Search

Background: Teduglutide reduces or eliminates parenteral support (PS) dependency in patients with short bowel syndrome (SBS). Recent post hoc analyses demonstrated that effects are correlated with baseline PS volume. We assessed the SBS-related quality-of-life (QoL) impact of teduglutide, particularly whether improvements are greater among subgroups achieving more PS volume reduction.Methods: Using phase 3 trial data of teduglutide in patients with SBS (NCT00798967), change in Short Bowel Syndrome-Quality of Life (SBS-QoL) scores from baseline were compared between teduglutide vs placebo in the overall population and subgroups classified by baseline PS volume requirement, disease etiology, and bowel anatomy. Generalized estimating equation models were fitted to assess impact of teduglutide on SBS-related QoL using data from all visits, adjusted for baseline characteristics.Results: Of 86 patients, 43 each were randomized to teduglutide or placebo (mean age: 51 vs 50 years, respectively). In adjusted analyses, teduglutide had a nonsignificant reduction (improvement) of -8.6 points (95% CI: 2.6 to -19.8) in SBS-QoL sum score from baseline to Week-24 vs placebo. The impact of teduglutide varied by subgroup. Patients treated with teduglutide experienced significantly greater reductions in SBS-QoL sum score at Week-24 vs placebo in 2 subgroups, ie, the third (highest) tertile baseline PS volume (-27.3, 95% CI: -50.8 to -3.7) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD; -29.6, 95% CI: -46.3 to -12.9). Results were similar for SBS-QoL subscale and item scores.Conclusions: The impact of teduglutide treatment on SBS-related QoL vs placebo varied among subgroups and was significant and most pronounced among patients with highest baseline PS volume requirement or IBD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine real-world prescription medication usage among commercially-insured adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the US.Methods: Adults with ADHD who received ≥1 ADHD medication during 2013 were identified from a large US claims database. Combination therapy was defined as an overlap of ≥30 days between the index (first treatment ≥30 days in 2013) and another medication(s). Patients were classified into six groups: long-acting (LA) monotherapy, short-acting (SA) monotherapy, LA + LA, SA + SA, LA + SA, and >2 therapies. Analyses compared baseline characteristics by regimen, ranked combination regimens, and estimated daily average consumption (DACON) for monotherapy users.Results: Of 206,443 adults with ADHD (mean age = 32.9 years; 51.6% female), 56.9% used LA monotherapy, 30.7% SA monotherapy, and 12.5% used combination therapies (LA + SA: 10.3%; LA + LA: 1.3%; SA + SA: 0.4%; >2 therapies: 0.5%). Extended-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-XR, 39.2%) and lisdexamfetamine (LDX, 31.5%) were the most common LA monotherapies. Nearly all SA monotherapy patients received immediate-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-IR; 81.7%). The top three therapies among combination categories were: (a) LA + LA: branded MAS-XR + generic MAS-XR (13.7%), LDX + generic MAS-XR (10.8%), LDX + guanfacine ER (10.7%); (b) SA + SA: generic MAS-IR + clonidine IR (33.5%), generic MAS-IR + generic MPH SA (17.9%), branded MAS-IR + generic MAS-IR (11.1%); (c) LA + SA: generic MAS-XR+/-IR (39.2%), LDX + generic MAS-IR (16.7%), LA + SA generic MPH (12.6%). Among monotherapy users, DACON was 1.2 ± 0.6 (LA) and 2.1 ± 0.9 (SA) tablets.Conclusions: There is significant treatment heterogeneity among US adults with ADHD. A sizable proportion of patients received monotherapies at above the recommended dosages or combination therapies, suggesting existing single-tablet regimens may not meet patients' needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in recurrent/advanced endometrial cancer in Europe are not well known. Materials & methods: Endometrial Cancer Health Outcomes-Europe-First-Line is a multicenter, retrospective chart review study conducted in the UK, Germany, Italy, France and Spain. Patients diagnosed with recurrent/advanced endometrial cancer who initiated first-line systemic therapy between 1 July 2016 and 31 March 2020 were eligible. Results: Among 242 patients, median age was 69 years and 82.2% had stage IIIB-IV disease. In first-line, most patients received platinum-based chemotherapy (78.9%); others received endocrine therapy (6.2%), taxane monotherapy (5.8%) and nonplatinum or taxane-based chemotherapy (4.1%). Median real-world progression-free survival since first-line initiation was 10.8 months and median overall survival was 20.7 months. Conclusion: Poor prognosis with platinum-based first-line chemotherapy suggests significant unmet medical need.

Background: Topical hemostatic agents are an option for controlling bleeding during cardiovascular surgery. Previous studies comparing topical hemostatic agents in cardiovascular surgery predate the 2012 reformulation of Surgiflo ® , which had been re-engineered to increase paste viscosity and thus be more adherent to the bleeding surface., Objective: To compare clinical and economic outcomes in patients receiving the current formulation of Surgiflo vs Floseal during cardiovascular surgeries., Methodology: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database. Eligible patients had an inpatient cardiovascular surgery between 1/1/2013 and 6/1/2018, were ≥18 years old and received the current formulation of Surgiflo or Floseal during surgery. Propensity score matching was performed, with exact matching on the surgery year and surgery type (aortic, coronary artery bypass grafting, valve, or other). Descriptive analysis and generalized estimating equations models compared outcomes between the Surgiflo and Floseal groups., Results: The matched sample included 5768 patients in each group (mean age: 66.5 years; 66.3% male). In the matched sample, rates of any documented bleeding event were similar in Surgiflo and Floseal groups (6.9% vs 7.2%; P = 0.576). Differences in transfusion rates between patients receiving Surgiflo vs Floseal varied by operational definition and timing of measurement but did not differ by >2 percentage points. Compared to Floseal, patients who received Surgiflo experienced longer surgery duration (306.0 vs 299.4 minutes), lower hospitalization cost ($44,146 vs $46,812), and lower odds of readmission at 30, 60, and 90 days post-discharge (all P < 0.05). Inpatient mortality and LOS were comparable between Surgiflo and Floseal (all P > 0.05)., Conclusion: In this large study of real-world clinical and economic outcomes after cardiovascular surgery involving the current formulation of Surgiflo vs Floseal, Surgiflo was associated with mostly similar clinical outcomes as compared with Floseal. Differences in selected economic/resource use outcomes were also observed, for which root-cause analysis in future research would be informative., Competing Interests: WD III is an employee of Ethicon, Inc., the study sponsor. SSJ is an employee of Johnson & Johnson. JA, SSK, XLM and XG are employees of OPEN Health, which received consultancy fees from Ethicon. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2022 Danker III et al.)