapeutics. Dr Seare reports being an employee of Optum at the time the study was conducted. Dr Garnier and Ms Merla report being employees of Pfizer. Ms Walker reports being an employee of Optum. Dr Alvir reports being an employee and stockholder of Pfizer. Dr Mahn reports being an employee and stockholder of Pfizer. Dr Zhang reports being an employee of Optum. Ms Landis reports being an employee of Optum. Ms Buikema reports being an employee of Optum and holding stock in UnitedHealth Group, the parent company of Optum.

Meningococcal Vaccination Rates Among People With a New Diagnosis of HIV Infection in the US.

Importance: In the United States, individuals with HIV infection have been recommended to receive a 2-dose series of the meningococcal A, C, W, Y (MenACWY) vaccine since 2016 owing to their increased risk of meningococcal disease. Objective: To examine uptake and time to receipt of the MenACWY vaccine among people with a new diagnosis of HIV. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used health insurance data from the US Optum Research Database from January 1, 2016, through March 31, 2018, to retrospectively identify 1208 individuals aged 2 years or older with 1 or more inpatient claim or 2 or more outpatient claims evidencing a new diagnosis of HIV infection and with continuous insurance enrollment for 12 or more months before and 6 or more months after diagnosis. Follow-up was 6 to 33 months. Statistical analysis was conducted from March 7, 2019, to January 5, 2022. Exposure: Receipt of the MenACWY vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were uptake and time to receipt of 1 or more doses of the MenACWY vaccine after a new HIV diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included uptake and time to receipt of 2 or more doses of the MenACWY vaccine. Vaccination uptake and receipt were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis; factors associated with receipt of 1 or more doses of the MenACWY vaccine were identified with multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results: Of 1208 individuals eligible for vaccination (1024 male patients [84.8%]; mean [SD] age, 38.8 [12.5] years; 35 [2.9%] Asian; 273 [22.6%] Black; 204 [16.9%] Hispanic; 442 [36.6%] White), 16.3% were estimated to have received a first dose of the MenACWY vaccine in the 2 years after a new HIV diagnosis. Among individuals who received a first dose, at 1 year or more of enrollment after the first dose, 66.2% were estimated to have received a second dose within 1 year of the first dose. Factors statistically significantly associated with uptake of the MenACWY vaccine included receipt of a pneumococcal vaccine (hazard ratio [HR], 23.03; 95% CI, 13.93-38.09), attendance at a well-care visit (HR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.11-12.12), West or Midwest geographic region (West: HR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.44-3.47; Midwest: HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.16-2.71), and male sex (HR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.18-6.26), whereas age of 56 years or older was significantly associated with reduced uptake of the MenACWY vaccine (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.97). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that MenACWY vaccine uptake among people with a new diagnosis of HIV was low, highlighting the need to educate patients and clinicians about the recommendations for conditions such as HIV infection that increase the risk of meningococcal disease among high-risk populations.

Low Meningococcal Vaccination Rates Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Complement Component Deficiencies in the United States.

Meningococcal vaccination is recommended for patients with complement component deficiencies (CDs) in the United States. In this retrospective database study, only 4.6% and 2.2% of patients received MenACWY and MenB vaccination, respectively, within 3 years of CD diagnosis. Thus, meningococcal vaccination rates among patients with CDs need to be improved.

Racial and ethnic disparity in clinical outcomes among patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection in a large US electronic health record database.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic minority groups have been disproportionately affected by the US coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, nationwide data on COVID-19 outcomes stratified by race/ethnicity and adjusted for clinical characteristics are sparse. This study analyzed the impacts of race/ethnicity on outcomes among US patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis in the electronic health record from 01 February 2020 through 14 September 2020. Index encounter site, hospitalization, and mortality were assessed by race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black [Black], non-Hispanic White [White], non-Hispanic Asian [Asian], or Other/unknown). Associations between racial/ethnic categories and study outcomes adjusted for patient characteristics were evaluated using logistic regression. FINDINGS: Among 202,908 patients with confirmed COVID-19, patients from racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely than White patients to be hospitalized on initial presentation (Hispanic: adjusted odds ratio 1·690, 95% CI 1·620-1·763; Black: 1·810, 1·743-1·880; Asian: 1·503, 1·381-1·636) and during follow-up (Hispanic: 1·700, 1·638-1·764; Black: 1·578, 1·526-1·633; Asian: 1·391, 1·288-1·501). Among hospitalized patients, adjusted mortality risk was lower for Black patients (0·881, 0·809-0·959) but higher for Asian patients (1·205, 1·000-1·452). INTERPRETATION: Racial/ethnic minority patients with COVID-19 had more severe disease on initial presentation than White patients. Increased mortality risk was attenuated by hospitalization among Black patients but not Asian patients, indicating that outcome disparities may be mediated by distinct factors for different groups. In addition to enacting policies to facilitate equitable access to COVID-19-related care, further analyses of disaggregated population-level COVID-19 data are needed.

