Integrated specialty pharmacy yields high PCSK9 inhibitor access and initiation rates

Implementing a letter template to expedite specialty medication appeal letter submission

BACKGROUND

Prior authorizations (PAs) for biologic medications, used to treat inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), are often denied by pharmacy benefits managers and can require a complex appeal process for patients to gain access to medication.

OBJECTIVE

This quality improvement project evaluated the impact of implementing a standardized appeal letter template and customizable clinical rationale letter content on specialty pharmacist workflow and workload in an integrated hospital health system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) IBD clinic.

PRACTICE DESCRIPTION

This initiative was conducted in an IBD outpatient clinic at a tertiary academic medical center with an integrated HSSP whose specialty pharmacists work collaboratively with providers to manage specialty medications.

PRACTICE INNOVATION

A letter template was created in the electronic health record (EHR) for pharmacists to use when submitting appeal letters. The template automatically populates patient results from recent labs, imaging, and clinic visit notes as part of the appeal documentation. Clinical rationale letter content was developed for the most common appeal reasons using EHR functionality that allows the creation of standardized notes that can be shared among team members and customized at time of use.

EVALUATION METHOD

An analysis of 2 months of data preimplementation/postimplementation was conducted using descriptive statistics to report the number of appeals submitted, time from PA denial to appeal submission, and appeal approval rate. A pharmacist postimplementation satisfaction score was also collected.

RESULTS

The number of appeals submitted preimplementation (n = 73) and postimplementation (n = 73) was the same. Postimplementation, 89% of appeals were submitted within 3 days of PA denial compared to 29% preimplementation. PA approval rate was high (93%) preimplementation and postimplementation. Overall pharmacist satisfaction was 9.7 out of 10.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an appeal letter template and standardized clinical rationale letter content in the EHR led to decreased time to appeal submission and high specialty pharmacist satisfaction.

Optimal follow-up schedule for patients taking PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies in a health system: Analysis of specialty pharmacy clinical interventions

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to determine if and when it is clinically appropriate to consider a reduction in the frequency of health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) clinical pharmacist assessments for patients taking a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibody (mAb) after they are deemed clinically stable on therapy.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective, observational study of adult patients on PCSK9 mAb therapy enrolled in the University of Rochester Specialty Pharmacy Cardiology Patient Management Program was performed between October 24, 2016, and April 30, 2022. The primary outcome was the number of clinical pharmacist interventions per interval within the baseline 12 months compared to 12-month intervals for up to 72 months after initiation of PCSK9 mAb therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 368 patients on PCSK9 mAb therapy were included in the study. A significantly lower percentage of patients had more than 2 interventions during the 12- to 24-month interval (24.3%) as compared to the baseline 12-month interval (80.2%) (P < 0.001); this represented a 70% reduction in the chance of a patient requiring more than 2 interventions (relative risk, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.24-0.38). A similar trend was demonstrated in the 24- to 36-month and 36- to 48-month intervals when compared to the first year of therapy. The most commonly documented clinical pharmacist interventions were in the categories of safety (29.2%), effectiveness (28.4%), and adherence (19.9%).

CONCLUSION

Patients beyond 1 year of PCSK9 mAb therapy required less clinical pharmacist interventions. Therefore, stable patients receiving a PCSK9 mAb may be considered for less frequent clinical assessments to allow for HSSP growth to nontraditional clinical areas.

Individual and Community-Level Characteristics and Adherence to Specialty Medications

Background: Understanding risk factors for nonadherence can help specialty pharmacies optimize resources to prevent nonadherence and inform risk-stratification processes. Objective: To determine which individual and community-level characteristics are associated with nonadherence to specialty medications. Methods: We analyzed a cohort of patients enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial having filled a specialty medication at least 4 times in the previous 12 months with a proportion of days (PDC) covered < 0.90. We collected patient age, gender, race, medication administration type, therapy start date, home address, insurance type, and online patient portal status from the electronic health record. An ordinal logistic regression model was used to assess the association of nonadherence with individual and community-level patient characteristics. Results: Most patients were female (68%), white (82%), and held commercial insurance (58%) with a median age of 53 (interquartile range [IQR] 40, 64) years. Patients were mostly from the adult rheumatology (35%), multiple sclerosis (20%) and lipid (17%) clinics. Given a 10-year increase in age, patients had lower odds of having lower PDC (odds ratio [OR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.71-0.94, P = 0.005). Patients on therapy greater than or equal to 1 year had half the odds of having lower PDC relative to patients on therapy less than 1 year (OR = 0.52, CI = 0.35 - 0.75, P < 0.001). No statistically significant associations were found between PDC and gender, race, insurance type, route of administration, clinic type, patient portal status, median income, percent receiving government assistance, or percent with no health insurance. Conclusion: Patients with younger age and shorter duration on treatment may be at-risk for lower adherence. Specialty pharmacies may benefit from targeting adherence interventions to these groups.

