No abstract

Background Limited real‐world data exist on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs of patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and preserved EF (HFpEF), including urgent HF visits, which are assumed to be less burdensome than HF hospitalizations (hHFs) Hypothesis This study aimed to quantify the economic burden of HFrEF and HFpEF, via a retrospective, longitudinal cohort study, using IBM® linked claims/electronic health records (Commercial and Medicare Supplemental data only). Methods Adult patients, indexed on HF diagnosis (ICD‐10‐CM: I50.x) from July 2012 through June 2018, with 6‐month minimum baseline period and varying follow‐up, were classified as HFrEF (I50.2x) or HFpEF (I50.3x) according to last‐observed EF‐specific diagnosis. HCRU/costs were assessed during follow‐up. Results About 109 721 HF patients (22% HFrEF, 31% HFpEF, 47% unclassified EF; median 18 months' follow‐up) were identified. There were 3.2 all‐cause outpatient visits per patient‐month (HFrEF, 3.3; HFpEF, 3.6); 69% of patients required inpatient stays (HFrEF, 80%; HFpEF, 78%). Overall, 11% of patients experienced hHFs (HFrEF, 23%; HFpEF, 16%), 9% experienced urgent HF visits (HFrEF, 15%; HFpEF, 12%); 26% were hospitalized less than 30 days after first urgent HF visit versus 11% after first hHF. Mean monthly total direct healthcare cost per patient was $9290 (HFrEF, $11 053; HFpEF, $7482). Conclusions HF‐related HCRU is substantial among contemporary real‐world HF patients in US Commercial or Medicare supplemental health plans. Patients managed in urgent HF settings were over twice as likely to be hospitalized within 30 days versus those initially hospitalized, suggesting urgent HF visits are important clinical events and quality improvement targets.

IntroductionProphylactic treatment of severe hemophilia A is burdensome, requiring frequent intravenous injections. Extended half-life (EHL) factor VIII replacement therapies offer longer intervals between infusions while still meeting efficacy and safety outcomes; however, patient perspectives following long-term use of such products in the real-world remain unknown.ObjectiveWe aimed to explore the importance of infusion frequency and the potential benefits of reduced infusion frequency among patients receiving prophylactic treatment with an EHL product (BAY 94-9027).MethodsPatients with severe hemophilia A participating in the PROTECT VIII extension study were invited to participate in a semi-structured, concept elicitation ‘exit’ interview to discuss their experiences. Participants were recruited from Israel, The Netherlands, and the US. Interview transcripts were translated into English and analyzed using thematic analysis methods.ResultsSixteen participants (29–68 years of age) infusing with BAY 94-9027 once every 7 days, once every 5 days, or twice weekly were interviewed. Participants reported infusion frequency (alongside efficacy) as the most important treatment attribute influencing their satisfaction with therapy. Patient-reported benefits of reduced infusion frequency and longer duration of factor coverage included greater ability to participate in physical activities; better vein health; less time to schedule and administer factor VIII; reduced impact on work; and improved emotional well-being.ConclusionsThis study provides rich insights into the experiences of patients with EHL products and the value of reduced infusion frequency. Such data could be of value to a range of stakeholders (e.g. regulators, payers) and facilitate patient–clinician discussions to promote tailored treatment decisions.

No abstract

Purpose Triple therapy comprising a long-acting muscarinic antagonist, long-acting β 2 -agonist and inhaled corticosteroid is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who continue to experience frequent exacerbations or symptoms whilst receiving dual therapy. Adherence and persistence to multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) is known to be poor. This study assessed comparative adherence to single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) versus MITT in a real-world setting in England. Patients and Methods This was a retrospective cohort study using linked primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum) and secondary care (Hospital Episode Statistics [HES] Admitted Patient Care) data to identify patients with COPD who were newly initiated on SITT or MITT between November 2017 and June 2019. Eligible patients were aged ≥35 years and had a forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity <0.7, linkage to HES and continuous registration with a general practitioner for 12 months pre- and 6 months post-initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between cohorts. Adherence was measured using the proportion of days covered by days’ supply of SITT or MITT prescriptions. Persistence was measured with a gap of >30 days between the end of a prescription and the following refill used to determine non-persistence. Results Overall, 4080 SITT and 6579 MITT users comprised the study cohort. After weighting, the baseline characteristics between the cohorts were comparable (absolute standardized mean difference <10%). SITT users had significantly higher adherence than MITT users at 6, 12, and 18 months post-initiation (p<0.001 for all comparisons). Median persistence was higher among SITT users than MITT users (5.09 months vs 0.99 months). Conclusion Patients with COPD in England initiating SITT had significantly better adherence and persistence compared with MITT initiators. These improvements continued at least 18 months following treatment initiation.