Development and validation of a drug adherence index for COPD.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled medications are the mainstay of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite their importance, adherence to these medications is low. Low adherence is linked to increased exacerbation rates, mortality rates, health care utilization, and, ultimately, increased costs. A drug adherence index (DAI) is a predictive modeling tool that identifies patients most likely to change adherence status so that they can be targeted for support programs. Optum has previously developed DAI tools for diabetes, hypertension, and high cholesterol. In this study, a COPD-specific DAI was developed. This DAI tool could be used to better target medication adherence support in patients with COPD, aiming to increase adherence. OBJECTIVES: To develop a COPD-specific DAI using (a) enrollment, medical, and pharmacy variables and (b) only enrollment and pharmacy variables for potential application to pharmacy benefit managers and pharmacy plans. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study using health care claims among Medicare Advantage with Part D beneficiaries with COPD in the United States. Potential predictors of adherence were measured during a 1-year baseline period. The adherence outcome was measured during a subsequent 1-year at-risk period. Adherence to long-acting bronchodilators was defined as a proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥80%. Nonadherence was defined as a PDC of <80%. Patients were stratified according to their adherence status at baseline, and logistic regression models were developed separately for each set of patients. Separate models were also developed using enrollment, medical, and pharmacy variables (primary objective) or using enrollment and pharmacy variables only (secondary objective). RESULTS: A total of 61,507 patients met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. For the primary objective, at baseline, 31,142 patients were adherent and 30,365 patients were nonadherent. The final DAI model used to predict future nonadherence included 30 covariates, with 7 predictors from medical claims. The validated model c-statistic was 0.752. The final DAI model used to predict future adherence included 29 covariates; only 4 predictors were from medical claims. The validated model c-statistic was 0.691. Findings were similar for the secondary objective using only enrollment and pharmacy variables. CONCLUSIONS: This DAI was developed and validated specifically to predict future adherence status to long-acting bronchodilator medications among patients with COPD. The DAI models performed better for predicting nonadherence than predicting adherence. Both organizations with medical and pharmacy data and organizations with only pharmacy data could utilize the DAI tool to target patients for adherence programs, as results were similar with and without the use of medical variables. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored and funded by GlaxoSmithKline (HO-16-17938). The study sponsor participated in the conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data, and drafting and critical revision of the report and approved submission of the manuscript. All authors had access to the results of the analyses, reviewed and edited the manuscript, approved the final draft, and were involved in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The data contained in the Optum database contain proprietary elements owned by Optum and, therefore, cannot be broadly disclosed or made publicly available at this time. The disclosure of these data to third parties assumes certain data security and privacy protocols are in place and that the third party has executed a license agreement that includes restrictive agreements governing the use of the data. Bengtson, Buikema, and Bankcroft are employees at Optum, and Schilling is a former employee of Optum; their employment was not contingent on this work. Optum was funded by GlaxoSmithKline to conduct the study. Stanford was an employee of GlaxoSmithKline at the time of this study and holds stock in GlaxoSmithKline.

Hepatitis C Screening Rates and Care Cascade in a Large US Insured Population, 2010-2016: Gaps to Elimination.

Understanding the health care system's ability to move patients through the hepatitis C virus (HCV) care cascade from screening to treatment is essential for HCV elimination. This retrospective study describes real-world HCV screening rates and care cascade steps to identify gaps in care for patients with HCV in the United States. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years as of the measurement year (calendar year between January 1, 2010-December 31, 2016) and were commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D members in the Optum Research database with continuous health plan enrollment 5 years prior to and during the measurement year. Incident and prevalent screening rates were calculated for each measurement year. Care cascade steps were analyzed via Kaplan-Meier analysis and logistic regression among patients with a positive HCV ribonucleic acid test. Cohorts were selected based on birth year (pre-1945 birth cohort, 1945-1965 birth cohort, post-1965 birth cohort). Among the 1945-1965 birth cohort, incident and prevalent screening rates increased from 1.6% to 4.7% and 10% to 18%, respectively, from 2010 to 2016. The proportion of patients attaining each independent cascade step within 1 year of screening increased significantly over time for genotype testing (P = 0.0283) and receipt of treatment (P < 0.0001). Median time from screening to treatment decreased from 1627 days (95% CI 1335-1871) in 2010 to 282 days (95% CI 223-498) in 2015. HCV screening and completion of the care cascade has improved for certain patient populations; however, gaps remain, highlighting the urgent need to address barriers to meeting HCV elimination goals.