Provision of ambrisentan from a health-system specialty pharmacy affiliated with a pulmonary hypertension Center of Comprehensive Care

PURPOSE

This descriptive report describes the process used to obtain access to providing ambrisentan from a health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) affiliated with a pulmonary hypertension Center of Comprehensive Care, develop a pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) care team at the HSSP, and characterize medication adherence and access metrics.

SUMMARY

PAH is a rare disease treated with several specialty medications requiring intensive monitoring. Historically, specialty medications used to treat PAH have been provided by only select specialty pharmacies due to restricted drug distribution channels. It is recommended that patients with PAH receive their care at centers with expertise in the diagnosis and management of this disorder, but the HSSPs at these expert centers are unable to provide specialty PAH medications. The current care model for PAH leads to patients receiving their medical and pharmaceutical care from separate entities. This descriptive report describes a multidisciplinary team's approach to gaining access to providing ambrisentan and developing a disease state care team within an established HSSP. After implementing this service, specialty pharmacy metrics were assessed, including proportion of days covered (PDC), time to first fill, patient contact rate, Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program compliance, time to prior authorization (PA) approval, rate of optimal adherence (PDC of >80%), and PA renewal rate, to demonstrate a proof-of-concept HSSP model for PAH. In this model, the HSSP was able to demonstrate high-quality specialty pharmacy metrics with regard to medication adherence, medication access, and REMS program compliance.

CONCLUSION

The development of a PAH care team to provide ambrisentan at an existing HSSP was associated with high adherence rates, efficient and reliable medication access, and REMS program compliance.

ASHP Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice: Practice Models, Operations, and Workforce - 2022

PURPOSE

The results of the 2022 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy (HSSP) Practice: Practice Models, Operations, and Workforce are presented.

METHODS

A total of 273 leaders in HSSPs were contacted by email to complete a survey hosted using Qualtrics. The survey sample was compiled from ASHP member lists, the presence of a specialty pharmacy indicated in previous ASHP surveys, and outreach to ASHP member organizational leaders.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 35.9%. Most HSSPs dispense 30,000 or fewer specialty prescriptions annually. Most respondents have an annual revenue of $100 million or less, are part of a 340B-covered entity, operate one location, have 1 to 2 specialty pharmacy accreditations, dispense both nonspecialty and specialty medications, and employ an average of 15.5 pharmacists and 17.6 technicians. The majority (66.7%) dispense 50% or less of prescriptions written by internal providers due to payor and manufacturer network restrictions. Over one-third employ nonpharmacist and nontechnician professionals. Specialty pharmacists are involved in treatment decisions and therapy selection before prescription generation (69.8%), and 47.7% of respondents report pharmacists operating under collaborative practice agreements. Most (82.6%) offer experiential or formal education in specialty pharmacy. The top point of pride remains patient satisfaction and level of service. Top challenges include access to payor networks, the ability to hire and retain qualified staff, and shrinking reimbursement from payors.

CONCLUSION

The HSSP is a continually maturing integrated advanced practice model focused on providing patient-centric care to all patients and employees of the health system regardless of network status. HSSPs are raising the standards for quality in specialty pharmacy care.

Insurance Approval Delay of Biologic Therapy Dose Escalation Associated with Disease Activity in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Dose escalation of self-injectable biologic therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases may be required to counteract loss of response and/or low drug levels. Payors often require completion of a prior authorization (PA), which is a complex approval pathway before providing coverage. If the initial PA request is denied, clinic staff must complete a time and resource-intensive process to obtain medication approval.

AIMS

This study measured time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval and evaluated impact of approval time on disease activity.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective analysis of adult patients with IBD prescribed an escalated dose of biologic therapy at an academic center with an integrated specialty pharmacy team from January to December 2018. Outcomes included time to insurance approval and the association between approval time and follow-up C-reactive protein (CRP) and Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ) scores. Associations were tested using linear regression analyses.

