RDS-NExT workshop: consensus statements for the use of surfactant in preterm neonates with RDS.

OBJECTIVE: To provide the best clinical practice guidance for surfactant use in preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). The RDS-Neonatal Expert Taskforce (RDS-NExT) initiative was intended to add to existing evidence and clinical guidelines, where evidence is lacking, with input from an expert panel. STUDY DESIGN: An expert panel of healthcare providers specializing in neonatal intensive care was convened and administered a survey questionnaire, followed by 3 virtual workshops. A modified Delphi method was used to obtain consensus around topics in surfactant use in neonatal RDS. RESULT: Statements focused on establishing RDS diagnosis and indicators for surfactant administration, surfactant administration methods and techniques, and other considerations. After discussion and voting, consensus was achieved on 20 statements. CONCLUSION: These consensus statements provide practical guidance for surfactant administration in preterm neonates with RDS, with a goal to contribute to improving the care of neonates and providing a stimulus for further investigation to bridge existing knowledge gaps.

Understanding Payer Perspectives on Value in the Use of Pharmaceuticals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, value assessment frameworks have been introduced to inform discussions about how to define and assess value in the U.S. health care system. However, there is uncertainty as to how value assessment frameworks and other approaches to achieve value such as outcomes-based contracting are perceived and used in coverage decisions. OBJECTIVE: To understand how U.S. payers determine value in the use of pharmaceuticals and how it differs from payers outside the United States. METHODS: Qualitative in-depth phone interviews with 13 executive-level public and private U.S. managed care representatives and 6 health technology assessment advisors outside the United States were conducted from September to November 2017. RESULTS: Despite various mechanisms used by U.S. payers to assess value, no consistent definitions of value were provided, and U.S. payers felt limited in what they can do to achieve value in pharmaceutical decision making. Value assessment frameworks are not formally considered in formulary and reimbursement decisions but are used as a reference as they become available by most or all U.S. health plans. U.S. payers expressed concerns, including limited control over pharmaceutical pricing and budget caps, and limited ability to use incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year thresholds. Outcomes-based contracting could have some utility in specific cases where the treatment has a particularly high cost and a clear outcomes measure, but payers indicated that outcomes-based contracts can be difficult to operationalize, and determination of savings was uncertain. Payers outside the United States-who are enabled by government health care bodies, policy tools, and analytical frameworks that have no counterpart in the United States-have a wider array of instruments at their disposal. U.S. payers were largely open to learning from other health care systems outside the United States, particularly the German health care system, where patient-relevant benefit compared with a predetermined treatment comparator is the primary determinant for price negotiations. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is interest in including value assessment frameworks during the decision-making process in the United States, there are significant challenges to operationalizing them. The current environment in the United States restricts payers' ability to make favorable contracts with manufacturers, and changes to the U.S. health system design are needed to facilitate this effort. Adoption of a value assessment framework in Medicare or Medicaid would accelerate adoption of these tools by private payers in the United States. DISCLOSURES: This study was conducted by RTI Health Solutions under the direction of The Pew Charitable Trusts and was funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts. Vekaria is employed by RTI Health Solutions. Reynolds and Coukell are employed by The Pew Charitable Trusts. Brogan and Hogue have nothing to disclose.

Barriers to the Administration of Epinephrine in Schools.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a serious and growing concern in the school setting as the prevalence of food allergies and food-induced severe allergic reactions continues to increase. METHODS: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted regarding anaphylactic events that occurred during the 2014-2015 school year. Eligible schools were enrolled in the EPIPEN4SCHOOLS® program (Mylan Specialty L.P., Canonsburg, PA), which provides free epinephrine auto-injectors to qualifying US schools. Participating schools completed a 29-item survey on anaphylactic event occurrence and treatment, epinephrine stock, school policies regarding anaphylaxis, school staff training, and school nursing coverage. RESULTS: Responses were provided by 12,275 schools. Epinephrine was administered on school property for 63.7% of reported anaphylactic events (1272/1998). In 38.5% (235/610) of events for which epinephrine was not used, antihistamines were cited as the reason. Only 59.4% of schools cited epinephrine as their standard first-line therapy for anaphylaxis. School nurses were most likely to be trained in anaphylaxis recognition and permitted to administer epinephrine; however, just 53.6% of schools had a full-time nurse on staff. CONCLUSIONS: Process-related barriers to the appropriate use of epinephrine go beyond access to medication. Widespread staff training and review of school policies are needed to ensure that anaphylaxis is appropriately managed in schools.