Meningococcal vaccination in patients with newly diagnosed asplenia in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patients with asplenia are recommended to receive meningococcal ACWY (MenACWY) and B (MenB) vaccines in the United States (US). OBJECTIVES: To examine uptake and time to receipt of meningococcal vaccines in newly diagnosed asplenia patients, and identify factors associated with vaccination. METHODS: For this retrospective database analysis, patients were identified from 1/1/2010 (MenACWY) or 1/1/2015 (MenB) through 3/31/2018 from an administrative claims database including commercially insured US patients with ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims with evidence of a new asplenia diagnosis (sickle cell disease was excluded); continuous enrollment for ≥12 months before and ≥6 months after the index date; and age ≥2 (MenACWY) or ≥10 (MenB) years. Co-primary outcomes were uptake and time to receipt of ≥1 dose, separately for MenACWY and MenB, by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with vaccination. RESULTS: Among 2,273 and 741 patients eligible for the MenACWY and MenB analyses, respectively, 28.1% and 9.7% received MenACWY and MenB in the first 3 years after a new asplenia diagnosis. Patients were more likely to receive meningococcal vaccines if they had received pneumococcal vaccines (MenACWY: hazard ratio [HR] 26.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 21.01-32.22; MenB: HR 3.89; 95% CI 2.07-7.29) or attended ≥1 well-care visit (MenACWY: HR 6.63; 95% CI 4.84-9.09; MenB: HR 11.17; 95% CI 3.02-41.26). CONCLUSIONS: Meningococcal vaccination rates among newly diagnosed asplenia patients were low, highlighting the need to educate providers about the recommendations for high-risk conditions and ensure healthcare access for vulnerable patients.

Healthcare Resource Utilization, Exacerbations, and Readmissions Among Medicare Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease After Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Therapy Initiation with Soft Mist versus Dry Powder Inhalers.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often managed with inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), yet real-world data on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) by inhaler type are lacking. This study compared HRU after LAMA initiation with a soft mist inhaler (SMI) versus a dry powder inhaler (DPI). Patients and Methods: Inclusion criteria were COPD diagnosis, age ≥40 years, LAMA initiation (index date = first LAMA SMI or DPI claim 9/1/14-6/30/18), and Medicare Advantage enrollment 1 year pre-index (baseline) to ≥30 days post-index (follow-up). Patients were followed to the earliest of discontinuation, switch, disenrollment, 1 year, or study end (7/31/18). Exclusion criteria were asthma, cystic fibrosis, or lung cancer diagnoses, unavailable demographics, multiple index LAMAs, or baseline LAMA use. Cohorts (SMI or DPI) were balanced on baseline characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Outcomes included per patient per month (PPPM) COPD-related HRU encounters, and exacerbations (defined as moderate [ambulatory visit with corticosteroid or antibiotic within ±7 days] or severe [emergency visit or inpatient admission]); and 30-day readmissions following COPD-related hospitalizations. Results: After weighting, cohorts (SMI [n=5360] and DPI [n=22,880]) were similar in age (72 and 73 years, respectively), gender (both 52% female), and COPD severity score (31.3 and 31.5, respectively). Cohorts had similar counts of follow-up HRU encounters. However, the SMI cohort had fewer (mean ± standard deviation) COPD-related exacerbations (0.054±0.082 vs DPI cohort 0.059±0.088 PPPM, p<0.001) overall. Moreover, the SMI cohort had fewer severe exacerbations (0.030±0.058 vs DPI: 0.034±0.065 PPPM, p<0.001). Hospitalizations among SMI patients had a lower adjusted odds of readmission versus hospitalizations among DPI patients (odds ratio: 0.656, 95% confidence interval= 0.460, 0.937; p=0.020). Conclusion: SMI initiators had significantly fewer COPD-related exacerbations than DPI initiators. In addition, lower odds of readmissions were observed following COPD-related hospitalizations among the SMI cohort, as compared with the DPI cohort.