RESULTS

220 patients were included, median age 39, 53% female, and 96% white. Overall median time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval was 7 days [interquartile range (IQR) 1, 14]. Approval time was delayed when an appeal was required [median of 29 days (IQR 17, 43)]. Patients with a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have CRP improvement (p = 0.019). Time to insurance approval did not significantly impact follow-up SIBDQ scores.

CONCLUSION

Patients who had a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have improvement in CRP, highlighting the negative clinical impact of a complex dose escalation process.

Impact of list price changes on out-of-pocket costs and adherence in four high-rebate specialty drugs

BACKGROUND

Insurers manage the cost of specialty medicines via rebates, however it is unclear if the savings are passed on to patients, and whether reducing rebates may lead to changes in patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and medication adherence. This study examined two drug classes to understand the impact of reducing list prices to net prices, via lower-priced national drug codes (NDCs) or authorized generics, on patient OOP costs and adherence.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis assessed IQVIA PharMetrics ® Plus adjudicated medical and pharmacy claims for commercially insured patients. Patient OOP costs per prescription and payer drug costs were assessed for evolocumab or alirocumab (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors [PCSK9is]) or velpatasvir/sofosbuvir or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (hepatitis C virus [HCV] medications). For PCSK9is and HCV medications, the original and lower-priced versions were compared. Adherence was estimated based on proportion of days covered (PDC) (PCSK9is) and receipt of full treatment regimen (HCV medications).

RESULTS

In total, 10,640 patients were included (evolocumab, 5,042; alirocumab, 1,438; velpatasvir/sofosbuvir, 2,952; ledipasvir/sofosbuvir,1,208). After list price reductions, mean payer drug costs decreased by over 60%, while patient OOP cost reductions ranged from 14% to 55% (evolocumab: 55%, p < 0.01; alirocumab: 51%, p < 0.01; velpatasvir/sofosbuvir: 30%, p < 0.01; ledipasvir/sofosbuvir: 14%, p = 0.03). Patients with coinsurance as the largest contributor to their OOP costs had the largest reductions in OOP costs, ranging from adjusted, mean values of US$135 to US$379 (>60% reductions). Six-month PDC for PCSK9is and proportion receiving full HCV treatment regimen were high with the original versions and did not substantially differ with the new, lower-priced versions.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing list prices to approximate net prices (as a proxy for reducing rebates) resulted in lower patient OOP costs, particularly for those with coinsurance. Our findings suggest that future reduction of rebates may assist in patient affordability, although additional transparency is needed.

Health-system specialty pharmacy role and outcomes: A review of current literature

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

Specialty medications can have life-altering outcomes for patients with complex diseases. However, their benefit relies on appropriate treatment selection, patients' ability to afford and initiate treatment, and ongoing treatment optimization based on patient response to therapy. Mounting research demonstrates the benefits of the health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) in improving specialty medication access, affordability, and outcomes. The purpose of this rapid review is to describe the currently reported role and function of HSSP pharmacists and outcomes reported with use of the HSSP model, and to identify gaps in the literature where more information is needed to better understand the HSSP model and outcomes.

SUMMARY

Current literature describes the role of HSSP pharmacists in facilitating patient access, affordability, and initiation and maintenance of specialty medications. Though it is clear HSSP pharmacists are involved in treatment monitoring, often through utilizing the electronic health record, more information is needed to elucidate the frequency, method, and extent of monitoring. Despite several valuable continuity of care services reported to be provided by HSSPs, the breadth and degree of standardization of these services remains unclear. There is minimal literature describing HSSP education and research involvement. HSSPs have reported significant benefits of this patient care model, as demonstrated by higher adherence and persistence; better clinical outcomes; financial benefits to patients, payers and the health system; better quality of care; higher patient and provider satisfaction with services, and highly efficient specialty pharmacy services. More literature comparing clinical and diagnosis-related outcomes in HSSP versus non-HSSP patients is needed.

CONCLUSION

HSSPs provide comprehensive, patient-centered specialty medication management that result in improved care across the continuum of the specialty patient journey and act as a valuable resource for specialty clinics and patients beyond medication management. Future research should build on the current description of HSSP services, how services affect patient outcomes, and the impact HSSP network restrictions.