No abstract

Objective: To create case definitions for confirmed COVID diagnoses, COVID vaccination status, and three separate definitions of high risk of severe COVID, as well as to assess whether the implementation of these definitions in a cohort reflected the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of COVID epidemiology in England. Design: Retrospective cohort study Setting: Electronic healthcare records from primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, or CPRD) linked to secondary care data (Hospital Episode Statistics, or HES) data covering 24% of the population in England Participants: 2,271,072 persons aged 1 year and older diagnosed with COVID in CPRD Aurum between August 1, 2020 through January 31, 2022. Main Outcome Measures: Age, sex, and regional distribution of COVID cases and COVID vaccine doses received prior to diagnosis were assessed separately for the cohorts of cases identified in primary care and those hospitalized for COVID (primary diagnosis code of ICD-10 U07.1 COVID-19). Smoking status, body mass index and Charlson Comorbidity Index were compared for the two cohorts, as well as for three separate definitions of high risk of severe disease used in the United Kingdom (NHS Highest Risk, PANORAMIC trial eligibility, UK Health Security Agency Clinical Risk prioritization for vaccination). Results: Compared to national estimates, CPRD case estimates underrepresented older adults in both the primary care (age 65-84: 6% in CPRD vs 9% nationally) and hospitalized (31% vs 40%) cohorts, and overrepresented people living in regions with the highest median wealth areas of England (20% primary care and 20% hospital admitted cases in South East, vs 15% nationally). The majority of non-hospitalized cases and all hospitalized cases had not completed primary series vaccination. In primary care, persons meeting high risk definitions were older, more often smokers, overweight or obese, and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score. Conclusions: CPRD primary care data is a robust real-world data source and can be used for some COVID research questions, however limitations of the data availability should be carefully considered. Included in this publication are supplemental files for a total of over 28,000 codes to define each of three definitions of high risk of severe disease.

Aims: To determine the proportion of UK patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who meet the cardiovascular (CV) or combined CV/core eligibility criteria used for the CV outcome trials (CVOTs) of UK-marketed glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists showing CV benefit (dulaglutide in REWIND, liraglutide in LEADER and injectable semaglutide in SUSTAIN-6).Materials and Methods: Adults with T2D on/before June 2018 were identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD primary care database and linked to Hospital Episode Statistics data (Protocol 19_262). Patient CV and clinical data were evaluated against the CVOT eligibility criteria. Data were analysed descriptively. Results:The study cohort (N = 33 118 patients with T2D) had a mean (standard deviation) age of 66.0 (13.3) years and 56.6% were male. Almost two-thirds (64.5%) of the study cohort met the CV criteria for REWIND, versus 43.0% for both LEADER and SUSTAIN-6. The proportions of the study cohort who met the CVOT criteria of "established CV disease" and "CV risk factors only" for REWIND were 22.4% and 42.1%, respectively, versus 38.7% and 4.3%, respectively, for both LEADER and SUSTAIN-6. The proportions of patients satisfying both CV and core criteria were 44.4% for REWIND, 13.3% for LEADER and 13.5% for SUSTAIN-6. Study findings remained consistent when restricted to GLP-1RA users.Conclusions: REWIND captured a trial population more representative of the realworld T2D population in the United Kingdom than LEADER or SUSTAIN-6 with regard to both CV and combined CV/core eligibility criteria.