Differences in Real-World Health and Economic Outcomes Among Patients with COPD Treated with Combination Tiotropium/Olodaterol Versus Triple Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommends combination long-acting muscarinic antagonists/long-acting beta2-agonists (LAMA + LABA) as preferred maintenance therapy for patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) after monotherapy and stepping up to triple therapy (TT; LAMA + LABA + inhaled corticosteroids [ICS]) in case of further exacerbations. Restrictions on TT recommendations have primarily been driven by higher pneumonia risk associated with regular ICS use. Evidence suggests that TT is overprescribed, which may affect economic and clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare health plan-paid costs, COPD exacerbations, and pneumonia diagnoses among patients newly treated with a LAMA + LABA regimen composed of tiotropium (TIO) + olodaterol (OLO) in a fixed-dose combination inhaler (TIO + OLO) or TT in a U.S. Medicare Advantage Part D insured population. METHODS: This retrospective study identified COPD patients aged ≥ 40 years who were initiating TIO + OLO or TT (index regimen) between January 1, 2014, and March 31, 2018, from a national administrative claims database. Continuous insurance coverage for 12 months pretreatment (baseline) and ≥ 30 days posttreatment (follow-up) was required. Patients were followed until the earliest of study end (May 31, 2018), discontinuation of index regimen (≥ 60-day gap in index regimen coverage), switch to a different regimen, or health plan disenrollment. Before analysis of outcomes, TIO + OLO and TT patients were 1:1 propensity score-matched on baseline demographics, comorbidities, COPD medication use, medical resource use, and costs. Cohort differences in post-match outcomes were assessed by Wald Z-test (annualized costs) and Kaplan-Meier method (time to first COPD exacerbation and pneumonia diagnosis). RESULTS: After matching, each cohort had 1,454 patients who were well balanced on baseline characteristics. Compared with TT, the TIO + OLO cohort incurred $7,041 (41.1%) lower mean COPD-related total costs ($10,094 vs. $17,135; P < 0.001); cohort differences in the medical component ($3,666 lower for TIO + OLO) were driven by lower mean acute inpatient costs ($3,053 lower for TIO + OLO). Combined mean COPD plus pneumonia-related medical costs were $5,212 (39.0%) lower for TIO + OLO versus TT ($8,209 vs. $13,421; P = 0.006), and total mean all-cause costs were $9,221 (30.4%) lower for TIO + OLO versus TT ($21,062 vs. $30,283; P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis found longer time to first severe COPD exacerbation (P = 0.020) and first pneumonia diagnosis (P = 0.002) for TIO + OLO versus TT and a lower percentage of TIO + OLO patients experiencing these events (severe COPD exacerbation: 9.0% vs. 16.1%; pneumonia: 14.5% vs. 19.3%). A secondary analysis, which expanded the TIO + OLO cohort to include any LAMA + LABA regimen, had similar findings for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: COPD patients initiating TIO + OLO incurred lower costs to health plans and experienced fewer COPD exacerbation and pneumonia events relative to TT. These findings provide important real-world economic and clinical insight into the GOLD recommendations for TIO + OLO and LAMA + LABA therapy. The study findings also indicate the continued inconsistency between the recommendations and real-world clinical practices pertaining to TT. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (BIPI). Palli and Franchino-Elder are employees of BIPI. Frazer, DuCharme, Buikema, and Anderson are employees of Optum, which was contracted by BIPI to conduct this study. The authors received no direct compensation related to the development of the manuscript. BIPI was given the opportunity to review the manuscript for medical and scientific accuracy as well as intellectual property considerations.

Costs, exacerbations and pneumonia after initiating combination tiotropium olodaterol versus triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Aim: To compare health plan-paid costs, exacerbations and pneumonia outcomes for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initiating combination tiotropium olodaterol (TIO + OLO) versus triple therapy (TT: long-acting muscarinic antagonist + long-acting ß2 agonists + inhaled corticosteroid). Patients & methods: COPD patients initiating TIO + OLO or TT between 1 January 2014 and 30 June 2016 were identified from a managed care Medicare database and balanced for baseline characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting before assessment of outcomes. Results: Annual COPD-related and all-cause costs were US$4118 (35%) and US$5384 (23%) lower for TIO + OLO versus TT (both p ≤ 0.001). TIO + OLO patients had nearly half the severe exacerbations (8.3 vs 15.5%; p = 0.014) and pneumonia was also less common (18.9 vs 30.9%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: TIO + OLO was associated with improved economic and COPD health outcomes versus TT.

Assessment of COPD-related outcomes in patients initiating a once daily or twice daily ICS/LABA.

