Cervical High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Burden and Standard of Care Treatment Effectiveness and Safety in the United States, 2008-2018: The EACH-WOMAN Project.

OBJECTIVE: Management of cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs), the immediate precursor of cervical cancer, consists largely of surgical treatment for women at higher risk for progression to cancer. The authors' objective was to describe the occurrence of cervical HSIL in the United States and various outcomes for women who received surgical treatment. METHODS: From a US commercial health insurer, a cohort of adult women with cervical HSIL diagnoses receiving surgical treatment within 3 months of diagnosis between January 2008 and September 2018 was identified. This cohort was followed for several outcomes, including cervical HSIL recurrence, human papillomavirus clearance, preterm birth, infection, and bleeding. RESULTS: The incidence rate of cervical HSIL declined from 2.34 (95% CI = 2.30-2.39) cases per 1,000 person-years in 2008 to 1.39 (95% CI = 1.35-1.43) cases per 1,000 person-years in 2014, remaining near that level through 2018. Among 65,527 women with cervical HSIL, 47,067 (72%) received surgical treatment within 3 months of diagnosis. Among the women receiving surgical treatment, cervical HSIL recurred in 6% of surgically treated women, whereas 45% of surgically treated women underwent subsequent virological testing that indicated human papillomavirus clearance. Preterm birth was observed in 5.9% by 5 years follow-up and bleeding and infection each at 2.2% by 7 days follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: From 2008 through 2018, the incidence of diagnosed cervical HSIL decreased for several years before stabilizing. Surgical treatment of HSIL may be beneficial in removing the precancerous lesion, but cervical HSIL may recur, and the surgery is associated with complications including preterm birth, infection, and bleeding.

Trends in COVID-19 patient characteristics in a large electronic health record database in the United States: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) databases provide an opportunity to facilitate characterization and trends in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 were identified based on an ICD-10 diagnosis code for COVID-19 (U07.1) and/or a positive SARS-CoV-2 viral lab result from January 2020 to November 2020. Patients were characterized in terms of demographics, healthcare utilization, clinical comorbidities, therapies, laboratory results, and procedures/care received, including critical care, intubation/ventilation, and occurrence of death were described, overall and by month. RESULTS: There were 393,773 patients with COVID-19 and 56,996 with a COVID-19 associated hospitalization. A greater percentage of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 relative to all COVID-19 cases were older, male, African American, and lived in the Northeast and South. The most common comorbidities before admission/infection date were hypertension (40.8%), diabetes (29.5%), and obesity (23.8%), and the most common diagnoses during hospitalization were pneumonia (59.6%), acute respiratory failure (44.8%), and dyspnea (28.0%). A total of 85.7% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 had CRP values > 10 mg/L, 75.5% had fibrinogen values > 400 mg/dL, and 76.8% had D-dimer values > 250 ng/mL. Median values for platelets, CRP, lactate dehydrogenase, D-dimer, and fibrinogen tended to decrease from January-March to November. The use of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine during hospitalization peaked by March (71.2%) and was used rarely by May (5.1%) and less than 1% afterwards, while the use of remdesivir had increased by May (10.0%) followed by dexamethasone by June (27.7%). All-cause mortality was 3.2% overall and 15.0% among those hospitalized; 21.0% received critical care and 16.0% received intubation/ventilation/ECMO. CONCLUSIONS: This study characterizes US patients with COVID-19 and their management during hospitalization over the first eleven months of this disease pandemic.