Prevalence and triggers of anaphylactic events in schools.

BACKGROUND: Prevention and management of anaphylaxis in schools is an area of active interest as allergy and asthma rates in children continue to increase. A greater understanding of the prevalence and characteristics of anaphylaxis can help guide preventive and management strategies both within and outside of the school setting, with the goal of reducing morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to elucidate the epidemiology of and management strategies for anaphylaxis in the school setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional, Web-based survey was administered to schools that participated in an initiative that provides stock epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) to qualifying U.S. schools. Representatives from participating schools completed a questionnaire regarding anaphylactic reactions that occurred during the 2014-2015 school year. Weighted analyses were performed to account for differential responses between schools that completed the survey and those that did not. RESULTS: A total of 12,275 of the 45,819 invited schools responded to the survey. The occurrence of one or more anaphylactic events was reported by 1358 schools. Most events (89.8% [1803/2008]) occurred in students. High school students accounted for the largest proportion of anaphylactic reactions among students (40.1% [723/1802]). Food was the most commonly identified anaphylaxis trigger across grade levels, seasons, and geographic regions. The trigger was unknown to the individual who experienced anaphylaxis in 21.8% of the events (436/1998). No known history of allergy or asthma was present in 24.5% (491/2001) and 51.3% (1026/2000) of affected individuals, respectively. Transportation to the hospital or clinic for further treatment and/or management was reported for 72.6% of the individuals with anaphylactic events (1450/1997). Results from the weighted analyses were similar to those of the unweighted analyses. CONCLUSION: Anaphylaxis occurred across grade levels and in individuals with or without known risk factors, which reinforced the need for school preparedness in both management of anaphylaxis and stocking of EAIs.

Payer Perspectives on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Health Care Decision Making: Oncology Examples.

BACKGROUND: Health authorities and payers increasingly recognize the importance of patient perspectives and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in health care decision making. However, given the broad variety of PRO endpoints included in clinical programs and variations in the timing of PRO data collection and country-specific needs, the role of PRO data in reimbursement decisions requires characterization. OBJECTIVES: To (a) determine the effect of PRO data on market access and reimbursement decisions for oncology products in multiple markets and (b) assess the effect of PRO data collected after clinical progression on payer decision making. METHODS: A 3-part assessment (targeted literature review, qualitative one-on-one interviews, and online survey) was undertaken. Published literature was identified through searches in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase. In addition, a targeted search was conducted of health technology assessment (HTA) agency websites in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. Qualitative one-on-one interviews were conducted with 16 payers from the RTI Health Solutions global advisory panel in 14 markets (Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, South Korea, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States [n = 3]). Of the 200 payers and payer advisors from the global advisory panel invited to participate in the online survey, 20 respondents (China, France, Germany, Spain [n = 2], Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States [n = 13]) completed the survey, and 6 respondents (Australia, South Korea, and the United States [n = 4]) partially completed the survey. RESULTS: Reviews of the literature and publicly available HTAs and reimbursement decisions suggested that HTA bodies and payers have varying experience with and confidence in PRO data. Payers participating in the survey indicated that PRO data may be especially influential in oncology compared with other therapeutic areas. Payers surveyed offered little differentiation by cancer type in the importance of PRO data but felt that it was most important to collect PRO data in phase 3 and postmarketing studies. Payers surveyed also anticipated an increasing significance for PRO data over the next 5-10 years. Characteristics of PRO data that maximize influence on payer decision making were reported to be (a) quality, well-controlled, and transparent PRO evidence; (b) psychometric validation of the PRO measure in targeted populations; and (c) publication in peer-reviewed journals. In markets with decentralized health care decision making, PRO data currently have more influence at the local level. Inclusion of PRO data in cancer treatment guidelines is key for centralized markets. Payers surveyed generally considered collecting PRO data postprogression to be useful. Of the 16 interviewees, 11 indicated that it is worthwhile to collect PRO data postprogression and that positive PRO data may support continued therapy at the physician's discretion upon regulatory approval, even in progressive disease. CONCLUSIONS: PRO data may help to differentiate treatments, particularly after clinical progression in oncology. Payers worldwide recognize high-quality PRO data as a key component of their decision-making process and anticipate the growing importance of PRO data in the future. DISCLOSURES: This study and preparation of this article were funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. This research was performed under a research contract between RTI Health Solutions and Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Brogan, Hogue, Demuro, and Barrett are employees of RTI Health Solutions. D'Alessio and Bal are employees of Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Study concept and design were contributed by DeMuro, Barrett, Bal, and Hogue. Brogan and Hogue took the lead in data collection, assisted by DeMuro and Bal. Data interpretation was performed by Brogan and Hogue, assisted by the other authors. The manuscript was written by D'Alessio and Brogan, along with the other authors, and revised primarily by Brogan, along with Hogue and assisted by the other authors. The abstract for this article was presented as a research poster at the following meetings: Hogue SL, Brogan A P, De Muro C, D'Alessio D, Bal V. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in post-progression oncology: implications in health technology assessments and payer decision making. Poster presented at the ISPOR 18th Annual European Meeting; November 7-11, 2015. Milan, Italy. Hogue SL, Brogan AP, De Muro C, D'Alessio D, Bal V. Influence of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) on market access decisions in markets with centralized healthcare systems. Poster presented at the ISPOR 18th Annual European Meeting; November 7-11, 2015. Milan, Italy. Hogue SL, Brogan AP, De Muro C, Barrett A, D'Alessio D, Bal V. Influence of patient-reported outcomes on market access decisions in decentralized markets (Brazil, Italy, Spain and the United States). Poster presented at the ISPOR 20th Annual Meeting; May 16-20, 2015. Philadelphia PA. Hogue SL, Brogan A P, De Muro C, Barrett A, McLeod L, D'Alessio D, et al. Payer Perspectives of Patient-Reported Outcomes Data: An Online Assessment. Poster presented at the ISOQOL 22nd Annual Meeting; October 21-24, 2015. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Evaluating the Impact of Sample Medication on Subsequent Patient Adherence.