Implementation of an integrated pharmacist collaborative care model in specialty disease state clinics

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

To expand health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) clinical continuity by implementing a specialty integrated model for clinical services in target sites.

SUMMARY

After evaluation of baseline clinical continuity and institutional goals, select clinics were identified as target sites to which to expand this integrated approach of a medication management clinic (MMC). In this MMC model, the key steps included engaging stakeholders, workflow training, optimization of the electronic health record, service evaluation, compliance with regulatory standards, and development of marketing strategies. The initial focus was development of innovative collaborative practice agreements (CPAs) to expand the scope of ambulatory care pharmacists' practice. Analysis of existing specialty and ambulatory workflows and technology was completed before development of the integrated workflow. Existing credentialing policies were updated to support expanded practices, and marketing collaterals were developed to support growth of pharmacy referrals. Meetings with stakeholders took place to ensure smooth transitions into integrated areas. Primary endpoints included clinical continuity, as determined by prescription orders placed within the health system sent to the HSSP, and number of signed referrals to MMC. Secondary endpoints included disease state-specific clinical outcomes as well as overall outcomes such as medication adherence, laboratory test adherence, immunization rates, and patient and clinician satisfaction. An MMC model was successfully implemented in 5 target specialty practices. Specialty clinic CPAs were developed for rheumatology and digestive health (including viral hepatitis). Since implementation, clinical continuity increased 23% and referrals exceeded the target at 165%. Data on secondary endpoints are currently being collected to evaluate quality of pharmacy services. Pharmacy services have enhanced patient care and received positive feedback from clinicians.

CONCLUSION

Expansion of integrated decentralized pharmacists into target practices has increased clinical continuity and the number of pharmacist referrals. Clinicians have regarded pharmacists as vital members of the team. Creation of additional specialty CPAs will be needed to support further growth in other clinics.

Pharmacist-managed multistep order transmittal for electronic specialty prescriptions reduces represcribing burden in ambulatory clinics: A retrospective cohort pilot study

BACKGROUND: Specialty medications pose unique prescribing challenges, including complexities with drug dosing and safety monitoring, need for prior authorization and patient financial assistance, use of payer-mandated specialty pharmacies, and special requirements for storage and handling. These challenges can lead to higher rates of represcribing for specialty clinic providers, who may be operating with inadequate information or limited resources. Multistep order transmittal (MSOT) is an electronic medical record (EMR) prescription work queue functionality used by a specialty pharmacy service to support select ambulatory clinics. OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between an MSOT specialty pharmacy support service and represcribing burden of specialty medications for providers in an ambulatory care setting. METHODS: A retrospective cohort pilot study was performed before and after MSOT implementation. Prescription data were queried from Sanford Health's EMR for patients who were electronically issued at least 1 prescription for an injectable biologic medication at a dermatology and rheumatology clinic. The pre-intervention group included index prescriptions prescribed between October 1, 2017, and June 20, 2018. The post-intervention group included index prescriptions prescribed between October 1, 2018, and June 20, 2019. Retrospective EMR review was completed to identify any prescriptions that were represcribed and the reason for represcribing. The primary outcome was the rate of represcribing. Secondary endpoints explored reason for represcribing, when it occurred. Nominal data were compared using Pearson's chi-square tests. Regressions were performed to account for potential confounders. RESULTS: The pre-intervention group included 880 index biologic prescriptions, and the post-intervention group included 941 index biologic prescriptions. The aggregate represcribing rate decreased from 12.73% in the pre-intervention group to 9.56% in the postintervention group (P = 0.03). Represcribing directly by providers as a result of needing to modify the destination pharmacy decreased significantly from 6.25% of the pre-intervention group to 0.64% of the post-intervention group (P < 0.01). However, represcribing due to patient preferences and prescribing errors increased significantly between the pre- and post-intervention groups, with patient preferences increasing from 0.91% to 2.55% (P = 0.01) and prescribing errors from 0.68% to 1.70% (P = 0.05), respectively. Represcribing due to provider preferences and payer restrictions remained similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Within 2 ambulatory care clinics in an integrated health care system, the use of pharmacist-managed MSOT reduced overall represcribing burden. The need to represcribe owing to wrong destination pharmacy was nearly eliminated, while appropriate represcribing to accommodate patient preferences and correct prescribing errors increased. DISCLOSURES: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Innovative, centralised, multidisciplinary medicines optimisation clinic for PCSK9 inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9is) are an important but underutilised option to help optimise lipid management. We developed a new service to improve patient access to these medicines in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations. This paper describes the model and provides lipid-lowering results and feedback from the first 100 referred patients.

