Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor Exposure Is Associated with Lower Alzheimer's Disease Risk: A Retrospective Cohort Proof-of-Concept Study.

Brain somatic gene recombination (SGR) and the endogenous reverse transcriptases (RTs) that produce it have been implicated in the etiology of Alzheimer's disease (AD), suggesting RT inhibitors as novel prophylactics or therapeutics. This retrospective, proof-of-concept study evaluated the incidence of AD in people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) with or without exposure to nucleoside RT inhibitors (NRTIs) using de-identified medical claims data. Eligible participants were aged ≥60 years, without pre-existing AD diagnoses, and pursued medical services in the United States from October 2015 to September 2016. Cohorts 1 (N = 46,218) and 2 (N = 32,923) had HIV. Cohort 1 had prescription claims for at least one NRTI within the exposure period; Cohort 2 did not. Cohort 3 (N = 150,819) had medical claims for the common cold without evidence of HIV or antiretroviral therapy. The cumulative incidence of new AD cases over the ensuing 2.75-year observation period was lowest in patients with NRTI exposure and highest in controls. Age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratios showed a significantly decreased risk for AD in Cohort 1 compared with Cohorts 2 (HR 0.88, p < 0.05) and 3 (HR 0.84, p < 0.05). Sub-grouping identified a decreased AD risk in patients with NRTI exposure but without protease inhibitor (PI) exposure. Prospective clinical trials and the development of next-generation agents targeting brain RTs are warranted.

COVID-19 Vaccination Reactions and Risk of Breakthrough Infections Among People With Diabetes: Cohort Study Derived From Community Reporters.

BACKGROUND: This exploratory study compares self-reported COVID-19 vaccine side effects and breakthrough infections in people who described themselves as having diabetes with those who did not identify as having diabetes. OBJECTIVE: The study uses person-reported data to evaluate differences in the perception of COVID-19 vaccine side effects between adults with diabetes and those who did not report having diabetes. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted using data provided online by adults aged 18 years and older residing in the United States. The participants who voluntarily self-enrolled between March 19, 2021, and July 16, 2022, in the IQVIA COVID-19 Active Research Experience project reported clinical and demographic information, COVID-19 vaccination, whether they had experienced any side effects, test-confirmed infections, and consented to linkage with prescription claims. No distinction was made for this study to differentiate prediabetes or type 1 and type 2 diabetes nor to verify reports of positive COVID-19 tests. Person-reported medication use was validated using pharmacy claims and a subset of the linked data was used for a sensitivity analysis of medication effects. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratios of vaccine side effects or breakthrough infections by diabetic status, adjusting for age, gender, education, race, ethnicity (Hispanic or Latino), BMI, smoker, receipt of an influenza vaccine, vaccine manufacturer, and all medical conditions. Evaluations of diabetes medication-specific vaccine side effects are illustrated graphically to support the examination of the magnitude of side effect differences for various medications and combinations of medications used to manage diabetes. RESULTS: People with diabetes (n=724) reported experiencing fewer side effects within 2 weeks of vaccination for COVID-19 than those without diabetes (n=6417; mean 2.7, SD 2.0 vs mean 3.1, SD 2.0). The adjusted risk of having a specific side effect or any side effect was lower among those with diabetes, with significant reductions in fatigue and headache but no differences in breakthrough infections over participants' maximum follow-up time. Diabetes medication use did not consistently affect the risk of specific side effects, either using self-reported medication use or using only diabetes medications that were confirmed by pharmacy health insurance claims for people who also reported having diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: People with diabetes reported fewer vaccine side effects than participants not reporting having diabetes, with a similar risk of breakthrough infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04368065; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04368065.

Daily COVID-19 symptom assessment over 28 days - findings from a daily direct-to-patient registry of COVID-19 positive patients.