BACKGROUND: Medication nonadherence is problematic throughout health care practice. Patient nonadherence is a result of several factors, such as financial issues, confusion about the medication, or concerns about possible side effects. Efforts to improve adherence have been implemented, but new strategies are needed to ensure that patients fill their medication prescriptions and adhere to their prescribed use. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether providing patients with a free 30-day supply of medication at the point of care via a dispensing kiosk-a secure, computerized cabinet placed in the prescriber's office-that provides sample medication and educational materials had a measurable impact on adherence and health care cost. METHODS: The study sample consisted of patients drawn from the electronic health records of a large health care provider who were prescribed medications to treat diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. The comparison groups included a treatment group of patients who each received a 30-day generic sample of medication and a control group of patients who did not receive a sample. The study outcome was primary medication non-adherence (PMN), defined as whether a patient filled a prescription within 90, 180, or 365 days of prescribing. Only patients receiving a prescription for the first time were considered; patients on a medication before receipt of the sample were dropped. Postprescription medication adherence (PPMA), measured as proportion of days covered (PDC) and proportion of days covered ≥ 80% (PDC80), was also examined. Propensity score methods and multivariate regression models were used to examine the outcomes and group differences. Costs to the patient before and after the prescription were also analyzed. Key informant interviews were conducted with physicians, and qualitative analyses were performed. RESULTS: Patients who received a 30-day generic medication sample had a higher probability of filling a first prescription within 90 days (72.2% for treatment patients vs. 37.6% for controls, P < 0.001); 180 days (79.1% vs. 43.3%, respectively, P < 0.001); and 365 days (85.5% vs. 48.6%, P < 0.001). The medication sample had a positive effect on PDC for 90 days, with treatment patients having 72.8% adherent days versus 35.1% adherent days for controls (average treatment effect [ATE] = 37.5%, P < 0.001). At 180 days, PDC adherence was 57.1% for treatment patients versus 35.4% for controls (ATE = 21.5%, P < 0.001), and 43.6% versus 33.9%, respectively (ATE = 9.5%, P < 0.001) for the 365-day period. PDC80 was significantly better among treatment patients at 90 days (53.5% vs. 31.2%, respectively, ATE = 22.4%, P < 0.001) and 180 days (38.4% vs. 29.1%, ATE = 9.2%, P < 0.001), but not at 365 days (23.7% vs. 23.7%, ATE = -0.02, not significant). Costs were reduced by $395 for the treatment group. Interviews with clinicians indicated a positive view of the program. CONCLUSIONS: Providing a free sample medication improved the probability of patients filling their initial prescriptions and adhering to those medications. This program can affect health care costs, as evidenced by lower costs for the treatment group. DISCLOSURES: Financial support for this study was provided by MedVantx. UMPC Health Plan reviewed and commented on the manuscript. Hogue is an employee of MedVantx and also reviewed the manuscript. Manolis is employed by UPMC Health Plan. The remaining authors report no other conflicts of interest. Study concept and design were contributed by Pringle. Aldridge took the lead in data collection, along with Kearney. Data interpretation was performed primarily by Radack, along with Kearney and Grasso. The manuscript was written by Kearney, Aldridge, and Radack and revised by Kearney, Manolis, Hogue, and Radack.