BACKGROUND: Use of inhaled corticosteroids and long acting beta agonist (ICS/LABA) combination therapy has been shown to decrease the frequency of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In this population, adherence to treatment is associated with better disease control and lower risk of COPD-related exacerbations in the future. Using a treatment with a more convenient regimen or easier-to-use device could improve patient adherence, improve disease control, decrease the frequency of exacerbations and minimize the COPD-related economic burden. Real-world information on the impact on healthcare costs and exacerbation risk of initiating once-daily or twice daily ICS/LABA in this patient population is limited. The objective of this study was to assess COPD-related healthcare costs, adherence, and exacerbations in COPD patients initiating treatment with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 (FF/VI) or budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 (BUD/F) using a large managed care database in the US. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study among COPD patients initiating FF/VI or BUD/F between January 01, 2014 and June 30, 2016. The analysis used the Optum Research Database (ORD) which contains patients from commercial and Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) plans. The study included new initiators of ICS/LABA as either FF/VI or BUD/F for COPD, ≥40 years of age at index, ≥15 months of continuous enrollment (12 months pre-index and ≥3 months post-index). New users of FF/VI or BUD/F were matched on baseline characteristics using propensity score matching (PSM) methods. Multivariate models including ordinary least squares regression, Lin's regression, logistic regression, and Cox proportional hazards were used to assess differences between the cohorts on outcomes of interest. RESULTS: A total of 18,652 subjects met all inclusion and exclusion criteria with 5044 initiating FF/VI and 13,608 initiating BUD/F. Of these, 9026 subjects were matched at a 1:1 ratio (4513 patients in each cohort) and were included in the final analyses. Proportion of days covered (PDC), was significantly better for FF/VI (mean PDC [SD]: FF/VI: 0.46 [0.31], BUD/F: 0.41 [0.29], p < 0.001) while FF/VI was associated with a 9% lower risk (adj. hazard ratio (HR): 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85-0.96) of having a moderate or severe COPD-related exacerbation. However, COPD-related healthcare costs were not significantly different, $11,521 vs $10,986, p = 0.41 for FF/VI and BUD/F, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiating once-daily FF/VI were more adherent, and were associated with a lower risk of subsequent COPD-related exacerbations compared with twice-daily BUD/F, however this was not associated with a significant difference in costs. (GSK Study HO1617333/206702).

Assessment of Adherence and Asthma Medication Ratio for a Once-Daily and Twice-Daily Inhaled Corticosteroid/Long-Acting ß-Agonist for Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Although efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) and budesonide/formoterol (BUD/F) have been demonstrated in clinical studies, real-world comparisons of utilization have not been performed. OBJECTIVE: To compare similar patients with asthma initiating FF/VI or BUD/F on measures of adherence, persistence, and the asthma medication ratio (AMR). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D enrollees initiating FF/VI or BUD/F for asthma. Adult patients (≥18 years) with at least 15-month (12-month preindex and 3-month postindex) continuous enrollment and 1 or more asthma diagnosis code were eligible for the study. Patients with a history of fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß-agonist and other respiratory disorders (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, acute respiratory failure) in the baseline period were excluded. Propensity-score matching was used to balance cohorts on baseline characteristics. Logistic regression and Cox-proportional hazard models were used to assess differences. RESULTS: A total of 9951 patients met all criteria. After propensity-score matching, 1725 patients were matched in each cohort. Subjects who initiated FF/VI had a significantly higher mean proportion of days covered (P < .001), had 86% greater odds of having a proportion of days covered value of greater than or equal to 0.80 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.51-2.30), 26% lower risk of discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.69-0.79), and 36% greater odds of an AMR of greater than or equal to 0.50 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.23-1.50) compared with BUD/F. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence and treatment persistence were low in both cohorts; however, patients initiating once-daily FF/VI were more likely to be adherent, have an AMR of greater than or equal to 0.5, and were less likely to discontinue therapy compared with patients initiating twice-daily BUD/F (GlaxoSmithKline Study HO1617302/206482).

The effect of delaying initiation with umeclidinium/vilanterol in patients with COPD: an observational administrative claims database analysis using marginal structural models.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with high clinical and economic burden. Optimal pharmacological therapy for COPD aims to reduce symptoms and the frequency and severity of exacerbations. Umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) is an approved combination therapy for once-daily maintenance treatment of patients with COPD. This study evaluated the impact of delaying UMEC/VI initiation on medical costs and exacerbation risk. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with COPD who initiated UMEC/VI between 4/28/2014 and 7/31/2016 was conducted using the Optum Research Database. The index date was the first COPD visit after UMEC/VI available on US formulary (Commercial 4/28/2014; Medicare Advantage 1/1/2015). Patients were followed for 12 months post-index, and categorized into 12 cohorts corresponding to month (30-day period) of UMEC/VI initiation (i.e. Months 1-12) post-index. The outcomes studied during the follow up period included COPD-related and all-cause medical costs, and risk of COPD exacerbations. Marginal structural models (MSM) were used to control for time-varying confounding due to changes in treatment and severity during follow up. RESULTS: 2,200 patients initiating UMEC/VI were included in the study sample. Patients' average age was 69.3 years, 49.9% were female and 69.7% were Medicare insured. Following MSM analysis, 12-month adjusted COPD-related medical costs increased by 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1-5.9%; p = 0.044) for each monthly delay in UMEC/VI initiation, with a 37.4% higher adjusted cost for patients initiating UMEC/VI in Month 12 versus Month 1 ($13,087 vs. $9524). The 12-month adjusted all-cause medical costs increased by 2.8% (95% CI: 0.6-5.2%; p = 0.013) for each monthly delay, with a 36.1% higher adjusted cost for patients initiating UMEC/VI at Month 12 versus Month 1 ($22,766 vs. $16,727). The monthly risk of severe exacerbation was significantly higher in patients who had not yet initiated UMEC/VI than those who had (hazard ratio: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.35-2.23; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prompt use of UMEC/VI following a physician visit for COPD appears to result in economic and clinical benefits, with reductions in medical costs and exacerbation risk. Additional research is warranted to assess the benefits of initiating UMEC/VI as a first-line therapy compared with escalation to UMEC/VI from monotherapies.