In January 2021, 999 COVID-19 positive adults in the US enrolled in an online, direct-to-patient registry to describe daily symptom severity and progression over 28 days. The most commonly reported and persistent symptoms were fatigue, headache, decreased sense of taste, decreased sense of smell, and cough. Fast resolving symptoms included gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea) and those related to fever and chills. While more than half (56%) of patients reported overall symptom improvement during the 28-day study period, 60% of patients were still reporting at least 1 COVID-19 symptom at the end of 28 days. Risk factors for experiencing symptoms for longer duration included at least one of the following: older age (> 60 years), higher BMI, lung disease, and receiving medication for hypertension. The study demonstrates the value of patient-reported data to provide important and timely insights to COVID-19 disease and symptom progression and the potential of using real-world data to inform clinical trial design and endpoints.

Cognitive and other neuropsychiatric symptoms in COVID-19: analysis of person-generated longitudinal health data from a community-based registry.

OBJECTIVE: To describe cognitive symptoms in people not hospitalised at study enrolment for SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated demographics, medical history, other neuropsychiatric symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. DESIGN: Longitudinal observational study. SETTING: Direct-to-participant registry with community-based recruitment via email and social media including Google, Facebook and Reddit, targeting adult US residents. Demographics, medical history, COVID-19-like symptoms, tests and vaccinations were collected through enrolment and follow-up surveys. PARTICIPANTS: Participants who reported positive COVID-19 test results between 15 December 2020 and 13 December 2021. Those with cognitive symptoms were compared with those not reporting such symptoms. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported cognitive symptoms (defined as 'feeling disoriented or having trouble thinking' from listed options or related written-in symptoms) RESULTS: Of 3908 participants with a positive COVID-19 test result, 1014 (25.9%) reported cognitive symptoms at any time point during enrolment or follow-up, with approximately half reporting moderate/severe symptoms. Cognitive symptoms were associated with other neuropsychiatric symptoms, including dysgeusia, anosmia, trouble waking up, insomnia, headache, anxiety and depression. In multivariate analyses, female sex (OR, 95% CI): 1.7 (1.3 to 2.2), age (40-49 years (OR: 1.5 (1.2-1.9) compared with 18-29 years), history of autoimmune disease (OR: 1.5 (1.2-2.1)), lung disease (OR: 1.7 (1.3-2.2)) and depression (OR: 1.4 (1.1-1.7)) were associated with cognitive symptoms. Conversely, black race (OR: 0.6 (0.5-0.9)) and COVID-19 vaccination before infection (OR: 0.6 (0.4-0.7)) were associated with reduced occurrence of cognitive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, cognitive symptoms among COVID-19-positive participants were associated with female gender, age, autoimmune disorders, lung disease and depression. Vaccination and black race were associated with lower occurrence of cognitive symptoms. A constellation of neuropsychiatric and psychological symptoms occurred with cognitive symptoms. Our findings suggest COVID-19's full health and economic burden may be underestimated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04368065.

Evaluating real-world COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness using a test-negative case-control design.

Aim: It is important to assess if clinical trial efficacy translates into real-world effectiveness for COVID-19 vaccines. Materials & methods: We conducted a modified test-negative design (TND) to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of three COVID-19 vaccines. We defined cases in two ways: self-reported COVID-19-positive tests, and self-reported positive tests with ≥1 moderate/severe COVID-19 symptom. Results: Any vaccination was associated with a 95% reduction in subsequently reporting a positive COVID-19 test, and a 71% reduction in reporting a positive test and ≥1 moderate/severe symptom. Conclusion: We observed high effectiveness across all three marketed vaccines, both for self-reported positive COVID-19 tests and moderate/severe COVID-19 symptoms. This innovative TND approach can be implemented in future COVID-19 vaccine and treatment real-world effectiveness studies. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04368065.

COVID-19 Vaccination Breakthrough Infections in a Real-World Setting: Using Community Reporters to Evaluate Vaccine Effectiveness.