Predictors of critical care, mechanical ventilation, and mortality among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in an electronic health record database.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on risk factors for serious outcomes and death from COVID-19 among patients representative of the U.S. POPULATION: The objective of this study was to determine risk factors for critical care, ventilation, and death among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a cohort study using data from Optum's longitudinal COVID-19 electronic health record database derived from a network of healthcare provider organizations across the US. The study included patients with confirmed COVID-19 (presence of ICD-10-CM code U07.1 and/or positive SARS-CoV-2 test) between January 2020 and November 2020. Patient characteristics and clinical variables at start of hospitalization were evaluated for their association with subsequent serious outcomes (critical care, mechanical ventilation, and death) using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from logistic regression, adjusted for demographic variables. RESULTS: Among 56,996 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (49.5% male and 72.4% ≥ 50 years), 11,967 received critical care, 9136 received mechanical ventilation, and 8526 died. The median duration of hospitalization was 6 days (IQR: 4, 11), and this was longer among patients that experienced an outcome: 11 days (IQR: 6, 19) for critical care, 15 days (IQR: 8, 24) for mechanical ventilation, and 10 days (IQR: 5, 17) for death. Dyspnea and hypoxemia were the most prevalent symptoms and both were associated with serious outcomes in adjusted models. Additionally, temperature, C-reactive protein, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase, D-dimer, and oxygen saturation measured during hospitalization were predictors of serious outcomes as were several in-hospital diagnoses. The strongest associations were observed for acute respiratory failure (critical care: OR, 6.30; 95% CI, 5.99-6.63; ventilation: OR, 8.55; 95% CI, 8.02-9.11; death: OR, 3.36; 95% CI, 3.17-3.55) and sepsis (critical care: OR, 4.59; 95% CI, 4.39-4.81; ventilation: OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 5.00-5.53; death: OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 3.92-4.38). Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers during hospitalization were inversely associated with death (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.54-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: We identified several clinical characteristics associated with receipt of critical care, mechanical ventilation, and death among COVID-19 patients. Future studies into the mechanisms that lead to severe COVID-19 disease are warranted.

Characterizing Health Outcomes in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis using US Health Claims Data.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a life-threatening interstitial lung disease (ILD). Characterizing health outcomes of IPF patients is challenging due to disease rarity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the burden of disease in patients newly diagnosed with IPF. METHODS: Patients with ≥1 claim with an IPF diagnosis were identified from a United States healthcare insurer's database (2000-2013). Patients with other known causes of ILD or aged <40 years were excluded. Subgroups were compared based on the 2011 change in International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) definition of IPF and occurrence of IPF testing. The prevalence and incidence of preselected health conditions of clinical interest were estimated. RESULTS: Median age of newly diagnosed patients (n = 7,298) was 62 years (54.0% male). Restricting to patients with IPF diagnostic testing did not substantially affect cohort characteristics, nor did ICD-9 IPF coding change. Mean follow-up was 1.7 years; 16.8% of patients died; and a substantial proportion of patients were censored due to end of health plan enrollment (50.7%) and other causes of ILD (19.6%). The incidence of pulmonary hypertension, lung cancer, and claims-based algorithm proxy for acute respiratory worsening of unknown cause was 22.5, 17.6, and 12.6 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IPF had a high disease burden with a variety of health outcomes observed, including a high rate of mortality. Database censoring due to changes in enrollment or other ILD diagnoses limited follow-up. Altering cohort entry definitions, including IPF testing or ICD-9 IPF coding change, had little impact on cohort baseline characteristics.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of Therapy With Once-Weekly Exenatide Versus Basal Insulin Among Injectable-Naive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in a Real-World Setting in the United States.

A propensity-matched cohort study compared injectable-naive patients with type 2 diabetes initiating exenatide once weekly (EQW) or basal insulin (BI), from 2012 through 2015, within a U.S. electronic health record database. A1C and weight were obtained as observed or multiply imputed values at baseline and quarterly for 1 year (Q1-Q4). Hypoglycemia and gastrointestinal symptoms were identified using diagnostic codes and clinical notes. EQW (n = 2,008) and BI (n = 4,016) cohorts were comparable at baseline (mean A1C and weight: EQW, 8.3% and 107.5 kg, respectively; BI, 8.5% and 107.9 kg, respectively). A1C declined in Q2: -0.69 and -0.50 percentage points for EQW and BI, respectively, with little further change in year 1. The EQW cohort lost 0.9 kg in Q1 and 1.9 kg by the end of the year; no weight change was observed in the BI cohort. Among EQW and BI cohorts, 25.9% and 14.3% achieved both glycemic control and weight loss, respectively. In the EQW and BI cohorts, the incidence of hypoglycemia per 1,000 person-years was 52.5 and 65.7, respectively. The incidence of nausea was greater among EQW relative to BI initiators (relative rate 1.18). EQW offers an advantage compared to BI in achieving glycemic control and weight loss and a lower incidence of hypoglycemia, but is associated with greater risk of gastrointestinal symptoms.