Rates of escalation to triple COPD therapy among incident users of LAMA and LAMA/LABA.

BACKGROUND: Improved outcomes have been reported for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receiving combination long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) therapy compared with LAMA monotherapy. However, little is known about the relative characteristics of these patients and their rates of escalation to triple therapy (TT, combining a LAMA, LABA, and inhaled corticosteroid). This study aimed to characterize patients initiating treatment with the LAMA tiotropium (TIO) and the fixed-dose LAMA/LABA combination therapy umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI), and to compare rates of escalation to TT between patients receiving these therapies. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients with COPD enrolled in a US health insurance plan during 2013-2015 and newly initiated on TIO or UMEC/VI. Patients were ≥40 years of age at index (date of therapy initiation) with continuous enrollment for 12 months pre-index and ≥30 days post-index. LAMA users were propensity score matched 1:1 to LAMA/LABA users, with TT initiation rates reported by cohort using pharmacy claims. RESULTS: 35,357 patients initiating on TIO and 2407 patients initiating on UMEC/VI were identified. After propensity score matching, the rate of TT initiation was significantly higher in new TIO users (n = 1320) than in new UMEC/VI users (n = 1320) (0.92 vs 0.49 per 100 months of exposure, respectively; p < 0.001). Relative to the UMEC/VI cohort, the TIO cohort had an 87% higher risk of TT initiation (hazard ratio: 1.87; 95% confidence interval: 1.4-2.5; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving UMEC/VI progressed to TT more slowly, and were at lower risk of progressing to TT, than patients receiving TIO.

Impact of a Health Management Program on Healthcare Outcomes among Patients on Augmentation Therapy for Alpha 1-Antitrypsin Deficiency: An Insurance Claims Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is a genetic disorder which reduces serum alpha 1-antitrypsin (AAT or alpha1-proteinase inhibitor, A1PI) and increases the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Management strategies include intravenous A1PI augmentation, and, in some cases, a health management program (Prolastin Direct®; PD). OBJECTIVES: This study compared clinical and economic outcomes between patients with and without PD program participation. METHODS: This retrospective study included commercial and Medicare Advantage health insurance plan members with ≥ 1 claim with diagnosis codes for COPD and ≥ 1 medical or pharmacy claim including A1PI (on index date). Outcomes were compared between patients receiving only Prolastin® or Prolastin®-C (PD cohort) and patients who received a different brand without PD (Comparator cohort). Demographic and clinical characteristics were captured during 6 months pre-index. Post-index exacerbation episodes and healthcare utilization and costs were compared between cohorts. RESULTS: The study sample comprised 445 patients (n = 213 in PD cohort; n = 232 in Comparator cohort), with a mean age 55.5 years, 50.8% male, and 78.9% commercially insured. The average follow-up was 822 days (2.25 years), and the average time on A1PI was 747 days (2.04 years). Few differences were observed in demographic or clinical characteristics. Adjusting for differences in patient characteristics, the rate of severe exacerbation episodes was reduced by 36.1% in the PD cohort. Adjusted total annual all-cause costs were 11.4% lower, and adjusted mean respiratory-related costs were 10.6% lower in the PD cohort than the Comparator cohort. Annual savings in all-cause total costs in the PD cohort relative to the Comparator cohort was US$25,529 per patient, largely due to significantly fewer and shorter hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that comprehensive health management services may improve both clinical and economic outcomes among patients with COPD and AATD who receive augmentation therapy. FUNDING: Grifols Shared Services of North America, Inc.