Purpose: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has highlighted the need for new methods of pharmacovigilance. Here, we use adult community volunteers to obtain systematic information on vaccine effectiveness and the nature and severity of breakthrough infections. Methods: Between December 15, 2020 and September 16, 2021, 11,826 unpaid community-based volunteers reported the following information to an on-line registry: COVID-19 test results, vaccination (Pfizer, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson) and COVID-19 symptoms. COVID-19 infections were described based on vaccination status at the time of infection: 1) fully vaccinated, 2) partially vaccinated (received first of two-dose vaccines or were <14 days post-final dose), or 3) unvaccinated. Results: Among 8554 participants who received any COVID-19 vaccine, COVID-19 infections were reported by 74 (1.0%) of those who were fully vaccinated and 198 (2.3%) of those who were partially vaccinated at the time of infection. Among the 74 participants who reported a breakthrough infection after full vaccination, the median time from vaccination to reported positive test result was 104.5 days (interquartile range: 77-135 days), with no difference among vaccine manufacturers. One quarter (25.7%) of breakthrough infections in the fully vaccinated cases were asymptomatic and most (>97%) fully vaccinated participants reported no symptoms or only mild symptoms compared to 89.3% of the unvaccinated cases. Only 1.4% of fully vaccinated participants reported experiencing at least 3 moderate-to-severe symptoms compared to 7.8% in the unvaccinated. Conclusion: Person-generated health data, also referred to as patient-reported outcomes, is a useful approach for quantifying breakthrough infections and their severity and for comparing vaccines. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04368065, EU PAS Register EUPAS36240.

COVID-19 Vaccinations in Pregnancy: Comparative Evaluation of Acute Side Effects and Self-Reported Impact on Quality of Life between Pregnant and Nonpregnant Women in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the acute side effects experienced by pregnant women who received a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine in the United States and to compare their experience to nonpregnant women of similar age. STUDY DESIGN: Adults who received a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States were invited via social media to enroll in an online, longitudinal, community-based registry ( www.helpstopCOVID19.com ). Participants self-reported pregnancy status, vaccination dates, manufacturer, acute side effects, impact on work and self-care, medical consultation, and hospitalization. This analysis was restricted to women aged 20 to 39 at the time of vaccination. Side effects reported by pregnant women were compared to those reported by nonpregnant women. RESULTS: This analysis included 946 pregnant women, with 572 (60%) receiving at least one dose of Pfizer, 321 (34%) Moderna, and 53 (6%) J&J, and 1,178 nonpregnant women. Demographic and medical history were similar across manufacturers for both cohorts.Overall, pregnant women reported similar side effects as nonpregnant women, with the most common being injection site reactions (83 vs. 87%), fatigue (72 vs.78%), and headache (45 vs. 59%). Pregnant women reported fewer side effects (median: 3 vs. 4, respectively). In both cohorts, very few reported seeking medical care (<5%) or being hospitalized (<0.3%) after vaccination. Fewer pregnant women reported working less after vaccination than nonpregnant women (32 vs. 40%) or trouble with self-care (32 vs. 46%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Pregnant women reported similar COVID-19 vaccine side effects as nonpregnant women, although fewer total side effects; pregnant women judged these side effects to have less impact on work and self-care. While these results do not address pregnancy outcomes or long-term effects, findings about acute side effects and impact offer reassurance for all three vaccines in terms of tolerability. KEY POINTS: · COVID vaccines were well tolerated by pregnant women.. · Pregnant women reported fewer total side effects.. · Pregnant women reported less impact on work and self-care..

How frequent are acute reactions to COVID-19 vaccination and who is at risk?

INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to describe and compare self-reported side effects ofCOVID-19 vaccinesin theUSA. METHODS: Aweb-basedregistry enrolled volunteers who received a COVID-19 vaccine between March 19-July 15, 2021. We collected self-reported short-term side effects, medical consultation, hospitalization, and quality of life impact following completed vaccination regimens (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J). RESULTS: We recruited 6,966 volunteers who completed their full course of vaccination (median age 48 years, IQR 35.0-62.0; 83.6% female): Pfizer 3,486; Moderna 2,857; J&J 623. Few (3.1%) sought medical care for post-vaccination side effects. Hospitalization (n = 17; 0.3%) and severe allergic reactions (n = 39; 0.6%) also were rare. Those with autoimmune disease or lung disease were approximately twice as likely to seek medical care (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.01, 95% CI:1.39; 2.92 and aOR 1.70, 95% CI: 1.12; .58 respectively). 92.4% of participantsreported ≥ 1side effect (median 3), with injection site reactions (78.9%), fatigue (70.3%), headache (49.0%) reported most frequently. More side effects were reported after the second dose of two-dose vaccines (medians: 1 vs. 2 for Pfizer and 1 vs. 3 for Moderna for first and second doses respectively) versus 3 for J&J's single-dose vaccine. For the employed, the median number of workdays missed was one. Diabetics and those vaccinated against influenza were substantially less likely to report 3 or more symptoms (aOR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56;0.82] and aOR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.73;0.93, respectively). DISCUSSION: The total side effect burden was, not unexpectedly, greater with two-dose regimens but all three vaccines appear relatively safe. Very few subjects reported side effects serious enough to warrant medical care or reported post-vaccination hospitalization. While these findings do not address possible long-term effects, they do inform on their short-term safety and tolerability and will hopefully provide some reassurance and positively inform the benefit-risk and pharmacoeconomic assessment for all three vaccines. See Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04368065.

Comparison of ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM Crosswalks Derived by Physician and Clinical Coder vs. Automated Methods.

Purpose: To evaluate whether automated methods are sufficient for deriving ICD-10-CM algorithms by comparing ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM crosswalks from general equivalence mappings (GEMs) with physician/clinical coder-derived crosswalks. Patients and methods: Forward mapping was used to derive ICD-10-CM crosswalks for 10 conditions. As a sensitivity analysis, forward-backward mapping (FBM) was also conducted for three clinical conditions. The physician/coder independently developed crosswalks for the same conditions. Differences between the crosswalks were summarized using the Jaccard similarity coefficient (JSC). Results: Physician/coder crosswalks were typically far more inclusive than GEMs crosswalks. Crosswalks for peripheral artery disease were most dissimilar (JSC: 0.06), while crosswalks for mild cognitive impairment (JSC: 1) and congestive heart failure (0.85) were most similar. FBM added ICD-10-CM codes for all three conditions but did not consistently increase similarity between crosswalks. Conclusion: The GEMs and physician/coder algorithms rarely aligned fully; human review is still required for ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM crosswalk development.

Linking electronic health data in pharmacoepidemiology: Appropriateness and feasibility.

PURPOSE: To provide guidance on data linkage appropriateness and feasibility to plan purposeful and sustainable new linkages that advance pharmacoepidemiology and healthcare research. Planning a new data linkage requires careful evaluation to weigh the resources required with the potential overall benefits. METHODS: In response to an International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) call for manuscripts, a working group comprised of members from academic, industry, and government determined priority content areas; appropriateness and feasibility of data linkage was selected. Within this topic, scientific and operational considerations were determined, reviewed, and formulated into key areas, and translated into 12 consensus recommendations. RESULTS: Guidance for feasibility assessment was categorized into five key areas: (1) research objectives and justification; (2) data quality and completeness; (3) the linkage process; (4) data ownership and governance; and (5) overall value added by linkage. Within these key areas, recommendations to consider prior to initiation were developed to evaluate suitability of the linkage to meet research objectives, assess source data completeness and population coverage, and ensure well-defined data governance standards and protections. When creating novel linked datasets, researchers must assess the feasibility of both scientific (data quality and linkage methods) and operational (access, data use and transfer, governance, and cost) aspects. CONCLUSIONS: The data linkage feasibility assessment considerations outlined can be used as a guide when designing sustainable linked data resources to generate actionable evidence in healthcare research. These recommendations were constructed for wide applicability and can be adapted depending on the geographic, structural, and data components of the linkage.

A comparison of the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in a large healthcare system.