Assessment of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) for varenicline (Chantix): A multistage patient survey.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) for varenicline by assessing patients' understanding of the varenicline medication guide (MG) at pre-specified time points: 18 months, 3 years, and 7 years after the REMS approval. METHODS: Self-administered surveys were mailed to people who received varenicline based on a pharmacy dispensing. Survey questions assessed understanding of potential risks outlined in the MG: neuropsychiatric symptoms, skin reactions, allergic reactions, and cardiovascular risks. Crude and weighted analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The response to the survey overall was between 18% and 19%. Among responders, approximately 90% recalled receiving the MG, and at least 80% read all or part of it. At least 88% correctly identified neuropsychiatric symptoms as potential medication effects, while 41% did so for skin reactions, 53% for allergic reactions, and 82% for cardiovascular risks. Patients who read the MG had a high proportion of correct responses to the risk comprehension questions. CONCLUSIONS: A large majority of patients who were dispensed varenicline recalled receiving the MG and were able to correctly recall neuropsychiatric and cardiovascular risks in all 3 surveys. The varenicline MG may be an effective tool for patient education.

Effectiveness and tolerability of therapy with exenatide once weekly vs basal insulin among injectable-drug-naïve elderly or renal impaired patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of exenatide once weekly (EQW) compared with basal insulin (BI) among injectable-drug-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who are elderly or have renal impairment (RI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Initiators of EQW and BI with T2DM were identified for the period 2012 to 2015 within a US electronic health record database and matched by propensity score. Matched EQW and BI initiators aged ≥65 years or who had RI were compared. Data on weight, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), blood pressure and lipids were obtained at baseline and quarterly (Q1-Q4) or semi-annually for 1 year after drug initiation. Hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal symptoms were identified using diagnosis codes and data abstracted from clinical notes. RESULTS: Among patients aged ≥65 years, HbA1c changed by -0.50 and -0.31 percentage points from baseline to Q4 for EQW and BI initiators, respectively. Weight changed by -1.6 kg among EQW initiators compared with 0.2 kg among BI initiators. Compared with BI initiators, EQW initiators had a 1.45-fold increased risk of nausea and vomiting. Among patients with RI, HbA1c changed by -0.58 and -0.33 percentage points from baseline to Q4 for EQW and BI initiators, respectively. Weight changed by -1.9 kg for EQW initiators while BI initiators had no change in weight. EQW initiators had a 1.28-fold increased risk of constipation and diarrhoea compared with BI initiators. CONCLUSION: Regardless of age or renal function, the benefits of EQW relative to BI treatment are improved glycaemic control and increased weight loss, which should be weighed against the increased risk of gastrointestinal symptoms.

Tolerability and Effectiveness of Exenatide Once Weekly Relative to Basal Insulin Among Type 2 Diabetes Patients of Different Races in Routine Care.

