Search

Lay abstract This study describes treatment patterns and outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients in Spain who were not candidates for transplant. The study looked at two patient groups: patients diagnosed between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013 and those diagnosed between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017. Among the 113 patients considered, the most common first-line therapies were proteasome inhibitor (PI) + alkylator combinations (49%) and PI-based regimens without an alkylator (30%). We saw increased use of PI with immunomodulators (which arm the immune system to battle disease) and decreased use of PI-based regimens without an alkylator or immunomodulator. First-line use of oral regimens was low but increased over time. The median length of first-line treatment for both groups combined was 6.9 months. Finding low use of first-line oral regimens and maintenance therapy and a short duration of first-line treatment, our study highlights the unmet needs that exist in NDMM patients who are not transplant candidates in Spain. Aim: To describe treatment patterns and outcomes in nontransplant newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients in Spain. Methods: This retrospective study included two cohorts of NDMM patients diagnosed between 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2013 and 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017. Results: Among 113 patients, proteasome inhibitor (PI) + alkylator combinations (49%) and PI-based regimens without an alkylator (30%) were the most common first-line (1L) therapies. Use of PI + immunomodulatory drug-based regimens increased between the cohorts; PI-based regimens without an alkylator/immunomodulatory drug decreased. Use of 1L oral regimens was low but increased over time; use of maintenance therapy was low across both periods. Median 1L duration of treatment was 6.9 months. Conclusion: Short 1L duration of treatment and low use of 1L oral regimens and maintenance therapy highlight unmet needs in NDMM.

Aim: To understand physician visit patterns among patients with stage IV (including nonmetastatic [M0] and metastatic [M1] disease) urothelial carcinoma (UC) and understand factors associated with a timely referral to a medical oncologist and systemic treatment. Patients & methods: Retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data. Results: First physician encounter was with a urologist (M0: 69%; M1: 53%) or primary care physician ([PCP]; M0: 19%, M1: 25%) for the majority of patients around UC diagnosis. After the index urologist encounter, most patients had a subsequent medical oncologist visit at a median of 52 days (M0: 69.5 days, M1: 33 days). In an adjusted model, older age, index PCP visit, higher comorbidities and M0 disease were negatively associated with a medical oncologist referral. Among those referred to a medical oncologist, older age, Hispanic or non-Hispanic Black race and not being married were negatively associated with subsequent chemotherapy receipt (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Many patients with advanced UC encounter multiple specialists during their disease course. Older patients or those with a first UC-related encounter with a PCP are less likely to be referred to medical oncology. Once referred to medical oncology, social determinants, including race and marital status, are relevant predictors of receiving chemotherapy.

Background In a randomized study, glasdegib (a hedgehog inhibitor) plus low‐dose cytarabine (LDAC) significantly prolonged survival in comparison with LDAC in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). A quality‐adjusted time without symptoms of disease progression or toxicity (Q‐TWiST) approach was used to evaluate comparative quality‐adjusted survival. Methods Overall survival was partitioned into the following: time with any treatment‐emergent grade 3 or higher adverse events (TOX); time without symptoms of disease progression or toxicity (TWiST); and time after treatment discontinuation due to insufficient clinical response, relapse, or death time after progression (REL). Q‐TWiST was calculated by multiplying the restricted mean time in each state by respective utilities and then summing up the utility‐adjusted time. Results At 20 months of follow‐up, the survival probabilities for the glasdegib‐LDAC arm and the LDAC arm were 28.2% and 7.9%, respectively. Glasdegib‐LDAC patients (n = 78), in comparison with LDAC patients (n = 38), had significantly longer mean TWiST (+3.4 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8‐5.2 months) and TOX (+0.8 months; 95% CI, 0.1‐1.6 months) and longer but nonsignificant REL (+0.3 months; 95% CI, −1.9 to 2.3 months). Q‐TWiST was 4.0 months (95% CI, 2.1‐5.8 months) longer with glasdegib plus LDAC, and this translated into a 75% relative improvement in quality‐adjusted survival with respect to LDAC. Results were robust to the length of follow‐up (6‐24 months) and remained significant when all adverse events, regardless of grade, were included. Conclusions These results suggest that most of the survival benefit from glasdegib plus LDAC versus LDAC alone is TWiST, and this represents added time in relatively “good” health. These results support the clinical value of glasdegib plus LDAC as initial therapy for AML in patients for whom intensive chemotherapy is not an option., This analysis suggests that most of the survival benefit from glasdegib plus low‐dose cytarabine (LDAC) in comparison with LDAC alone is time without symptoms of disease progression or toxicity, which represents added time in relatively “good” health. These results support the clinical value of glasdegib plus LDAC as an initial therapy for acute myeloid leukemia in patients for whom intensive chemotherapy is not an option.