Training and administration of epinephrine auto-injectors for anaphylaxis treatment in US schools: results from the EpiPen4Schools(®) pilot survey.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a serious, potentially life-threatening condition. Adequate preparation for anaphylaxis management is imperative for school personnel. This descriptive pilot study assessed preparedness of US schools to manage anaphylactic reactions. METHODS: An exploratory, cross-sectional, web-based, pilot survey assessed the occurrence and characteristics of anaphylactic events, as well as training provided to school personnel for the recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis. Eligible US schools were participants in the EpiPen4Schools(®) program during the 2013-2014 school year. EpiPen4Schools provides EpiPen(®) (epinephrine injection) Auto-Injectors and training materials to qualifying US schools. Survey data were parsed by US Census Bureau region and state and were evaluated using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Schools from all 50 states and the District of Columbia participated in the survey (N=6,019). Among schools that provided information on anaphylactic events, 11% (607/5,683) reported the occurrence of one or more events, with significant variability in incidence across census regions and among states. A total of 5,613 schools provided information regarding which staff members were trained to recognize the signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis. Thirty-six percent of schools (2,022/5,613) indicated that only the school nurse and select staff were trained in anaphylaxis recognition. The proportion of schools in which most or all school staff received such training differed by region/state (range, 13%-100%). A total of 5,578 schools provided information on which staff were permitted to administer epinephrine. The majority of schools (54%; 3,024/5,578) permitted only the school nurse and select staff to administer epinephrine, although percentages varied by region/state (range, 4%-100%). CONCLUSION: Schools differed substantially in their preparedness to manage anaphylaxis, with significant disparities in staff training and permission to treat. Given the ramifications of delayed treatment, removing barriers to the recognition and treatment of anaphylactic events in schools is an important public health goal.

Anaphylaxis in Schools: Results of the EPIPEN4SCHOOLS Survey Combined Analysis.

A pilot survey described the characteristics of anaphylactic events occurring in an initial set of participating U.S. schools during the 2013-2014 school year. This survey was subsequently readministered to large school districts, which were underrepresented in initial results. A cross-sectional survey was administered to the U.S. schools that were participating in the EPIPEN4SCHOOLS® program (Mylan Specialty L.P., Canonsburg, PA) to assess characteristics of anaphylactic events. Data from large school districts were added to initial findings in this comprehensive combined analysis. A total of 1,140 anaphylactic events were reported among 6,574 responding schools. Of 1,063 anaphylactic events with data on who experienced the event, it was observed that it occurred mostly in students (89.5%, 951/1,063). For students, anaphylactic events were reported across all grades, with 44.9% (400/891) occurring in high school students, 18.9% (168/891) in middle school students, and 32.5% (290/891) in elementary school students. Food was identified as the most common trigger (60.1%, 622/1,035). A majority of schools (55.0%, 3,332/6,053) permitted only the school nurse and select staff to administer epinephrine to treat anaphylaxis. The unpredictability of anaphylaxis is emphasized by its high occurrence in individuals with no known allergies (25.0%). A majority of schools permitted only the school nurse and select staff to treat anaphylaxis. Thus, individuals experiencing an anaphylactic event may frequently encounter staff members not being permitted to administer potentially life-saving epinephrine. Epinephrine auto-injectors provided by the EPIPEN4SCHOOLS program were used to treat 38.0% of events. Anaphylaxis can occur in children with no previously known allergies, illustrating the importance of public access to epinephrine.

Anaphylaxis Triggers and Treatments by Grade Level and Staff Training: Findings from the EPIPEN4SCHOOLS Pilot Survey.

