Search

Background: Real-world data on usage and associated outcomes with hereditary angioedema (HAE)-specific medications introduced to the United States (US) market since 2009 are very limited. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate real-world treatment patterns of HAE-specific medications in the US and to assess their impact on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). This analysis used IMS PharMetrics PlusTM database records (2006-2014) of patients with HAE, ≥1 insurance claim for an HAE-specific medication, and continuous insurance enrollment for ≥3 months following the first HAE prescription claim., Results: Of 631 total patients, 434 (68.8%) reported C1-INH(IV) use; 396 (62.8%) reported using ecallantide and/or icatibant. There were 306 episodes of prophylactic use of C1-INH(IV) (defined by continuous refills averaging ≥1500 IU/week for ≥13 weeks) in 155 patients; use of ≥1 on-demand rescue medication was implicated during 53% (163/306) of those episodes. Sixty-eight (20.2%) of 336 C1-INH(IV) users eligible for the HCRU analysis were hospitalized at least once, and 191 (56.8%) visited the emergency department (ED). Eighteen patients (5.4%) had a central venous access device (CVAD); of these, 5 (27.7%) required hospitalization and 14 (77.7%) had an ED visit. The adjusted relative risk of hospitalization and/or ED visits for patients with a CVAD was 2.6 (95% CI: 0.17, 39.23) compared to C1-INH(IV) users without a CVAD., Conclusions: Despite widespread availability of modern HAE medications in the US, we identified a subset of patients requiring long-term prophylaxis who continue to be burdened by frequent rescue medication usage and/or complications related to the use of CVADs for intravenous HAE medication.

Background: Hereditary angioedema with C1-inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Objective: The objective of this study was to assess HRQoL outcomes in patients self-administering subcutaneous C1-INH (C1-INH[SC]; HAEGARDA) for routine prevention of HAE attacks., Methods: Post hoc analysis of data from the placebo-controlled, crossover phase III COMPACT study (Clinical Studies for Optimal Management of Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Replacement Therapy). Ninety patients with C1-INH-HAE were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment sequences: C1-INH(SC) 40 or 60 IU/kg twice weekly for 16 weeks, preceded or followed by 16 weeks of twice weekly placebo injections. All HAE attacks were treated with open-label on-demand treatment as necessary. HRQoL assessments at week 14 (last visit) included the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI), and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM)., Results: Compared with placebo (on-demand treatment alone), treatment with twice weekly C1-INH(SC) (both doses combined) was associated with better EQ-5D visual analog scale general health, less HADS anxiety, less WPAI presenteeism, work productivity loss, and activity impairment, and greater TSQM effectiveness and overall treatment satisfaction. More patients self-reported a "good/excellent" response during routine prevention with C1-INH(SC) compared with on-demand only (placebo prophylaxis) management. For each HRQoL measure, a greater proportion of patients had a clinically meaningful improvement during C1-INH(SC) treatment compared with placebo., Conclusions: In patients with frequent HAE attacks, a treatment strategy of routine prevention with self-administered twice weekly C1-INH(SC) had a greater impact on improving multiple HAE-related HRQoL impairments, most notably anxiety and work productivity, compared with on-demand treatment alone (placebo prophylaxis)., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)