Courtney Johnson,1 Jennifer Stephens,1 Christopher Walker,2 Joseph C Cappelleri,3 Ahmed Shelbaya4 1Pharmerit International, Real World Evidence and Data Analytics, Bethesda, MD, USA; 2Pfizer Ltd., Global Medical Affairs, Tadworth, Surrey, England; 3Pfizer Inc., Statistics, Groton, CT, USA; 4Pfizer Inc., Health Economics and Outcomes Research, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Jennifer StephensPharmerit International, 4350 East West Highway, Suite 1100, Bethesda, MD, USATel +1 240-821-1290Email jstephens@pharmerit.comObjective: This study describes treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with persistence, switching, and dosing of branded celecoxib in osteoarthritis (OA) patients.Methods: This retrospective claims database analysis used MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (MarketScan) data from 2009 to 2013. Included patients were adult (≥ 18 years), incident celecoxib users with ≥ 1 OA claim. The treatment switch analysis analyzed outcomes in patients persistent on celecoxib versus switched to a generic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). The dosing analysis stratified patients as under-dose (< 200 mg per day) and standard dose (≥ 200 mg per day). HCRU, costs, and treatment duration were compared in persistent versus switched and standard dose versus under-dose patients using descriptive, multivariate logistic regression, and Kaplan–Meier analysis.Results: A total of 65,530 patients met the inclusion criteria. During follow-up, 83% discontinued celecoxib without switching, 10% were persistent, and 5% switched to a generic NSAID. Ninety percent received a standard dose of celecoxib. Switched (versus persistent) patients had significantly higher all-cause hospital admissions, length of stay, emergency room (ER) visits, and office visits per person year (PPY), all P < 0.001; and under-dosed (versus standard dose) patients had significantly higher hospital admissions (P< 0.001), length of stay (P< 0.001), and ER visits (P= 0.021) PPY. Persistent versus switched patients had lower mean total all-cause costs PPY ($20,378 vs $23,949, P< 0.001). Standard dose versus under-dose patients had lower mean total all-cause costs ($23,680 vs $26,955 PPY, P< 0.001), and not statistically significant higher mean total OA-related costs ($5698 vs $5524 PPY, P=0.441).Conclusion: Patients that switched from branded celecoxib to a generic NSAID or received an under-dose of branded celecoxib had higher average overall HCRU and costs. OA-related inpatient and outpatient cost savings may offset the higher drug cost of celecoxib for persistent patients.Keywords: generic, healthcare resource use, Celebrex, NSAIDS, switching, discontinuation

Aim: To describe treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with unresectable stage III and metastatic/stage IV melanoma. Materials & methods: An observational retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with advanced melanoma before 1 November 2015 who initiated a new line of therapy (LOT) from 1 January 2015 to 31 May 2016. Results: Among 487 patients, ipilimumab monotherapy (27.5%) was the most common first line of therapy (1LOT) in 2015, surpassed by nivolumab monotherapy (21.5%) in 2016. 12-month survival was ≥80.1%; proportions were highest forpatients treated with nivolumab + ipilimumab (86.6%). All treatments relatively well tolerated in real-world setting and adverse events were consistent with the previously reported safety profiles. Conclusion: This study provides important insights into real-world advanced melanoma treatment patterns and demonstrates encouraging treatment safety and patient survival data.