Dabigatran is approved for stroke risk reduction in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Data from diverse clinical practice settings will help establish whether the risk:benefit ratio seen in clinical trials is comparable with routine clinical care. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in clinical practice. We undertook a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort study (N=12,793 per group; mean age 74) comparing treatment with dabigatran or warfarin in the US Department of Defense claims database, October 2009 to July 2013. Treatment-naïve patients with first prescription claim for dabigatran (either FDA-approved dose) or warfarin between October 2010 and July 2012 (index) and a diagnosis of NVAF during the 12 months before index date were included. Primary outcomes were stroke and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, major gastrointestinal (GI), urogenital or other bleeding, myocardial infarction (MI) and death. Time-to-event was investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Outcomes comparisons were made utilising Cox-proportional hazards models of PSM groups. Dabigatran users experienced fewer strokes (adjusted hazard ratio [95 % confidence intervals] 0.73 [0.55-0.97]), major intracranial (0.49 [0.30-0.79]), urogenital (0.36 [0.18-0.74]) and other (0.38 [0.22-0.66]) bleeding, MI (0.65 [0.45-0.95]) and deaths (0.64 [0.55-0.74]) than the warfarin group. Major bleeding (0.87 [0.74-1.03]) and major GI bleeding (1.13 [0.94-1.37]) was similar between groups and major lower GI bleeding events were more frequent (1.30 [1.04-1.62]) with dabigatran. In conclusion, compared with warfarin, dabigatran treatment was associated with a lower risk of stroke and most outcomes measured, but increased incidence of major lower GI bleeding.

A common data model to assess cardiovascular hospitalization and mortality in atrial fibrillation patients using administrative claims and medical records.

PURPOSE: Atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF) is frequently associated with cardiovascular comorbidities. Observational health care databases are commonly used for research purposes in studies of quality of care, health economics, outcomes research, drug safety, and epidemiology. This retrospective cohort study applied a common data model to administrative claims data (Truven Health Analytics MarketScan(®) claims databases [MS-Claims]) and electronic medical records data (Geisinger Health System's MedMining electronic medical record database [MG-EMR]) to examine the risk of cardiovascular hospitalization and all-cause mortality in relation to clinical risk factors in recent-onset AF and to assess the consistency of analyses for each data source. METHODS: Cohorts of patients with newly diagnosed AF (n=105,262 [MS-Claims] and n=3,919 [MG-EMR]) and demographically similar patients without AF (n=105,262 [MS-Claims] and n=3,872 [MG-EMR]) were followed from the qualifying AF diagnosis until cardiovascular hospitalization, death, database disenrollment, or study completion. A common data model standardized the data in structure, format, content, and nomenclature to allow for systematic assessment and comparison of outcomes from two disparate data sets. RESULTS: In both databases, AF patients had greater overall baseline comorbidity and higher incidence rates of cardiovascular hospitalization (threefold higher) and all-cause mortality (46% higher) than non-AF patients. For AF patients, incidence rates of cardiovascular hospitalization and all-cause mortality were increased by the concomitant presence of coronary disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke at baseline. Overall, the pattern of cardiovascular hospitalization in the MS-Claims database was similar to that in the MG-EMR database. Compared with the MS-Claims database, the use of cardiovascular medications and the capture of certain comorbidities among AF patients appeared to be higher in the MG-EMR data set. CONCLUSION: Similar standardized analyses across EMR and Claims databases were consistent in the association of AF with acute morbidity and an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Areas of inconsistency were due to differences in underlying population demographics and cardiovascular risks and completeness of certain data fields.

Clinical characteristics and healthcare utilization of patients with multicentric Castleman disease.

