Recognition, Description, and Variability of Spasticity in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis and Potential Barriers to Clinician-Patient Dialogue: Results From SEEN-MSS, a Large-Scale, Self-Reported Survey.

BACKGROUND: The experience with spasticity varies among individuals with multiple sclerosis and spasticity (MSS), as they may not recognize it as spasticity or have the language to describe their symptoms. This can lead to potential delays in diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: Symptoms and Emotions Exploration Needed in Multiple Sclerosis Spasticity was an online survey completed by 1177 individuals with MSS in 2021. It sought to capture symptoms of spasticity, variability of symptoms, specific spasticity triggers, and how conversations with physicians were initiated. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 56.8 years and it was 78% women. Prior to spasticity onset, 65% of respondents felt minimally prepared or unprepared for possibly developing spasticity and were unaware that spasticity manifests as part of MS. Eighty percent experienced spasticity daily, which was variable in severity and duration. Spasticity was triggered by a range of factors and 90% of those surveyed were unable to predict when it would occur or its severity. Day-to-day variability of spasticity prevented 65% of respondents from doing things they wished to do. Sixty percent were confused by their symptoms, not recognizing them as spasticity. Although 91% reported experiencing muscle spasms, only 69% used "muscle spasms" to describe their symptoms. Other descriptors included "muscle tightness," "stiffness," "cramping," and "pain." After recognizing spasticity, 78% proactively initiated discussions with their physicians, 52% wished they had done so sooner, and 42% delayed the conversation by up to or more than a year. CONCLUSIONS: Results emphasize the variable nature of spasticity and the lack of a common language to describe symptoms, underscoring the importance of education, earlier recognition, and customized treatments tailored to the severity and duration of spasticity symptoms.

Caregiver-reported outcomes with real-world use of cannabidiol in Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and Dravet syndrome from the BECOME survey.

PURPOSE: Plant-derived highly purified cannabidiol (CBD) reduced the frequency of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) and Dravet syndrome (DS) and improved the overall condition of patients in placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trials. Anecdotal reports also suggest a positive effect on nonseizure outcomes. In this study, we aimed to identify, through a caregiver survey which nonseizure outcomes were most likely to change in these patients. METHODS: The BEhavior, COgnition, and More with Epidiolex® (BECOME) was a 20-minute, cross-sectional, online survey that was developed with extensive input from caregivers, healthcare professionals, and epilepsy researchers, and was based on questions from validated measures and previously published caregiver reports. US-based caregivers (from Jazz Pharmaceuticals patient/caregiver database) of people with LGS or DS who were treated with CBD (Epidiolex®, 100 mg/mL oral solution) for ≥3 months were asked to compare the past month to the period before CBD initiation and rate their impression of changes using symmetrical Likert scales. RESULTS: A total of 498 caregivers (97% parents) of patients with LGS (80%) or DS (20%) completed the survey. Mean (range) age of patients was 16 (1-73) years, and 52% were male. Patients were taking a median CBD dose of 14 mg/kg/d and median 4 concomitant antiseizure medications. A large proportion of respondents reported improvements in ≥1 survey question for all nonseizure-related domains: alertness, cognition, and executive function (85%); emotional functioning (82%); language and communication (79% in nonverbal patients and 74% in verbal); activities of daily living (51%); sleep (51%); and physical functioning (46%). Respondents reported improvements in seizure-related domains, including overall seizure frequency (85%), overall seizure severity (76%), seizure-free days per week for ≥1 seizure type (67%), and seizure freedom during the past month (16%). The majority of respondents who reported reduction in seizure frequency also reported improvements in nonseizure outcomes domains (51-80%). However, improvements in nonseizure outcomes (18-56%) were also reported in patients who either had no change or worsening of seizure frequency. CONCLUSIONS: This survey characterized and quantified caregiver impression of changes in the seizure and nonseizure outcomes in patients taking add-on CBD treatment. Overall, 93% of caregivers reported planning to continue CBD treatment, primarily because of reduced seizure burden but also because of improvements in nonseizure-related outcomes. Despite the limitations that are associated with a retrospective survey-based study design, these results support further evaluation of the effect of CBD treatment on nonseizure outcomes among patients with LGS or DS.