Background: Early antibiotic switch and early discharge protocols have not been widely studied in Latin America. Our objective was to describe real-world treatment patterns, resource use, and estimate opportunities for early switch from intravenous to oral antibiotics and early discharge for patients hospitalized with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections. Materials/methods: This retrospective medical chart review recruited 72 physicians from Brazil to collect data from patients hospitalized with documented methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft tissue infections between May 2013 and May 2015, and discharged alive by June 2015. Data collected included clinical characteristics and outcomes, hospital length of stay, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-targeted intravenous and oral antibiotic use, and early switch and early discharge eligibility using literature-based and expert-validated criteria. Results: A total of 199 patient charts were reviewed, of which 196 (98.5%) were prescribed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus -active therapy. Only four patients were switched from intravenous to oral antibiotics while hospitalized. The mean length of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-active treatment was 14.7 (standard deviation, 10.1) days, with 14.6 (standard deviation, 10.1) total days of intravenous therapy. The mean length of hospital stay was 22.2 (standard deviation, 23.0) days. The most frequent initial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-active therapies were intravenous vancomycin (58.2%), intravenous clindamycin (19.9%), and intravenous daptomycin (6.6%). Thirty-one patients (15.6%) were discharged with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus -active antibiotics of which 80.6% received oral antibiotics. Sixty-two patients (31.2%) met early switch criteria and potentially could have discontinued intravenous therapy 6.8 (standard deviation, 7.8) days sooner, and 65 patients (32.7%) met early discharge criteria and potentially could have been discharged 5.3 (standard deviation, 7.0) days sooner. Conclusions: Only 2% of patients were switched from intravenous to oral antibiotics in our study while almost one-third were early switch eligible. Additionally, one-third of hospitalized patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft tissue infections were early discharge eligible indicating opportunity for reducing intravenous therapy and days of hospital stay. These results provide insight into possible benefits of implementation of early switch/early discharge protocols in Brazil. Keywords: IV-to-PO switch, Length of stay, Clinical criteria, Antibiotic therapy, Economics

Background: Black patients can face a higher incidence and poorer prognosis from cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) compared to their white counterparts yet race is not a known factor in the treatment of CTCL. The significance of race, particularly in the treatment of early-stage CTCL using extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP), is not well understood. Objective: To characterize race-based and stage- based differences in ECP utilization and response among adults with mycosis fungoides and Sezary syndrome. Methods: A 10-year retrospective chart review was performed at a single tertiary referral center institution. Results: Among total 42 qualifying CTCL patients that received, 57.1% were female, 47.6% identified as black, and 54.7% presented with early-stage CTCL (Stage IA–IIA). There were no race-based differences in the number of systemic therapies trialed before ECP (p=0.8), use of ECP as 1st-line treatment (p=0.5), number of ECP treatments (p=0.4965), or use of concomitant medications (e.g. interferon, oral retinoids). White patients began ECP sooner than black patients following CTCL diagnosis (median 16 vs 4 months; p=0.08). Black patients were significantly more likely to face progressive disease following ECP (p=0.04) and had a shorter duration of response (16.1 vs 36.5 months; p=0.0455). Limitations: This was a retrospective study. Conclusion: There are race-based differences in ECP use and disease progression among adults with CTCL. Future research may investigate the source of these disparities, be they attributable to biologic differences in disease or differential treatment prescription.

AIMS: Medicare patients with metastatic or surgically unresectable urothelial carcinoma (mUC) often receive platinum-based chemotherapy as first line of therapy (LOT) but invariably progress, requiring additional LOTs and healthcare resource use (HCRU). To better understand the evolving mUC treatment landscape, we estimated the economic burden of chemotherapy-based mUC treatments among US Medicare patients. METHODS: Newly diagnosed Medicare patients with mUC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Patients were followed from diagnosis to death, disenrollment, or end of study to characterize LOTs (first [LOT1], second [LOT2], and third+ [LOT3+]). Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS) by LOT. HCRU and mean costs were reported over the follow-up period, LOT duration, or maximum LOT received. RESULTS: Among 1,873 eligible patients with mUC (median age, 77 years; median follow-up, 7.5 months), 1,035 (55%) received no chemotherapy. Among chemotherapy-treated patients, 61% had LOT1 only, 25% had LOT1 and LOT2 only, and 14% had ≥3 LOTs. Median OS was 8.1 months, range 4.3 (untreated) to 29.8 (LOT3+) months. HCRU frequency increased with additional LOTs. Mean cumulative per-patient cost was $82,912 for all patients, increasing with additional LOTs (untreated, $57,207; LOT1, $99,213; LOT2, $125,190; LOT3+, $163,884). Mean per-patient per-month cost was $18,827 for all patients, decreasing with increasing number of LOTs received (untreated, $27,211; LOT1, $9,601; LOT2, $7,325; LOT3+, $6,017). LIMITATIONS: Potential for treatment misclassification when using the algorithm defining LOTs and non-generalizability of results to younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Over 50% of Medicare patients with mUC received no chemotherapy. Among chemotherapy-treated patients, most received only one LOT. Additional LOTs led to higher mean costs and HCRU, but as patients were followed longer, monthly costs decreased. As treatments evolve to include immuno-oncology agents, these findings provide a clinically relevant economic benchmark for mUC treatment across different traditional LOTs.

