Comparison of Hospital Length of Stay and Supportive Care Utilization Between Patients Treated with CPX-351 and 7+3 for Therapy-Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Acute Myeloid Leukemia with Myelodysplasia-Related Changes.

PURPOSE: CPX-351 is dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of daunorubicin and cytarabine at a fixed synergistic 1:5 molar ratio. This study determined current real-world use of CPX-351 versus conventional 7+3 (cytarabine+daunorubicin) therapy and evaluated hospital length of stay (LOS) and supportive care utilization in t-AML and AML-MRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective, observational study utilized the Premier Healthcare Database and included patients who were aged ≥18 years with t-AML or AML-MRC and treated with CPX-351 or 7+3 between August 1, 2017 and February 28, 2019. All patients treated with 7+3 were required to be eligible for CPX-351 based on its FDA-approved indication. Outcome variables were annualized and adjusted for patient, hospital, and clinical confounding factors. The primary outcome was inpatient LOS. Secondary outcomes included use of blood products and use of anti-infectives. RESULTS: The study included 195 qualifying patients treated with CPX-351 and 160 patients treated with 7+3 who were eligible for CPX-351. Approximately one-third of the patients treated with CPX-351 were administered therapy in a hospital-based outpatient setting, and all patients treated with 7+3 received it in the inpatient setting. The regression-adjusted annualized inpatient LOS was shorter with CPX-351 than 7+3 (mean of 183.7 vs 197.1 days, p<0.001). The difference in mean-adjusted LOS was most pronounced for t-AML, with a mean-adjusted LOS of 168.9 versus 192.5 days for CPX-351 versus 7+3, respectively (nominal p<0.001). Supportive care utilization, including the number of administrations of red blood cells, the number of administrations of platelets, and the number of days on anti-infectives, was similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: CPX-351 was associated with a shorter inpatient LOS than 7+3. Supportive care use, including blood products and anti-infectives, was similar for CPX-351 and 7+3. These findings suggest CPX-351 conveys resource advantages over 7+3 in patients with newly diagnosed t-AML and AML-MRC.

The Economic Burden of ACPA-Positive Status Among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) are serological biomarkers associated with early, rapidly progressing rheumatoid arthritis (RA), including more severe disease and joint damage. ACPA testing has become a routine tool for RA diagnosis and prognosis. Furthermore, treatment efficacy has been shown to vary by ACPA-positive status. However, it is not clear if the economic burden of patients with RA varies by ACPA status. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the economic burden of RA varies by patient ACPA status. METHODS: IMS PharMetrics Plus health insurance claims and electronic medical record (EMR) data from 2010-2015 were used to identify patients with incident RA. Patients were aged ≥ 18 years, had ≥ 1 inpatient or ≥ 2 outpatient claims reporting an RA diagnosis code (ICD-9-CM code 714.0), and had an anticyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP; a surrogate of ACPA) antibody test within 6 months of diagnosis. Incident patients were defined as those who had no claims with an RA diagnosis code in the 6 months before the first observed RA diagnosis. The primary outcome of interest was RA-related medical expenditures, defined as the sum of payer- and patient-paid amounts for all claims with an RA diagnosis code. Secondary outcomes included health care utilization metrics such as treatment with a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) and physician visits. Generalized linear regression models were used for each outcome, controlling for ACPA-positive status (defined as anti-CCP ≥ 20 AU/mL), age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score as explanatory variables. RESULTS: Of 647,171 patients diagnosed with RA, 89,296 were incident cases, and 47% (n = 42,285) had an anti-CCP test. After restricting this sample to patients with a linked EMR and reported anti-CCP test result, 859 remained, with 24.7% (n = 212) being ACPA-positive. Compared with ACPA-negative patients, adjusted results showed that ACPA-positive patients were more likely to use either conventional (71.2% vs. 49.6%; P < 0.001) or biologic (20.3% vs. 11.8%; P < 0.001) DMARDs during the first year after diagnosis and had more physician visits (5.58 vs. 3.91 times per year; P < 0.001). Annual RA-associated total expenditures were $7,941 for ACPA-positive and $5,243 for ACPA-negative patients (Δ = $2,698; P = 0.002). RA-associated medical expenditures were $4,380 for ACPA-positive and $3,427 for ACPA-negative patients (Δ = $954; P = 0.168), whereas DMARD expenditures were $3,560 and $1,817, respectively (Δ = $1,743; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: RA-related economic burden is higher for patients who are ACPA-positive compared with those who are ACPA-negative. Providers may wish to inform patients diagnosed with ACPA-positive RA about the likely future disease and economic burden in hopes that both stakeholders can be more proactive in addressing them. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this research was contributed by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Patel and Price are employees and stockholders of Bristol-Myers Squibb. Shafrin and Tebeka are employees of Precision Health Economics, a health care consulting firm that received funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb to conduct this study. Michaud has received a grant from Pfizer and is employed by the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases, which has received funds from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, and Regeneron. Study concept and design were contributed by Shafrin, Price, Patel, and Michaud. Shafrin, Price, and Patel collected the data, and all authors contributed equally to data analysis. The manuscript was written by Shafrin and Tebeka and revised by Shafrin, Price, Patel, and Michaud.