METHODS

The service is based on a centralised multidisciplinary clinic that is the sole prescriber of PCSK9i therapy in the area. Referred patients are assessed for eligibility and given tailored, person-centred support, education and monitoring to promote treatment adherence and lipids optimisation. The clinic also supports referred patients that do not meet PCSK9i eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

Among the first 100 patients referred (n=62 male; mean age: 62.9±10.5 years), 48 were initiated on PCSK9i therapy. Mean total cholesterol decreased from 7.7±1.6 mmol/L at baseline to 4.5±1.4 mmol/L at 3 months (41% reduction), while mean low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) fell from 5.0±1.6 mmol/L to 2.1±1.3 mmol/L (58% reduction; p<0.0001) and median LDL-C decreased from 4.8 mmol/L to 1.6 mmol/L (67% reduction) over the same period. These decreases were maintained at 12 months (45%, 65% and 67% reductions, respectively; p<0.0001 for the decrease in mean LDL-C from baseline). Patient feedback on the clinic was positive and overall satisfaction was high.

CONCLUSIONS

This innovative, person-centred, multidisciplinary service successfully initiated PCSK9i therapy for eligible patients and drove long-term monitoring, adherence and cholesterol lowering. It also provided medicines optimisation and adherence assistance to PCSK9i-ineligible patients. The model could be used in other areas to support better uptake and optimisation of PCSK9i therapy.

Association between health system specialty pharmacy use and health care costs among national sample of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries

BACKGROUND: Health care expenditures are growing rapidly. There is a growing body of literature showing that health system specialty pharmacy is associated with improvement in clinical outcomes; however, there is a lack of data on its effect on health care costs and utilization. OBJECTIVE: To perform exploratory research assessing the association between health system specialty pharmacy use and health care costs and utilization. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted examining medical and pharmacy claims from 2018 and 2019 of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Optum Advisory Service's proprietary deidentified Normative Health Information database was used, which includes claims, membership, and provider data for 12.6 million Medicare Advantage members. Members who filled a prescription at a health system specialty pharmacy and had a specialty provider participating in the health system specialty pharmacy care model in clinic were assigned to the intervention group. Members who did not use a health system specialty pharmacy but had the same provider (provider benchmark group) or different provider (network benchmark group) were considered as comparisons. The network benchmark group was further refined to match variation in health care cost due to geography. The primary outcome measure was total health care costs (across the medical and pharmacy benefit) on a per-patient per-month basis. Secondary outcomes were selected utilization drivers and cost subcomponents. Cost and utilization metrics were calculated on a risk-adjusted basis using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hierarchical Condition Categories (CMS-HCC) risk score methodology. Differences were assessed for categorical variables with chi-square tests, and 2-tailed t-tests were used for continuous variables. RESULTS: Of the analytic sample of 9,780 members used in this study, 208 (2.1%) used health system specialty pharmacy services. During the 2018 baseline period, total health care costs and utilization were similar after CMS-HCC risk score adjustment ($9,520 among health system specialty pharmacy users; $8,691 among the provider benchmark group; $9,510 among the network benchmark group) but lower in 2019 ($7,060, $7,683, and $8,152, respectively). The differences in 2019 were primarily driven by savings in pharmacy and free-standing physician-related costs. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a health system specialty pharmacy is associated with a lower health care cost. Further study is required to analyze how drug and disease-specific interactions influence total health care costs and utilization for health system specialty pharmacy populations. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Shields Health Solutions and completed with Optum Advisory Services, which provided all analysis and was the sole source of data. University of Massachusetts Medical School investigators were independent context experts, who volunteered their time for this study. Hellems is employed by Optum Advisory Services; Fasching and Smith are employed by Shields Health Solutions; and Soni and McManus are employed by the University of Massachusetts Medical School. Soni received support from the National Institute of General Medical Science (T32GM107000), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (TL1-TR001454), and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1F30HD091975-03). McManus's time was supported by R01HL126911, R01HL137734, R01HL137794, R01HL135219, R01HL136660, U54HL143541 from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. McManus has received research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Care Evolution, Samsung, Apple Computer, Pfizer, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Philips Research Institute, Flexcon, Fitbit; has consulted for Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Philips, Samsung Electronics, Rose Consulting, Boston Biomedical Associates, and FlexCon; and is also a member of the Operations Committee and Steering Committee for the GUARD-AF Study (NCT04126486), sponsored by Bristol Meyers Squibb and Pfizer. The other authors have nothing additional to disclose. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The funders played no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Addressing the Challenges of Novel Oncology and Hematology Treatments Across Sites of Care: Specialty Pharmacy Solutions