Objectives To describe opportunities for early switch (ES) from intravenous (IV) to oral (PO) antibiotics and early discharge (ED) of patients hospitalized in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs). Methods This retrospective medical chart review study enrolled physicians from 16 KSA and UAE sites to collect data for 107 MRSA cSSTI patients. Results Actual length of MRSA-active treatment was 13.3 ± 9.3 mean days in KSA and 11.2 ± 3.9 mean days in UAE, with a mean of 11.8 ± 9.3 days of MRSA-targeted IV therapy in KSA and 10.7 ± 4.3 days in UAE. 12.5% in KSA met ES criteria and potentially could have discontinued IV therapy 4.0 ± 2.9 days sooner; 44.0% in UAE could have discontinued 6.6 ± 3.6 days sooner. Patients were hospitalized for a mean 28.6 ± 45.0 days in KSA and 13.1 ± 5.9 days in UAE. 25.0% in KSA and 48.0% in UAE met ED criteria and potentially could have been discharged 6.1 ± 8.0 days earlier in KSA and 7.9 ± 5.0 days earlier in UAE. Conclusions A significant proportion of patients hospitalized for MRSA cSSTI could be eligible for ES or ED opportunities, resulting in potential for reductions in IV and bed days.

Ahmed Shelbaya,1,2 Caitlyn T Solem,3 Chris Walker,4 Yin Wan,3 Courtney Johnson,3 Joseph C Cappelleri1 1Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, 2Columbia School of Public Health, New York, NY, 3Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, USA; 4Pfizer Ltd., Tadworth, Surrey, UK Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics associated with early versus late initiation of celecoxib treatment after osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis and whether economic and safety outcomes differ between patients with early versus late initiation of celecoxib.Methods: Adults (≥18 years) with a confirmed OA diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modifications code: 715.XX), ≥12 months of continuous pre- and post-index enrollment, and ≥1 post-index claim for celecoxib were included from the MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounter Database (2009–2013). Index date was defined as initial OA diagnosis. Patients were categorized as initiating celecoxib early (within 6 months of index date) or late (≥6 months after index date). Logistic regressions were used to assess characteristics associated with early versus late celecoxib initiation. Key outcomes included health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs post-index, and adverse event incidence post-celecoxib initiation. Unadjusted and adjusted comparisons (using generalized linear models with a gamma distribution for costs and Poisson distribution for event and resource utilization) were made between early and late celecoxib initiators.Results: Of the 62,434 OA patients identified, 27,402 were early and 35,032 were late initiators. Post-index hospital admissions and length of stay did not differ statistically between early versus late initiators after controlling for pre-index event rates and covariates, but early patients had significantly fewer outpatient (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95, 0.97) and emergency room visits (IRR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.95). After adjustment for key covariates, early initiators (versus late initiators) had lower all-cause (US$12,909 versus US$13,781, P

This retrospective study compared effectiveness of (brentuximab vedotin) BV to other chemotherapies in patients with rrHL following an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Data originated from a medical chart review of patients treated in real-world clinical settings at 50 sites in the United Kingdom and Germany. Inverse probability of treatment weights based on propensity scores were used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups. Among 312 rrHL patients included, 196 received BV and 116 received physicians' choice chemotherapy. Median PFS was significantly longer (27.0 months vs. 13.4 months; p = .0144) and 12-month OS survival greater (78.1% vs. 65.9%; p = .0129) with BV compared to chemotherapy. Documented adverse events included leukopenia (12.8%) and peripheral neuropathy (8.7%) for BV and leukopenia (12.1%), anemia (5.2%) and diarrhea (5.2%) for chemotherapy. In this real-world study, rrHL patients treated for relapse after ASCT with BV had longer median PFS and 12-month OS than patients receiving chemotherapy.