Comparative evaluation of treatment patterns and healthcare utilization of newly-diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis patients by anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody status.

BACKGROUND: Anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) antibody positivity is an established diagnostic factor for severe disease activity and joint damage and a prognostic factor for aggressive disease in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVE: To compare RA-related treatment, healthcare utilization, and joint erosion between anti-CCP-positive and anti-CCP-negative RA patients. METHODS: Newly-diagnosed RA patients were identified from the Henry Ford Health System database between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2014; the date of the first RA diagnosis within the study period was the index date. Baseline anti-CCP test was used to categorize patients as anti-CCP-positive or anti-CCP-negative, and outcomes were evaluated in the 6 months post-index. RESULTS: There were 217 anti-CCP-positive and 191 anti-CCP-negative RA patients included in the study. A higher proportion of anti-CCP-positive patients were initiated on RA treatment than anti-CCP-negative patients (70.5% vs 23.0%; p < .0001). More anti-CCP-positive patients received methotrexate (73.2% vs 56.8%; p = .0374), while more anti-CCP-negative patients received hydroxychloroquine (31.8% vs 13.1%; p = .0037) in first-line therapy. A higher proportion of anti-CCP-negative patients were tested for rheumatoid factor (RF) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Of those tested, there were more positive test results in the anti-CCP-positive cohort compared to the anti-CCP-negative cohort (RF: 84.4% vs 18.2%, p < .0001; C-reactive protein [CRP]: 69.7% vs 48.3%, p = .0008; and ESR: 89.5% vs 53.9%, p < .0001). Outpatient utilization predominated, with more anti-CCP-positive patients having any outpatient physician office visit (96.3% vs 77.5%, p < .0001) and a higher mean number of visits (5.3 vs 2.5, p < .0001) than anti-CCP-negative patients. Among anti-CCP-positive (n = 113) and anti-CCP-negative (n = 58) patients with imaging results, more anti-CCP-positive patients had joint erosion compared to anti-CCP-negative patients (18.6% vs 8.6%; p = .0858); however, statistical significance was not reached. CONCLUSION: RA patients with positive anti-CCP antibodies had higher degrees of inflammation and disease activity as indicated by laboratory results, which likely contributed to their higher rates of healthcare utilization, joint erosion, and proportions of RA treatment.