Inhaled Corticosteroid-Containing Treatment Escalation and Outcomes for Patients with Asthma in a U.S. Health Care Organization.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a common disorder that affects approximately 8% of the U.S. POPULATION: Treatment guidelines indicate inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as the mainstay treatment, yet poor asthma control is common among ICS-treated patients. Treatment escalation (ICS dose increase and other controller therapy add-ons) is used to manage symptoms. Real-world studies of postescalation outcomes may inform treatment decisions. OBJECTIVES: To (a) describe characteristics and treatment patterns among asthma patients who escalated treatment and (b) assess outcomes (exacerbations, uncontrolled asthma, and health care resource utilization [HCRU]) after escalation. METHODS: The study cohort was identified from a large U.S. administrative claims database via ICD-9-CM codes for asthma (493.xx on ≥ 2 dates) and initiation (defining index date) of long-term (> 1 fill) ICS-containing treatment between January 1, 2009, and September 30, 2014. One year of continuous enrollment was required before and after the index date. Escalation was defined as ≥ 1 of the following: ICS dose increase; a switch between ICS, long-acting beta-2 agonists (LABA), or leukotriene modifiers (LTRM) to a different ICS, LABA, or LTRM; or add-on of controller medications (e.g., antibody biologic). Escalation patterns were examined. Rates of exacerbation (defined by inpatient admission, emergency department [ED] visit, or office visit with a pharmacy claim for an oral corticosteroid [OCS] within 7 days) and occurrence of uncontrolled asthma (defined by > 4 fills for a short-acting beta agonist [SABA] in a 1-year period, ≥ 1 OCS fill, or ≥ 1 asthma-related ED visit or inpatient admission) were calculated. Per-patient-per-year (PPPY) HCRU was estimated. RESULTS: Among 35,126 patients (mean [SD] age 38 [16] years) who initiated long-term ICS-containing treatment, 5,044 (14%) patients escalated their index regimens at 136 (105) days post-index (i.e., pre-escalation period). The most frequent changes, alone or in combination, included ICS dose increase (68%) or LABA (27%) or LTRM (25%) add-ons. Before escalation, the exacerbation rate was 1.60 (5.10) PPPY, and 1,108 (22%) patients experienced exacerbation. During the postescalation period of 251.6 (138.9) days, the exacerbation rate was 0.75 (2.9) PPPY, and 1,038 (21%) patients experienced exacerbation. A majority (> 85%) of exacerbations in the periods before and after escalation were associated with an office visit plus an OCS pharmacy claim within 7 days. Uncontrolled asthma was experienced by 41.5% and 41.0% of patients before and after escalation, respectively. Ambulatory care visits were common before (mean [SD] 24.0 [26.7] all-cause and 8.5 [13.4] asthma-related PPPY) and after escalation (19.3 [21.3] all-cause and 4.6 [8.1] asthma-related PPPY). CONCLUSIONS: Among asthma patients who initiated a long-term ICS-containing regimen, approximately 14% escalated therapy within a year of initiation. Yet, 21% of those patients had ≥ 1 exacerbation, and 41% of patients had uncontrolled asthma within 1 year after treatment escalation. The results demonstrate an unmet need among asthma patients who escalated their ICS-containing treatment. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored and funded by Boehringer-Ingelheim, which contracted with Optum to conduct the research. The sponsor collaborated with Optum on the preparation, writing, revision, and approval of the manuscript. Bengston, Cao, Hulbert, Wolbeck, Elliott, and Buikema are employees of Optum. Yu and Wang are employed by Boehringer-Ingelheim. Study concept and design were contributed by Bengston, Yu, and Wang. Cao, Hulbert, and Wolbeck collected the data, and data analysis was performed by Bengston, Yu, and Wang. The manuscript was written by Bengston, along with Yu and Wang, and revised by Bengston, Yu, and Wang, along with the other authors.