This pilot survey was designed to evaluate the characteristics of anaphylactic events and epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) use in children in U.S. schools. A cross-sectional, web-based, pilot survey of schools participating in the EPIPEN4SCHOOLS® program (Mylan Specialty L.P., Canonsburg, PA) assessed characteristics of anaphylactic events and EAI use during the 2013-2014 academic year. Respondents reported 757 anaphylactic events experienced by students; student grade level was noted for 724 events. Of these events, 32.3% (234/724) were experienced by students in grade school, 18.6% (135/724) by students in middle school, and 49.0% (355/724) by students in high school. Frequency of food-related triggers was consistently high across grade levels. However, many events experienced by students in high school (22.3%, 79/355), middle school (15.0%, 20/135), and grade school (14.1%, 33/234) had an unknown trigger. In 36.0% of schools (2008/5579), only the school nurse and select staff received training to recognize anaphylaxis; most staff or all staff received training in 28.9% (1610/5579) and 30.9% (1722/5579) of schools, respectively. In a majority of schools (54.2%, 3003/5544), only the school nurse and select staff were permitted to administer epinephrine, whereas most staff or all staff were permitted to administer epinephrine in 15.8% (876/5544) and 21.9% (1212/5544) of schools, respectively. Risk of anaphylaxis may be particularly high during adolescence, and some students encounter staff members who are untrained in anaphylaxis recognition or management, or both. These findings support the need for continued anaphylaxis training for the protection of all students, staff, and visitors.

Review of the cost of venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second most common medical complication and a cause of excess length of hospital stay. Its incidence and economic burden are expected to increase as the population ages. We reviewed the recent literature to provide updated cost estimates on VTE management. METHODS: Literature search strategies were performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Collaboration, Health Economic Evaluations Database, EconLit, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from 2003-2014. Additional studies were identified through searching bibliographies of related publications. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified and are summarized in this review; of these, 13 reported data from the USA, four from Europe, and one from Canada. Three main cost estimations were identified: cost per VTE hospitalization or per VTE readmission; cost for VTE management, usually reported annually or during a specific period; and annual all-cause costs in patients with VTE, which included the treatment of complications and comorbidities. Cost estimates per VTE hospitalization were generally similar across the US studies, with a trend toward an increase over time. Cost per pulmonary embolism hospitalization increased from $5,198-$6,928 in 2000 to $8,764 in 2010. Readmission for recurrent VTE was generally more costly than the initial index event admission. Annual health plan payments for services related to VTE also increased from $10,804-$16,644 during the 1998-2004 period to an estimated average of $15,123 for a VTE event from 2008 to 2011. Lower costs for VTE hospitalizations and annualized all-cause costs were estimated in European countries and Canada. CONCLUSION: Costs for VTE treatment are considerable and increasing faster than general inflation for medical care services, with hospitalization costs being the primary cost driver. Readmissions for VTE are generally more costly than the initial VTE admission. Further studies evaluating the economic impact of new treatment options such as the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants on VTE treatment are warranted.

Disease Burden in the Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Findings From a Time-and-Motion Study.

PURPOSE: To examine the time burden of managing neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) imposed on physicians, staff, patients, and caregivers. DESIGN: Mixed-methods, prospective, observational time-and-motion study. METHODS: The multicenter study was conducted from March 2011 through August 2012. Retina specialists administering ≥50 vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-inhibitor injections monthly were surveyed and completed records for ≥5 patients scheduled for office visits within 3 weeks for anti-VEGF injection or monitoring. A survey was administered to 75 neovascular AMD patients aged ≥50 years who received ≥1 anti-VEGF injection in the past 6 months. Telephone interviews were conducted with 13 neovascular AMD patient caregivers. RESULTS: Fifty-six physicians provided data for 221 patients with neovascular AMD. Patients accounted for 20% of the health care staff's time per week, with an average of 23 staff members. An average patient visit for neovascular AMD was 90 minutes (range: 13 minutes to >4 hours). Patients reported an average time per visit of almost 12 hours, including preappointment preparation (16 minutes), travel (66 minutes), waiting time (37 minutes), treatment time (43 minutes), and postappointment recovery (9 hours). Patients stated that caregivers took time away from work (22%) and personal activities (28%) to provide transportation to appointments. CONCLUSIONS: Neovascular AMD management imposes a substantial time burden on physicians, staff, patients, and caregivers. There may be a need for additional support and/or reimbursement for services required by patients and caregivers and provided by physicians.

EpiPen4Schools pilot survey: Occurrence of anaphylaxis, triggers, and epinephrine administration in a U.S. school setting.