Lower mortality with andexanet alfa vs 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for factor Xa inhibitor-related major bleeding in a U.S. hospital-based observational study.

Background: Well-designed studies with sufficient sample size comparing andexanet alfa vs 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in routine clinical practice to evaluate clinical outcomes are limited. Objectives: To compare in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with rivaroxaban- or apixaban-related major bleeding who were treated with andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC. Methods: An observational cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05548777) was conducted using electronic health records between May 2018 and September 2022 from 354 U.S. hospitals. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, inpatient admission with diagnosis code D68.32 (bleeding due to extrinsic anticoagulation), a record of use of the factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban or apixaban, andexanet alfa or 4F-PCC treatment during index hospitalization, and a documented discharge disposition. Multivariable logistic regression on in-hospital mortality with andexanet alfa vs 4F-PCC was performed. The robustness of the results was assessed via a supportive propensity score-weighted logistic regression. Results: The analysis included 4395 patients (andexanet alfa, n = 2122; 4F-PCC, n = 2273). There were 1328 patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), 2567 with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds, and 500 with critical compartment or other bleed types. In the multivariable analysis, odds of in-hospital mortality were 50% lower for andexanet alfa vs 4F-PCC (odds ratio [OR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.65; P < .01) and were consistent for both ICH (OR, 0.55; [0.39-0.76]; P < .01) and GI bleeds (OR, 0.49 [0.29-0.81]; P = .01). Similar results were obtained from the supporting propensity score-weighted logistic regression analyses. Conclusion: In this large observational study, treatment with andexanet alfa in patients hospitalized with rivaroxaban- or apixaban-related major bleeds was associated with 50% lower odds of in-hospital mortality than 4F-PCC. The magnitude of the risk reduction was similar in ICH and GI bleeds.

Hereditary Angioedema With Normal C1 Inhibitor: US Survey of Prevalence and Provider Practice Patterns.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) with normal C1-INH (HAE-nl-C1INH) is phenotypically similar to HAE resulting from C1-INH deficiency (HAE-C1INH). Confirmatory diagnostic tests for HAE-nl-C1INH are limited and few clinical study data exist regarding management of the condition. Therefore, survey studies may provide initial estimates of prevalence, diagnosis, and management patterns of this condition. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence and describe current management patterns for HAE-nl-C1INH in the United States (US). METHODS: We conducted an Internet-based survey of US physicians to estimate the prevalence of the HAE-nl-C1INH population in the United States. Potential participating physicians were identified from the US Hereditary Angioedema Association database and IQVIA Xponent prescription database. Eligible physicians were invited to complete an online survey between June and September 2021. RESULTS: A total of 113 physicians provided data for the estimation of HAE-nl-C1INH prevalence and 81 physicians treating HAE-nl-C1INH patients provided data about treatment patterns. In bias-corrected analysis, we estimated 1,230 to 1,331 HAE-nl-C1INH patients within the United States between May 2019 and April 2020. Mean time to diagnosis for HAE-nl-C1INH was approximately 6 years (range, 2.4-13.5 years). Response to medication was commonly used to inform diagnosis (antihistamine response or nonresponse used by 73% of physician respondents, corticosteroids by 57%, or HAE-specific medications by 74%), and Factor XII genetic testing was used by 43%. CONCLUSIONS: These survey data provide estimates of HAE-nl-C1INH prevalence in the United States as well as current diagnosis and management strategies. Results may be useful for developing studies to assess treatment efficacy and safety, and potentially improve the diagnosis for and management of this patient population.