Objective Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate licensed for the treatment of relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (rrHL) following autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or at least two prior therapies when ASCT or multi-agent chemotherapy is not an option. The objective of this study was to describe real-world outcomes with BV in rrHL patients considered ASCT-ineligible or who refuse ASCT. Methods This was a retrospective medical chart review study that enrolled patients ≥18 years old who were initially diagnosed with HL between 1 January 2008 and 30 June 2014, considered ASCT-ineligible, and treated in routine care with BV for progressive disease after multi-drug chemotherapy regimens. Clinical outcomes included best response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events. Results A total of 136 patients were included, with a median age of 70 years at initial HL diagnosis. The most common reasons for ASCT-ineligibility were comorbidities (74%) and age (57%). Overall response rate was 74% and PFS and OS were 15.1 and 17.8 months, respectively. Peripheral neuropathy was observed in 9.6% of patients. Conclusion The results of this study provide real-world evidence on the feasibility and effectiveness of BV in elderly or frail ASCT-ineligible patients with rrHL in a real-world setting. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Introduction: The efficacy and safety of glasdegib (a selective oral inhibitor of hedgehog signaling pathway) in combination with low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) was evaluated in a randomized, phase 2 trial of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients (BRIGHT AML 1003; NCT01546038). Patients receiving glasdegib+LDAC experienced statistically significant and meaningful gains in overall survival (OS) compared with patients receiving LDAC alone (median OS [95% CI]): 8.3 months [4.7-12.2] vs 4.3 months [1.9-5.7]). This analysis examined whether quality-adjusted survival improvements were similarly observed using a quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease progression or toxicities (Q-TWiST) approach to evaluate possible trade-offs between time with adverse events (toxicities), time in relapse/progression (i.e., with symptoms of disease), and 'good' survival (i.e., time without toxicities or symptoms of progression [TWiST]) when comparing regimens. Methods: OS in BRIGHT AML 1003 data, restricted to a follow-up of 20 months, was partitioned into time with toxicity (TOX: grade 3+ adverse events prior to progression), TWiST, and time post-progression (REL). Progression was defined as treatment discontinuation due to insufficient clinical response or death; patients who discontinued for other reasons (including adverse events) were censored at the date of discontinuation unless death occurred within 28 days of discontinuation. Q-TWiST was calculated by multiplying restricted mean time in each state by respective utilities (U) and then summing up the utility-adjusted time. Base case analysis used U(TOX)=U(REL)=0.5 and U(TWiST)=1.0; threshold analyses were performed varying U(TOX) and U(REL) jointly each from 0 to 1. Relative gains in Q-TWiST (i.e., Q-TWiST difference (combination vs LDAC) / OS in LDAC arm) of ≥15% were considered clearly clinically meaningful per the clinical literature. Sensitivity analysis varied the length of follow-up and AE definitions; subgroup analyses were also performed. 95% confidence intervals were obtained using the bootstrap procedure. Results: At 20 months of follow-up, the survival rate for glasdegib+LDAC and LDAC arm was 28.2% and 7.9%, respectively. Glasdegib+LDAC patients (n=78) compared with LDAC patients (n=38) had significantly longer mean time in TWiST (+3.4 [95% confidence interval: 1.8, 5.2] months) and TOX (+0.8 [0.1, 1.6] months), and longer but non-significant REL (+0.3 [-1.9, 2.3] months). Q-TWiST was 4.0 [2.1, 5.8] months longer for glasdegib+LDAC, translating into a 75% relative improvement in quality-adjusted survival relative to LDAC alone. In threshold analyses, absolute and relative Q-TWiST gains ranged from 3.5 to 4.5 months and 66% to 85%, respectively (Table 1). They exceeded the clinically meaningful threshold for gains in Q-TWiST and were statistically significant across all combinations of U(TOX) and U(REL). Results were robust to length of follow-up 6 to 24 month and remained significant when including all adverse events regardless of grade. Discussions/Conclusions: Glasdegib+LDAC is an add-on therapy that has demonstrated significant survival benefits for newly diagnosed AML patients who are unable to receive intensive chemotherapy. While patients can experience a longer time with toxicities from receiving glasdegib+LDAC (as expected since it is given as an add-on therapy), the trade-off can still be favorable as the treatment provides added time spent in 'good' health (i.e., a significantly longer time in TWiST). In the BRIGHT AML 1003 cohort, the relative gains in OS greatly exceeded previously established thresholds for being clearly clinically meaningful, which suggests that the benefits of glasdegib+LDAC vs LDAC alone outweigh the risks. Table 1 Disclosures Kwon: Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Pharmerit International: Employment. Bell:Pfizer Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Solem:Pharmerit International: Employment; Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding. Cappelleri:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Johnson:Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Pharmerit International: Employment. Bhattacharyya:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hoang:Pfizer Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cortes:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Biopath Holdings: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BiolineRx: Consultancy; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merus: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Immunogen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sun Pharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.