BACKGROUND: Although epinephrine is the treatment of choice for anaphylaxis, it remains underused. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to describe anaphylactic events and epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) use in U.S. schools enrolled in the EpiPen4Schools program. METHODS: This exploratory, cross-sectional, Web-based survey of 6019 schools that participated in the EpiPen4Schools program assessed anaphylactic events and EAI use at responding schools during the 2013-2014 school year. RESULTS: A total of 919 anaphylactic events were reported in 607 schools. Of the 852 anaphylactic events with data on those who experienced an event, most 88.8% (n = 757) occurred in students, and 21.9% of events (n = 187) occurred in individuals with no known allergies. Of the 851 events with data on EAI use, 74.7% (n = 636) were treated with EAIs and 8.5% (n = 54) received a second epinephrine injection. Of the 204 individuals not treated with an EAI, 77.0% (n = 157) received antihistamines, 12.7% (n = 26) received another treatment, and 8.3% (n = 17) received no treatment. Of the 850 events with data on hospital transport, 79.6% of individuals (n = 677) were transported to the hospital. Common triggers varied seasonally, with food listed most frequently overall (62.5%). CONCLUSION: More than one in ten schools that participated in the EpiPen4Schools survey reported an anaphylactic event. Approximately 25% of individuals with anaphylactic events were not treated with EAIs, and 20.4% of patients were not taken to the hospital after an anaphylactic event. Analysis of these data supports the value of stocking EAIs and of providing continuing education regarding the recognition and proper treatment of anaphylaxis for school personnel.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the relative efficacy and safety of edoxaban versus other nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and CHADS2 score ⩾ 2.

BACKGROUND: The nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants pivotal clinical trials for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation have important differences in trial designs and baseline patient characteristics. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of edoxaban versus other nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in the management of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation by adjusting for differences in baseline stroke risk and the length of follow-up among the four phase 3 randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials evaluating the nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and performed a network meta-analysis using data from ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48, RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE, with warfarin as a common comparator. To adjust for between-trial differences in CHADS2 score and length of follow-up, annualized event rates among patients with CHADS2 score ⩾ 2 were analyzed using a mixed Poisson's regression model. RESULTS: Once-daily high-dose edoxaban was associated with significant lower major bleeding episodes compared with once-daily rivaroxaban (risk ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.89), twice-daily dabigatran 150 mg (risk ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.84), and twice-daily dabigatran 110 mg (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.98) and similar bleeding risk compared with twice-daily apixaban (risk ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.28). Risk of stroke and systemic embolism was similar for the high-dose edoxaban and other nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant regimens. The low-dose edoxaban regimen was associated with a significant lower risk of major bleeding than other nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and a significant higher risk of stroke and systemic embolism compared with apixaban and dabigatran 150 mg. CONCLUSION: Among patients with atrial fibrillation and CHADS2 score ⩾ 2, the high-dose edoxaban regimen may offer similar efficacy to the other nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants but with a significant major bleeding benefit over rivaroxaban and dabigatran.

Early symptom improvement and discontinuation of 5-α-reductase inhibitor (5ARI) therapy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) commonly include α-blocker (AB) and 5-α-reductase inhibitor (5ARI) agents, which have separate but important attributes that carry clinical implications in terms of improvement of lower-urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and clinical disease progression. OBJECTIVES: This study hypothesized that administering AB therapy concomitantly with newly started 5ARI treatment would reduce the likelihood of 5ARI discontinuation through early symptom improvement. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of the PharMetrics Integrated Medical and Pharmaceutical Database included men aged ≥50 years with ≥1 medical claim of BPH diagnosis and ≥1 prescription claim of a 5ARI with or without an AB. Patients initiating 5ARI monotherapy were propensity score matched with patients initiating combination AB + 5ARI therapy (1:1), with 5ARI time to discontinuation (30-day gap in treatment) compared between groups utilizing survival analysis techniques. The percentage of patients adherent to 5ARI therapy based on medication possession ratio (MPR) was assessed. RESULTS: After 180 days of follow-up, 61.7% of the combination therapy arm versus 59.2% of the monotherapy arm remained on therapy. Combination therapy patients were 10% less likely to discontinue 5ARI treatment (hazard ratio = 0.904; P = .006) and were more likely to be adherent when adherence was defined as MPR ≥70% and ≥75%. CONCLUSIONS: Based on an assessment of claims data, initiating AB with 5ARI therapy is associated with a lower rate of 5ARI discontinuation compared with 5ARI monotherapy. Early symptom relief from AB therapy may contribute to a lower discontinuation rate for concomitant 5ARI therapy.