Multicentric Castleman disease (MCD) is a rare lymphoproliferative disease. Little is known about how patient clinical features and healthcare utilization varies by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status and disease subtype. Data of MCD patients identified between 2000 and 2009 were collected from medical records at two United States treatment centres. Clinical, demographic, and biochemical characteristics, drug therapies and medical utilization were descriptively reported by HIV status and cell histology, and statistically compared with the Fisher's Exact and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Patients (n = 59) had a pathologically and clinically confirmed MCD diagnosis: plasmacytic (42%), hyaline vascular (29%) and mixed (15%); 10% had HIV infection. In the first year after diagnosis, MCD patients on average saw a healthcare provider more than six times, were hospitalized at least once and underwent frequent radiological and laboratory testing. Rituximab was the most commonly used drug therapy, followed by corticosteroids and conventional chemotherapy. One- and 2-year survival was excellent in HIV-negative patients (100% and 97%, respectively) but inferior for HIV-positive cases (67% and 67%, respectively). Heterogeneous treatment decisions were observed in this MCD study; HIV status was the only distinguishing clinical criteria associated with pharmacotherapies. Additional research is necessary to guide treatment of this rare lymphoproliferative disorder.

Identification of pseudobulbar affect symptoms in Veterans with possible traumatic brain injury.

Pseudobulbar affect (PBA), a neurological syndrome characterized primarily by involuntary episodes of laughing and crying, can develop secondary to neurological conditions including traumatic brain injury (TBI). Veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have an unprecedented risk for TBI, primarily from blast-related munitions. In this cross-sectional study with linkage to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) clinical data, Veterans screening positive for TBI on the VA TBI screen (N = 4,282) were mailed packets containing two PBA symptom assessments: a single PBA symptom screen question and the Center for Neurologic Study-Lability Scale (CNS-LS) questionnaire. Seventy percent (n = 513) of the 728 Veteran respondents screened positive for PBA symptoms with a CNS-LS score of 13 or greater. There was strong concordance between PBA symptom prevalence measured with the single screening question and CNS-LS, with high sensitivity (0.87) and positive predictive value (0.93), and moderate specificity (0.79). Posttraumatic stress disorder (54% vs 32%), major depression (35% vs 22%), and anxiety disorder (20% vs 13%) were more common for Veterans with PBA symptoms than for those without. PBA symptoms were common in this Veteran cohort, were detected using simple screening tools, and often co-occurred with other psychiatric disorders common in Veterans.

Clinical outcomes of concomitant therapy of exenatide twice daily and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a retrospective database analysis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the clinical effectiveness of concomitant therapy of exenatide twice daily and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States. METHODS: Data from adults with type 2 diabetes were selected from an electronic medical record database. Concomitant therapy was defined as a basal insulin prescription within 6 months before or after an exenatide prescription between May 2005 and April 2009. Upon initiation, patients were treated with both medications. Clinical effectiveness was measured as mean changes in hemoglobin A1c (primary outcome), body weight, body mass index, blood pressure, and lipid values from a 6-month baseline to mean-adjusted values in a 12-month follow-up period. These changes were assessed by a bootstrapping test. RESULTS: There were 1752 patients (mean age, 57 years) who initiated concomitant therapy (75% added exenatide to basal insulin, 25% added basal insulin to exenatide). Patients achieved significant mean reductions in hemoglobin A1c (0.5%), body weight (1.8 kg), body mass index (0.6 kg/m2), diastolic blood pressure (0.5 mm Hg), and various lipid measures (all P<.05). Hemoglobin A1c reduction was consistent irrespective of the treatment order. However, body weight, body mass index, and blood pressure reductions were observed in only patients who added exenatide to basal insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, exenatide and basal insulin concomitant therapy was associated with significant reductions in hemoglobin A1c, body weight, body mass index, diastolic blood pressure, and lipids in a large, diverse patient population treated in ambulatory care settings in the United States. In the subgroup analysis, body weight, body mass index, and diastolic blood pressure reductions were observed in only patients who added exenatide to basal insulin.