Treatment and discharge patterns among patients hospitalized with non-valvular atrial fibrillation transitioning from the inpatient to outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate inpatient oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment, discharge location, and post-discharge OAC treatment for patients hospitalized with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective study using claims data linked to hospital electronic health records (EHR). Patients (n = 2,484) were hospitalized with a primary (38%) or secondary (62%) diagnosis of AF without evidence of mitral valvular heart disease or valve replacement between January 2009 and September 2013. Inpatient OAC treatment was identified from EHR data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inpatient and post-discharge OAC treatment [direct OAC (DOAC; apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran), warfarin, no OAC] and discharge location (long-term care, home health-care, home self-care). RESULTS: Mean age was 72.6 years, 61.2% were male, and 89.5% had a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Overall, 6.4% received a DOAC, 38.0% warfarin, and 55.6% no OAC during hospitalization. Compared to other treatment groups, patients receiving DOAC were younger and more likely to be male. The majority (72.2%) were discharged to home health-care, 13.2% home self-care, and 6.0% long-term care. Among patients who were treated with warfarin during hospitalization, 40.3% filled a warfarin prescription within 30 days post-discharge, whereas among patients who were treated with a DOAC, 52.4% filled a DOAC prescription within 30 days post-discharge. Some NVAF patients not treated with an OAC during hospitalization filled a prescription for warfarin (18.0%) or DOAC (1.9%) within 30 days post-discharge. Results were similar among patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients hospitalized for NVAF were discharged to home support, and the majority did not have OAC treatment during hospitalization or the 30 days post-discharge. Additional investigation should be conducted on trends beyond 30 days post-hospitalization, and the reasons for not receiving anticoagulation therapy in patients at moderate-to-severe risk of stroke or systemic embolism. Helping to avoid preventable strokes is an important goal for public health.

Comparison of hospital length of stay and hospitalization costs among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation treated with apixaban or warfarin: An early view.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and compare hospital length of stay (LOS) and costs between hospitalized non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients treated with either apixaban or warfarin via a large claims database. METHODS: Adult patients hospitalized with AF were selected from the Premier Perspective Claims Database (01JAN2013-31MARCH2014). Patients with evidence of valvular heart disease, valve replacement procedures, or pregnancy during the index hospitalization were excluded. Patients treated with apixaban or warfarin during hospitalization were identified. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to control for baseline imbalances between patients treated with apixaban or warfarin. Primary outcomes were hospital LOS (days), post-medication administration LOS, and index hospitalization costs, and were compared using paired t-tests in the matched sample. RESULTS: Before PSM, 2894 apixaban and 124,174 warfarin patients were identified. Patients treated with warfarin were older and sicker compared to those treated with apixaban. After applying PSM, a total of 2886 patients were included in each cohort, and baseline characteristics were balanced. The mean (standard deviation [SD] and median) hospital LOS was significantly (p = 0.002) shorter for patients treated with apixaban for 5.1 days (5.7 and 3) compared to warfarin for 5.5 days (4.8 and 4). The trend appeared consistent in the hospital LOS from point of apixaban or warfarin administration to discharge (4.5 vs 4.7 days, p = 0.051). Patients administered apixaban incurred significantly lower hospitalization costs compared to those administered warfarin ($11,262 vs $12,883; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among NVAF patients, apixaban treatment was associated with significantly shorter hospital LOS and lower costs when compared to warfarin treatment.

The relationship among health literacy, health knowledge, and adherence to treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with poor health literacy often lack the knowledge needed to manage their treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this cross-sectional study is to determine whether health literacy is a predictor of health knowledge and/or adherence to medication treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHOD: The study was completed in an urban, outpatient rheumatology setting. Health literacy was measured using the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults. The Arthritis Knowledge Questionnaire was modified to measure medication specific health knowledge, and the Morisky Medication Adherence scale was used to measure adherence. Researchers used regression analyses to determine if health literacy was a predicator of knowledge and/or adherence. RESULTS: Participants (N = 125) had high mean health literacy scores. The average medication knowledge score was 0.73. Adherence to medication regimen was 0.84. Controlling for patient covariates, health literacy was positively associated with education, race, and age. In adjusted analyses, health literacy was a significant predictor of health knowledge but not adherence. Race, neighborhood income, and confidence with contacting provider about medications were predictors of adherence. CONCLUSION: Study findings indicate that health literacy is independently associated with medication knowledge but not medication adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. These results provide useful information for planning initiatives to support individuals with disease self-management.

Using the nursing interventions classification as a potential measure of nurse workload.

Standardized terminologies, such as the Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC) taxonomy, may be used in multiple ways to represent nursing constructs. This study is the first known to explore the NIC as a framework for the development of a nursing workload measure. While the NIC may not represent the complexity of nurses' work, the classification system may represent uniformly the work of nurses in health information systems to yield reliable data for a nursing workload measure.