Review of economics and cost-effectiveness analyses of anticoagulant therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation in the US.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the available evidence on the issues in health economics related to oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) in the US. DATA SOURCES: A literature review was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, as well as the websites of professional organizations. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: The search was conducted according to a prespecified protocol, limiting articles to those published in English from 2001 to October 2012 and focused on the economics associated with AF and AF-related stroke in the US. Data from 27 studies were extracted and included in the review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Strokes in patients with AF are more debilitating and have higher recurrence rates and mortality compared with strokes unrelated to AF. However, data describing the long-term cost of AF-related stroke and stroke subtypes remain limited. The costs of major gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and intracranial bleeding related to warfarin are significant, whereas the costs of the more frequent minor GI bleeding are relatively low. Overall, the cost-effectiveness of warfarin versus aspirin or no treatment in patients with at least 1 risk factor for stroke is well established. Economic evaluations based on results from randomized controlled clinical trials generally found that new anticoagulants were a cost-effective alternative to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF. However, these cost-effectiveness results are highly sensitive to how well optimal international normalized ratio control is maintained (within target of 2.0-3.0) for warfarin and the time horizon used for analysis. Time in therapeutic range for warfarin in routine clinical practice was lower than in clinical trials, as shown by previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified several areas of uncertainty regarding the economic benefit of anticoagulants. The generalizability of cost-effectiveness results of anticoagulant therapy in AF based on clinical trial data must be confirmed by comparative effectiveness research conducted in the real-world setting.

Review of challenges in optimizing oral anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

Oral anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation; it is highly effective at reducing stroke risk, but its use can be limited by increased risk of bleeding. As new oral anticoagulants are available, barriers to optimal use of oral anticoagulation therapy warrant consideration by healthcare professionals and administrators who are seeking to optimize the quality of care for patients with atrial fibrillation. Suboptimal use of oral anticoagulation therapy constitutes an important health problem with significant humanistic and economic consequences. Based on a review of the medical literature published between 2000 and 2011, this article summarizes the literature on the barriers to optimal use of oral anticoagulation therapy, describes the clinical and economic burdens that these barriers add to the burden of atrial fibrillation, and discusses how well the new oral anticoagulants may address some of these issues.

High burden and unmet patient needs in chronic kidney disease.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a complex debilitating condition affecting more than 70 million people worldwide. With the increased prevalence in risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease in an aging population, CKD prevalence is also expected to increase. Increased awareness and understanding of the overall CKD burden by health care teams (patients, clinicians, and payers) is warranted so that overall care and treatment management may improve. This review of the burden of CKD summarizes available evidence of the clinical, humanistic, and economic burden of CKD and the current unmet need for new treatments and serves as a resource on the overall burden. Across countries, CKD prevalence varies considerably and is dependent upon patient characteristics. The prevalence of risk factors including diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and congestive heart failure is noticeably higher in patients with lower estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) and results in highly complex CKD patient populations. As CKD severity worsens, there is a subsequent decline in patient health-related quality of life and an increased use of health care resources as well as burgeoning costs. With current treatment, nearly half of patients progress to unfavorable renal and cardiovascular outcomes. Although curative treatment that will arrest kidney deterioration is desired, innovative agents under investigation for CKD to slow kidney deterioration, such as atrasentan, bardoxolone methyl, and spherical carbon adsorbent, may offer patients healthier and more productive lives.

Clinical and economic impact of early versus delayed 5-alpha reductase inhibitor therapy in men taking alpha blockers for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent clinical trials indicate that combining an alpha blocker for rapid symptom improvement and a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) to reduce the risk of clinical progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) may be an optimal approach to management; however, few studies have evaluated the effect of combination therapy on clinical progression in a real-world setting. The purpose of our study was to assess the clinical and economic impact of early versus delayed 5-ARI therapy in patients treated with an alpha blocker for BPH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective database analysis included men 50 years of age and older who were treated for BPH between 2003 and 2007. Clinical outcomes were evaluated for patients using 5-ARIs early (within 30 days of starting an alpha blocker) compared with those using delayed 5-ARI therapy (between 30 and 180 days after starting an alpha blocker). We assessed the likelihood of clinical progression (defined as the occurrence of acute urinary retention or prostate surgery) for each group over a one-year period following the start of alpha-blocker therapy. DATA SOURCE: The MarketScan Database, which was used to identify patients, contains medical and pharmacy claims data obtained directly from Medicare and commercial health plans and employers, representing 18 to 20 million lives annually. RESULTS: Of 8,617 men included in the analysis, 64.5% began 5-ARI therapy within 30 days of alpha-blocker therapy (the early cohort). These patients were less likely than those receiving delayed 5-ARI treatment to have clinical progression (12.8% vs. 17.4% respectively; P < 0.0001), acute urinary retention (10.2% vs. 13.8%, P < 0.0001), and prostate surgery (5% vs. 7%, P = 0.0002). The early group also incurred lower BPH-related medical costs ($572 vs. $730, P < 0.0001). Even though BPH-related pharmacy costs were significantly higher ($1,137 vs. $1,263, P = 0.0313), their total BPH-related costs were lower ($1,834 vs. $1,867, P = 0.0068). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that early 5-ARI therapy for men with symptomatic BPH who receive an alpha blocker may significantly reduce the risk of clinical progression (i.e., acute urinary retention or prostate surgery) over the next 12 months as well as lower BPH-related medical costs and BPH-related total costs.