BACKGROUND

The number of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals for anticancer therapies has significantly increased in recent years, but these novel therapies are costly and present challenges to patients and providers. Many institutions have implemented health systems specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) to help patients and providers navigate financial and logistical barriers to treatment with oral anticancer therapies. Patients on oral anticancer therapy are often treated across multiple sites of care which can complicate the inpatient specialty medication initiation process. Health systems often limit inclusion of oral anticancer therapies for inpatient administration due to costs, however several new therapies necessitate admission for treatment initiation. Health systems are then faced with the challenge of starting costly oral anticancer therapy inpatient and ensuring continued access to therapy upon discharge. We describe the integrated HSSP multidisciplinary approach to this MUP including providers, inpatient and outpatient pharmacists, specialty and inpatient pharmacies, institutional procurement team, and the institutional pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee to streamline this process.The HSSP multidisciplinary processes addresses a growing need for cancer patients to receive timely and affordable treatments across different sites of care. The healthcare team and P&T committee ensure the patient receives the most appropriate therapy while being conscious of health-system costs. The HSSP and procurement team ensure the patient can obtain and afford the medication. The implemented processes allows for direct communication and collaboration between different sites of care and this collaborative approach leads to optimal patient care.

HIV PrEP access and affordability: a multidisciplinary specialty pharmacy model

BACKGROUND

Increasing the number of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) providers expands PrEP access to more eligible patients to help end the HIV epidemic. Previous studies have noted providers perceive financial barriers as a limitation to prescribing PrEP.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe PrEP medication access and affordability in patients seen at a multidisciplinary PrEP clinic.

METHOD

We conducted a single-center, retrospective, cohort study of adults initiating tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine in the Vanderbilt PrEP Clinic between September 1, 2016, and March 31, 2019, with prescriptions filled by Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy. Data were gathered from the electronic health records and pharmacy claims. We evaluated 3 different time periods: initial evaluation to PrEP initiation, prescription of PrEP to insurance approval, and insurance approval to initiation. Treatment initiation was considered delayed when > 7 days from initial evaluation, and reasons for delay were recorded. Continuous variables are presented as median (interquartile range [IQR]), and categorical variables are presented as percentages.

RESULTS

We included 63 patients; most were male (97%), white (84%), and commercially insured (94%) with a median age of 38 years (IQR 29-47). Primary indication for PrEP was men who have sex with men at high risk of acquiring HIV (97%). Median time from initial appointment to treatment initiation was 7 days (IQR 4-8). Treatment delays occurred in 25% of patients and were mostly driven by patient preference (50%). Insurance prior authorization was required in 27% of patients; all were approved. Median total out-of-pocket medication costs for the entire study period were $0 (IQR $0-$0). Most patients (86%) used manufacturer copay cards.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of mostly commercially insured men, the majority were able to access PrEP with low out-of-pocket costs facilitated by manufacturer assistance. Although generalizability beyond this population is limited, these results contradict perceived financial barriers to PrEP access.

Evaluating implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, and feasibility) of two initiatives to improve the medication prior authorization process

BACKGROUND

Processes such as prior authorization (PA) for medications, implemented by health insurance companies to ensure that safe, appropriate, cost-effective, and evidence-based care is provided to all members, have created inefficiencies within healthcare systems. Thus, healthcare systems have implemented supplemental processes to reduce burden and ensure efficiency, timeliness, and appropriate care.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate implementation outcomes of two initiatives related to PA for medications: a common record that records all PA-related information that was integrated into the health record and an auto-routing of specialty prescriptions to a hospital-owned specialty pharmacy.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical staff to understand their experience, acceptability, adoption, and feasibility of these initiatives guided by Proctor's Framework for Implementation Outcomes. Transcripts were analyzed using consensus coding.