Economic Outcomes of First-Line Regimen Switching Among Stable Patients with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Although switching of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is a valid approach for addressing treatment failure in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), ART changes among those who are well maintained on their current regimens may lead to the development of new side effects or resistance. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of first-line regimen switching on subsequent health care utilization and cost among stable HIV patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective claims data study of adult patients with HIV who initiated ART between 2007 and 2013 and had been treated with their initial regimens for at least 6 continuous months. Those with evidence of pregnancy or HIV-2 were excluded. Patients who underwent an ART change were assigned to a switcher cohort; a nonswitcher cohort was then generated by matching up to 20 nonswitchers for each switcher, with replacement. The index date was the date of the first ART change for switchers and was the claim date closest to the corresponding switcher's switch date for nonswitchers. Patient characteristics at baseline and post-index annualized health care utilization and costs were analyzed descriptively and with multivariable models. Analyses were performed in the full population and among patients designated as virologically stable (had undetectable viral ribonucleic acid [RNA] for 90 days pre-index) and virologically and clinically stable (had undetectable viral RNA and no apparent clinical reason for switching ART). RESULTS: The study population consisted of 6,983 individuals, which included 927 switchers (168 virologically stable; 55 virologically+clinically stable), who were matched with replacement with 18,511 nonswitcher comparators. The switcher cohort was 88.8% male (mean age 43.8 years). Mean preindex and follow-up treatment durations for switchers and nonswitchers were 1.8 years and 1.5 years, respectively; demographic characteristics, pre-index treatment duration, and follow-up duration were similar between cohorts. Significantly more nonswitchers than switchers had a first-line efavirenz-based regimen (67.2% vs. 47.8%, P < 0.001). In the virologically stable subset, follow-up annualized health care utilization for switchers versus nonswitchers, respectively, was 14.8 versus 12.3 ambulatory visits (P < 0.05), 0.8 versus 0.9 emergency department visits (P = 0.652), and 0.05 versus 0.05 inpatient hospitalizations (P = 0.915). Follow-up annualized health care costs were $37,120 for switchers versus $31,771 for nonswitchers (P < 0.05), with the difference driven largely by pharmacy costs. Multivariable-adjusted follow-up annualized health care costs were 8.9% higher among switchers versus nonswitchers (P < 0.01), and switchers also had a shorter time to subsequent ART regimen change (P < 0.001). Results were similar for the virologically+clinically stable subset. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, real-world population, stable patients with HIV who switched from their first-line ART regimens had significantly higher health care costs than those who did not change therapies, suggesting that ART regimen changes may be costly and should be undertaken only when clinically warranted. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), which participated in the design of the study, interpretation of the data, revision of the manuscript, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Rosenblatt is an employee and stock owner of BMS; Villasis-Keever was an employee of BMS at the time this study was conducted and is currently an employee of Janssen. Buikema is an employee and stock owner of Optum, and Seare, Bengston, Johnson, and Cao are employees of Optum, which was contracted by BMS to conduct the study. Optum contracts with pharmaceutical companies, such as Janssen, Merck, EMD Serano, GlaxoSmithKline, and Gilead, to conduct research in HIV. Optum is also a subsidiary of a health plan that has interest in managing the health and associated costs of patients with HIV. Study concept and design were contributed by Rosenblatt and Buikema, along with the other authors. Cao and Johnson took the lead in data collection, along with Buikema, Seare, and Bengston. Data interpretation was performed by Buikema, Seare, Bengston, and Villasis-Keever. The manuscript was written by Buikema and Bengston, along with Rosenblatt, Seare, Johnson and Villasis-Keever, and revised by Rosenblatt, Villasis-Keever, and Johnson, along with the other authors.

Mixing of diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccines in a population of children in managed care.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends administering diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccines to children at 2, 4, 6, 15-18 months, and 4-6 y of age; preferably with the same-brand vaccine for the whole series. We estimated age-appropriate DTaP dose completion and the proportion of children receiving a "mixed" DTaP vaccination series (ie, including DTaP vaccines from ≥ 2 brands) across the 3 milestones. Commercially-insured children born between 01/01/2003 and 04/30/2011 were identified from United States health insurance claims data and assigned to ≥ 1 of 3 study cohorts based on the duration of continuous health plan enrollment: 1) birth to <8 months; 2) birth to <20 months; 3) birth to <7 years. Dose completion and brand mixing of the first 3, first 4 or all 5 doses were measured in the respective cohorts. Administered DTaP vaccinations were identified in claims data and classified by brand (based on vaccine components and manufacturer). The analysis included children who received ≥ 2 DTaP vaccinations and had known brand information for all doses. Age-appropriate dose completion was 77% with 3 doses (<8 months cohort), 71% with 4 doses (<20 months cohort), and 85% with 5 doses (<7 years cohort). Mixed DTaP series were received by 4.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6%-4.7%) in the <8 months cohort, 29.0% (95% CI: 28.6%-29.4%) in the <20 months cohort, and 39.0% (95% CI: 34.5, 43.6) in the <7 years cohort. DTaP mixing was just 4.7% for the first 3 doses but subsequently increased with the number of administered doses.

Asthma controller delay and recurrence risk after an emergency department visit or hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have asthma-related emergency department (ED) visits or hospitalizations are at risk for recurrent exacerbation events. Our objectives were to assess whether receiving a controller medication at discharge affects risk of recurrence and whether delaying controller initiation alters this risk. METHODS: Asthma patients with an ED visit or inpatient (IP) stay who received a controller dispensing within 6 months were identified from healthcare claims. Cox proportional hazards of the time to first recurrence of an asthma-related ED or IP visit in the 6-month period following the initial event were constructed, with time following discharge without controller medication as the primary predictor. RESULTS: A total of 6139 patients met inclusion criteria, 78% with an ED visit and 22% with an IP visit; 15% had a recurrence within 6 months. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) associated with not having controller medication at discharge was 1.79 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-2.25). The controller-by-time interaction was significant (P<0.001), with hazard rising as time-to-controller initiation increased. Delaying initiation by 1 day approximately tripled the risk (HR 2.95; 95%CI 1.48-5.88). Sensitivity analyses, including accounting for controller fills prior to the index event, did not substantially alter these results. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study shows that the risk of a recurrent asthma-related ED visit or IP stay increased as the time to initiate a controller increased. Our findings support the importance of early controller initiation following an asthma-related ED or IP visit in reducing risk of recurrence.