A Coala-T-Cannabis Survey Study of breast cancer patients' use of cannabis before, during, and after treatment.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to characterize cannabis use among patients with breast cancer, including their reasons for and timing of use, their sources of cannabis information and products, their satisfaction with the information found, their perceptions of its safety, and their dialogue about cannabis with their physicians. METHODS: United States-based members of the Breastcancer.org and Healthline.com communities with a self-reported diagnosis of breast cancer within 5 years (age ≥ 18 years) were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. After informed consent was obtained, nonidentifiable data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of all participants (n = 612), 42% (n = 257) reported using cannabis for relief of symptoms, which included pain (78%), insomnia (70%), anxiety (57%), stress (51%), and nausea/vomiting (46%). Furthermore, 49% of cannabis users believed that medical cannabis could be used to treat cancer itself. Of those taking cannabis, 79% had used it during treatment, which included systemic therapies, radiation, and surgery. At the same time, few (39%) had discussed it with any of their physicians. CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of survey participants (42%) used cannabis to address symptoms; approximately half of these participants believed that cannabis could treat cancer itself. Most participants used cannabis during active cancer treatment despite the potential for an adverse event during this vulnerable time. Furthermore, most participants believed that cannabis was safe and were unaware that product quality varied widely and depended on the source. This study reviews the research on medicinal cannabis in the setting of these findings to help physicians to recognize its risks and benefits for patients with cancer. LAY SUMMARY: Almost half of patients with breast cancer use cannabis, most commonly during active treatment to manage common symptoms and side effects: pain, anxiety, insomnia, and nausea. However, most patients do not discuss cannabis use with their physicians. Instead, the internet and family/friends are the most common sources of cannabis information. Furthermore, most participants believe that cannabis products are safe and are unaware that the safety of many products is untested.

Real-world management of oral factor Xa inhibitor-related bleeds with reversal or replacement agents including andexanet alfa and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate: a multicenter study.

Aim: We describe the real-world utilization and outcomes associated with managing oral factor Xa inhibitor (FXai)-related major bleeds. Materials & methods: Electronic records from 45 US hospitals were queried (ICD-10-CM billing codes D68.32, T45.515x or T45.525x) to identify major bleed hospitalizations related to FXai use. Patient demographics, bleed type (intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal, critical compartment, traumatic, other), FXai taken, reversal or replacement agents administered (including andexanet alfa, four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate, fresh frozen plasma, others), in-hospital mortality and length of stay were recorded. Results: Of 3030 FXai-related hospitalizations for major bleeds, patients averaged 68 years old and 47% were women. In-hospital mortality was highest for intracranial hemorrhage (23%, n = 507) and lowest for gastrointestinal bleeds (4%, n = 1453). In-hospital mortality was lowest (4%) for bleeds managed with andexanet alfa (n = 342), compared with 10% for four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (n = 733), 11% for fresh frozen plasma (n = 925) and 8% for both other agents (n = 794) and no agents (n = 438). Median length of stay was 5 days across all agents, while ICU length of stay was shorter andexanet alfa (2 days) compared with other agents (3 days). Conclusion: In-hospital mortality differed by bleed type and agents administered. Andexanet alfa was associated with the lowest rate of in-hospital mortality across all bleed types.

Barriers to timely diagnosis of interstitial lung disease in the real world: the INTENSITY survey.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and other interstitial lung diseases (ILD) presents significant clinical challenges. To gain insights regarding the diagnostic experience of patients with ILD and to identify potential barriers to a timely and accurate diagnosis, we developed an online questionnaire and conducted a national survey of adults with a self-reported diagnosis of ILD. METHODS: A pre-specified total of 600 subjects were recruited to participate in a 40-question online survey. E-mail invitations containing a link to the survey were sent to 16 427 registered members of the Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation. Additionally, an open invitation was posted on an online forum for patients and caregivers ( www.inspire.com ). The recruitment and screening period was closed once the pre-defined target number of respondents was reached. Eligible participants were adult U.S. residents with a diagnosis of IPF or a non-IPF ILD. RESULTS: A total of 600 eligible respondents met the eligibility criteria and completed the survey. Of these, 55% reported ≥ 1 misdiagnosis and 38% reported ≥ 2 misdiagnoses prior to the current diagnosis. The most common misdiagnoses were asthma (13.5%), pneumonia (13.0%), and bronchitis (12.3%). The median time from symptom onset to current diagnosis was 7 months (range, 0-252 months), with 43% of respondents reporting a delay of ≥ 1 year and 19% reporting a delay of ≥ 3 years. Sixty-one percent of respondents underwent at least one invasive diagnostic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: While a minority of patients with ILD will experience an appropriate and expedient diagnosis, the more typical diagnostic experience for individuals with ILD is characterized by considerable delays, frequent misdiagnosis, exposure to costly and invasive diagnostic procedures, and substantial use of healthcare resources. These findings suggest a need for physician education, development of clinical practice recommendations, and improved diagnostic tools aimed at improving diagnostic accuracy in patients with ILD.