INTRODUCTION: Analyses of efficacy and tolerability of pharmacologic interventions are based on clinical trials that often include predominately white populations, in part because of challenges associated with recruitment and retention of racial/ethnically diverse study populations. Using real-world electronic health record (EHR) data, we sought to evaluate the tolerability and effectiveness of exenatide once weekly (EQW), overall and relative to basal insulin (BI), according to race. METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes initiating EQW or BI between 2012 and 2015 were selected from the Optum EHR Research Database, a system pooling data from dozens of hospitals throughout the US. Measures of HbA1c, weight, and body mass index (BMI) were summarized at initiation and quarterly in the first year afterwards. Occurrences of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and hypoglycemia were identified by diagnostic codes and clinical notes, and incidence rates (IR) and relative rates (RR) were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 4907 white patients (mean age = 57 years) and 454 African American patients (mean age = 53 years) were included. The percent change in HbA1c from initiation through 9-12 months was similar for white and African American patients [EQW-White: -6.89 (95% CI: -8.29, -5.50), EQW-African American: -5.99 (95% CI: -10.33, -1.65), BI-White: -4.68 (95% CI: -5.51, -3.86), BI-African American: -3.11 (95% CI: -5.37, -0.85)]. For EQW, percent change in weight was -1.73 (95% CI: -2.45, -1.02) for white patients and -1.11 (95% CI: -3.02, -0.81) for African American patients. No weight loss was observed among BI initiators. Relative to BI initiators, EQW initiators had lower rates of hypoglycemia [White RR: 0.82 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.01), African American RR: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.26, 1.34)]. GI symptoms were increased in white EQW initiators. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with EQW, relative to BI, was associated with larger reductions in HbA1c and weight and reduced risk of hypoglycemia, effects that were not different for white and African American patients. FUNDING: AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.

The effectiveness of varenicline medication guide for conveying safety information to patients: a REMS assessment survey.

PURPOSE: Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) include various mechanisms to enhance safe use of medications, including a patient medication guide (MG) that provides key information regarding the potential risks associated with the medication. To evaluate the effectiveness of the varenicline MG as a REMS tool for educating patients, we undertook a survey among patients who were dispensed varenicline. METHODS: Varenicline recipients within the Optum Research Database, a large U.S. administrative claims database, were invited to participate in a self-administered survey. Survey questions were general (receipt and reading of the MG) and specific regarding patient's understanding of the potential varenicline risks outlined in the MG (neuropsychiatric symptoms, skin reactions, and allergic reactions). RESULTS: From 3568 varenicline recipients invited, 640 (18%) responded, with 633 completing at least one of three risk-comprehension questions. The majority (93%) indicated receiving the MG, and 86% read all or part of it. Ninety-one percent, 41%, and 53% correctly answered at least one question on neuropsychiatric symptoms, skin reactions, and allergic reactions, respectively. A higher proportion who read the MG had correct responses to the risk-comprehension questions than those who did not read it. CONCLUSIONS: The varenicline MG was widely received and read among survey respondents, and the information conveyed was generally well understood regarding potential risk of neuropsychiatric symptoms. This study provides an assessment of the effectiveness of the varenicline MG in communicating information about potential risks associated with varenicline. This assessment method may apply to the evaluation of the effectiveness of other MGs.

Pharmacoepidemiology safety study of fibrate and statin concomitant therapy.

Combinations of statins and fibrates may be increasingly prescribed to achieve lipid goals in high-risk patients and those with other cardiovascular risk factors, such as mixed dyslipidemia. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare rates of hospitalization for specific diagnoses in a cohort of new users of statins or fibrates, using claims data from a large United States health insurer. New users of statin, fibrate, or statin-fibrate therapy from 2004 to 2007 were identified; followed for hospitalization with rhabdomyolysis, renal impairment, hepatic injury, or pancreatitis; and confirmed by medical record review. Incidence rates (IRs) were compared across categories of fibrate or statin use, with adjusted IR ratios estimated using Poisson regression. A total of 584,784 patients initiated statins or fibrates. The IR of rhabdomyolysis in statins was 3.30 per 100,000 patient-years; the adjusted IR ratio for statin-fenofibrate combinations compared to statins alone was 3.75 (95% confidence interval 1.23 to 11.40). The IRs of renal impairment and pancreatitis in statins were 108.87 per 100,000 patient-years and 45.76 per 100,000 patient-years, respectively; the adjusted IR ratios for statin-fenofibrate combinations compared to statins alone were 1.47 (95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.93) and 2.87 (95% confidence interval 2.05 to 4.02), respectively. The IR of hepatic injury with statins was 8.57 per 100,000 patient-years, with no risk difference between exposure groups. In conclusion, the risk for rhabdomyolysis was low, although higher in patients newly treated with statin-fibrate concurrent therapy than those treated with either as monotherapy. The risk for pancreatitis was higher in patients treated with fenofibrate, whether in combination with statins or alone.