Benign prostatic hyperplasia: racial differences in treatment patterns and prostate cancer prevalence.

OBJECTIVE: • To compare prostate cancer, prostate-related surgery and acute urinary retention rates, as well as associated healthcare resource use over 11 years in African American and Caucasian men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: • The BPH-related medical and surgical charges and events were determined for 398 African American men and 1656 Caucasian men followed for a mean of 10.2 years within a health maintenance organization. • Racial differences in clinical outcomes were evaluated using time-to-event analysis, stratifying results by baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values. RESULTS: • Risk of a prostate cancer diagnosis was 2.2 times greater in African American than Caucasian men (95% CI 1.48-3.35, P < 0.001) in analyses adjusting for serum PSA level. • Although African Americans were more likely to receive medical therapy for symptoms of BPH than Caucasians (43.5% vs 37.2%, respectively; P= 0.029), there were no clinically meaningful differences with respect to subsequent acute urinary retention or BPH-related surgery between them, or BPH-related medical charges (US $407 vs US $405 per month). CONCLUSION: • As evidenced by this analysis of 'real-world' clinical practice, African Americans with BPH have a much greater risk of developing prostate cancer than similar Caucasian men highlighting the need for education and early detection in this population.

The economic impact of delaying 5-alpha reductase inhibitor therapy in men receiving treatment for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacologic treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia often includes alpha-blockers and 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. Many clinicians use alpha-blockers for rapid symptom control, later adding 5-alpha reductase inhibitors to modify long-term disease progression. Delaying the addition of these medications has been shown to result in reduced clinical outcomes. The economic impact of this practice has not been widely studied or reported to date. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the economic impact of delaying initiation of concomitant 5-alpha reductase inhibitor therapy (≥30 days) in patients receiving alpha-blockers for lower urinary tract symptoms. METHODS: Using 2 nationally representative databases (Integrated Health Care Information Solutions and PharMetrics), 2 retrospective analyses were conducted involving 2636 and 4260 men, respectively, aged ≥50 years treated for benign prostatic hyperplasia between 2000 and 2007. Economic outcomes (ie, the cost of therapy and the use of healthcare resources) were compared for adding 5-alpha reductase inhibitor therapy early (within <30 days of initiating an alpha-blocker) versus delaying these medications (≥30 days after initiating an alpha-blocker). RESULTS: In the Integrated Health Care Information Solutions analysis, patients in the early add-on therapy group (n = 1572) had lower benign prostatic hyperplasia-related medical costs in the posttreatment period than those in the delayed-therapy group (n = 1064), $349 versus $618 (P <.0001). Similar trends were seen in the PharMetrics analysis-the medical costs in the early add-on therapy group (n = 2604) and delayed group (n = 1656) were $344 versus $449, respectively (P <.001). Pharmacy costs were $1068 for the early-treatment cohort and $989 for the delayed-treatment cohort for the Integrated Health Care Information Solutions database, yielding total costs of $1417 and $1606, respectively, for a $189 savings per patient over the initial year of treatment (P <.0001). In the PharMetrics analysis, pharmacy costs were $1391 for the early-treatment cohort and $1237 for the delayed-treatment cohort, resulting in total cost of $1735 and $1686, respectively, yielding $59 in additional costs per patient annually for those treated early (P = .8645). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that patients receiving 5-alpha reductase inhibitor therapy within 30 days after initiating alpha-blocker treatment have lower benign prostatic hyperplasia-related medical costs than those who start combination treatment later. The increase in pharmacy costs associated with early initiation of 5-alpha reductase inhibitor therapy resulted in total costs that were similar or significantly lower than those of delayed combination users.