RESULTS

Eleven medical staff participated in semi-structured interviews. The two initiatives were analyzed together because the findings were similar across both for our outcomes of acceptability, adoption, and feasibility. Participants found the implemented initiatives to be acceptable and beneficial but felt there were still challenges with the new workflow. The initiatives were fully adopted by only one clinic site within the healthcare system, but limitations arose when adopting to another site. Individuals felt the initiatives were feasible and improved workflow, communication, and transparency. However, participants described future adaptations that would help improve this process including improved standardization, automation, and transparency.

CONCLUSION

The acceptability, adoption, and feasibility of two initiatives to improve the PA process within the one clinical site were well received but issues of generalizability limited the initiatives adoption system wide.

Factors associated with time to initiation of a PCSK9 inhibitor after hospital discharge for acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) lower atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event risk.

OBJECTIVE

Analyze patient characteristics associated with time to PCSK9i initiation following an acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

METHODS

We analyzed characteristics of patients ≥21 years of age in the Marketscan or Medicare databases who initiated a PCSK9i 0-89 days, 90-179 days, or 180-365 days after an AMI between July 2015 and December 2018 (n=1,705). We estimated the cumulative incidence of recurrent ASCVD events before PCSK9i initiation.

RESULTS

Overall, 42%, 25%, and 33% of patients who initiated a PCSK9i did so 0-89 days, 90-179 days, and 180-365 days following AMI hospital discharge, respectively. Taking ezetimibe prior to AMI hospitalization and initiating ezetimibe within 30 days after AMI hospital discharge were each associated with a higher likelihood of PCSK9i initiation in the 0-89 days versus 180-365 days post-discharge (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.83, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.35-2.49 and 1.76, 95%CI 1.11-2.80, respectively). Statin use before and statin initiation within 30 days after AMI hospitalization were associated with a lower likelihood of PCSK9i initiation 0-89 days versus 180-365 days post-discharge (adjusted OR 0.64, 95%CI 0.49-0.84 and 0.39, 95%CI 0.28-0.54, respectively). Overall, 8.0%, 10.5%, and 12.5% of patients had an ASCVD event at 90, 180, and 365 days following AMI hospital discharge and before initiating a PCSK9i, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among patients initiating a PCSK9i after AMI, a low proportion did so within 89 days of hospital discharge. Many patients had a recurrent ASCVD event before treatment initiation.

Proportion of days covered as a measure of medication adherence

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles , AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Turning differentiation into value: How health-system specialty pharmacies can align to an outcomes-focused mission

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

ASHP National Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice-2020

PURPOSE

Results of the first ASHP National Survey of Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Practice are presented.

METHODS

A sample of 230 leaders in health-system specialty pharmacies were contacted by email and invited to participate in a survey hosted using an online survey application. The survey sample was compiled from ASHP member lists, through review of data from other ASHP surveys indicating the presence of specialty pharmacies, and by outreach to ASHP member organizational leaders.

RESULTS

The response rate was 53.0%. Most health-system specialty pharmacies dispense 30,000 or fewer specialty prescriptions per year, have an annual revenue of $100 million or less, are part of an entity eligible to participate in the 340B Drug Pricing Program, operate 1 specialty pharmacy location, have at least 1 specialty pharmacy accreditation, dispense nonspecialty medications in addition to specialty medications, and employ an average of 13 pharmacists and 15 technicians. More than two-thirds of health-system specialty pharmacies (68.8%) dispense no more than half of the prescriptions written by their providers due to payer network restrictions or limited distribution drugs. The health-system specialty pharmacy practice model includes access to the electronic health record (100% of respondents), pharmacists and technicians dedicated to specific clinics (64.9% and 57.7%, respectively), specialty pharmacist involvement in treatment decisions and drug therapy selection prior to the prescription being written (64.9%), and documenting recommendations and progress notes in patients' electronic health record (93.4%). Most health-system specialty pharmacies (83.3%) offer experiential or formal education in specialty pharmacy. Top challenges that survey respondents expected to face in the next year included restricted access to payer networks and limited distribution drugs, 340B Drug Pricing Program changes, and shrinking reimbursement from payers.

CONCLUSION

The health-system specialty pharmacy represents an integrated advanced practice model that incorporates specialty medication-use management across the continuum of care.