Costs associated with febrile neutropenia in the US.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially life-threatening condition that may develop in cancer patients treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy and result in considerable costs. This study was designed to estimate US healthcare utilization and costs in those experiencing FN by location of care, tumour type and mortality. METHODS: Cancer patients who received chemotherapy between 2001 and 2006 were identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database®, a longitudinal claims database with enrolment, medical, prescription and mortality information covering 12 health plans and more than 20 million US patients. Patients who experienced FN were prospectively matched using propensity score methods within each tumour type of interest (non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, breast, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer) to those not experiencing FN. Health resource utilization was compared per patient per month for unique prescriptions and visits (inpatient and outpatient) over the length of follow-up. Healthcare total paid costs adjusted to 2009 US dollars per patient per month were examined by FN group (FN vs non-FN, FN died vs FN survived), by source of care (physician office visit, outpatient services, hospitalization and prescriptions) and by tumour type. The number of unique FN-related encounters (inpatient and outpatient) and the number of patients experiencing at least one FN-related encounter were examined. The costs per encounter were tabulated. FN encounters differ from FN episodes in that a single FN episode may include multiple FN encounters (i.e. a patient is seen multiple times [encounters] for treatment of a single FN event [episode]). RESULTS: A total of 5990 patients each were successfully matched between the FN and non-FN (control) groups. Health resource utilization was generally higher in those with FN than in controls. FN patients incurred greater costs (mean ± SD: $US9628 ± 12 517 per patient-month) than non-FN patients ($US8478 ± 12 978). Chemotherapy comprised the majority of costs for both FN (33.5%) and non-FN (40.6%) patients. The largest cost difference by categorical source of care was for hospitalization (p < 0.001). FN patients who died had the highest mean total costs compared with FN surviving patients ($US21 214 ± 25 596 per patient-month vs $US8227 ± 8850, respectively). Follow-up time for those surviving was, on average, 6.6 months longer. Hospitalization accounted for 53.1% of costs in those experiencing mortality with FN, while chemotherapy accounted for the majority of costs (37.1%) in surviving FN patients. A total of 6574 patients with at least one FN encounter experienced a total of 55 726 unique FN-related encounters, 90% of which were outpatient in nature. The majority of FN-related encounters (79%) occurred during the first chemotherapy course. The average costs for FN encounters were highest for inpatient encounters, $US22 086 ± 43 407, compared with $US985 ± 1677 for outpatient encounters. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of FN in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy results in greater healthcare resource utilization and costs, with FN patients who die accounting for the greatest healthcare costs. Most FN patients experience at least one outpatient FN encounter, and the total cost of treatment for FN continues to be high.

Metabolic outcomes of elderly patient populations initiating exenatide BID versus insulin glargine in an ambulatory care setting.

AIMS: The safety and efficacy of exenatide BID (exenatide) and insulin glargine (glargine) have been studied in clinical trials with few elderly patients. This study examined the clinical effectiveness of exenatide compared to glargine in patients 65 years and older with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the General Electric electronic medical record database. Patients aged 65 years and older with T2DM who initiated exenatide or glargine were identified between November 1, 2006 and April 30, 2009 with 12 months of pre- and post-index continuous eligibility. Propensity-score matching (1:1) was used to balance baseline differences between the cohorts. The effectiveness endpoints were changes in A1C (primary endpoint), weight, body mass index (BMI), and blood pressure (BP). Matched cohorts were compared using paired t tests and nonparametric tests as appropriate. RESULTS: The matched exenatide and glargine patients (n = 804 each) were comparable in their baseline characteristics, including age (70 vs. 71 years), and male sex (44.9% vs. 45.2%). In the 12-month follow-up, exenatide patients experienced significantly greater mean reductions in A1C (-0.5 vs. -0.2%), weight (-2.8 vs. -0.2 kg), BMI (-1.0 vs. -0.1 kg/m(2)), and systolic BP (-2.2 vs. 1.0 mmHg) (all: P < 0.05). More exenatide-treated patients reached the A1C goal of <7% (53.9% vs. 43.0%, P < 0.01). Diastolic BP was similar between the cohorts. LIMITATIONS: Unmeasured confounding bias may still exist and thus findings should be interpreted as associations instead of causations. Due to incomplete data, adverse events and medication use were not examined. CONCLUSION: Exenatide was associated with significant improvement in A1C, weight, BMI and BP compared to glargine for management of T2DM in an elderly patient population treated in ambulatory care settings.