Adherence and persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy

BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) improve symptoms and delay progression of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but adherence is often sub-optimal and many patients change medication (either "switching" to a medication with a different mechanism of action or "cycling" to a medication with the same mechanism of action) during the first year of therapy. Some integrated health-system specialty pharmacies embed pharmacists in clinics to help patients access and adhere to specialty medication. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed DMARD switching, cycling, adherence, and persistence at an outpatient rheumatology clinic with an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with RA, naïve to biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs, who filled ≥ 2 biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD prescriptions within 12 months. Adherence was measured using proportion of days covered (PDC); persistence was computed at 12 months. Univariate analyses compared adherence and persistence between patients with and without a medication change. Ordinal logistic regression examined whether PDC was associated with patient age, gender, race, insurance type, and medication change. RESULTS: We included 772 patients: 79% female/21% male, 89% White/11% non-White, median age 56 years (interquartile range = 48-63). Most patients (84%) did not change medication during the study period, 5% cycled medication one or more times (but did not switch), 9% switched medication one or more times (but did not cycle), and 2% of patients both switched and cycled during the study period. Median PDC of the sample was 0.94 and 73% of patients were persistent. Patients with a medication change had lower PDC than those without (0.89 vs 0.95, P = 0.004), but rate of persistence did not significantly differ between groups (77 vs 72%, P = 0.300). Odds of higher PDC was more likely for men (Odds ratio [OR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-2.48, P < 0.001) and less likely for patients who changed medication (OR = 0.65, CI: 0.47-0.91, P = 0.011); age, race, and insurance type were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RA demonstrated high medication adherence and persistence, and low rates of switching and cycling. Findings support evidence that integrated health-system specialty pharmacies with clinical pharmacists embedded in outpatient clinics help patients overcome barriers to medication adherence to persist on therapy. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi, Inc. James and J. Choi were employed by Sanofi, Inc., at the time of this study. Peter, Zuckerman, DeClercq, L. Choi, and Tanner, received research funding from Sanofi, Inc., for work on this study. Tanner has also received advisory board/speaker bureau fees from Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi-Aventis. This study was presented as a poster at AMCP Nexus in October 2019 at National Harbor, MD.

Development, implementation, and evaluation of a health outcomes and research program at an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy

PURPOSE

Health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) provide high-quality, efficient, and collaborative care to patients receiving specialty therapy. Despite proven benefits of the integrated model, manufacturer and payer restrictions challenge the viability and utility of HSSPs. Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy developed a health outcomes and research program to measure and communicate the value of this model, drive improvement in patient care delivery, and advocate for recognition of HSSP pharmacists' role in patient care. The purpose of this descriptive report is to describe the development and results of this program.

SUMMARY

The health outcomes and research program began as an initiative for pharmacists to evaluate and convey the benefits they provide to patients, providers, and the health system. Early outcomes data proved useful in communicating the value of an integrated model to key stakeholders and highlighted the need to further develop research efforts. The department leadership invested resources to build a research program with dedicated personnel, engaged research experts to train pharmacists, and fostered internal and external collaborations to facilitate research efforts. As of March 2021, the health outcomes and research program team has published 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts, presented 88 posters and 7 podium presentations at national conferences, and received 4 monetary research awards. Further, the program team engages other HSSP teams to initiate and expand their own health outcomes research in an effort to empower all HSSPs in demonstrating their value.

CONCLUSIONS

The health outcomes and research program described has pioneered outcomes research among HSSPs nationwide and has proven valuable to specialty pharmacists, the health system, and key specialty pharmacy stakeholders.

A framework for graduate and postgraduate specialty pharmacy training

Disclaimer

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Purpose

There is a growing need for specialty pharmacy leaders within integrated delivery networks (IDNs). Traditional training for students and residents has not met the demand for pharmacy leaders in this space. This article describes the partnership between UW Health (UWH) and the University of Wisconsin School of Pharmacy (UWSOP) in developing a specialty pharmacy elective course at UWSOP and in creating a postgraduate residency training program at UWH. Future directions for the partnership are discussed.

Summary

Members of the leaderships of UWH and UWSOP met to discuss expanding coursework related to specialty pharmacy business fundamentals at UWSOP. This meeting led to the development of a 2-credit elective course beginning in spring 2017. The course focused on marketplace economics, channel strategies, and specialty pharmacy practice development. Additionally, UWH identified the need to provide postgraduate training to meet the increasing demand across IDNs for specialty pharmacy leaders. The residency program was initiated in 2013 and received accreditation in 2016. The residency provides experience in specialty pharmacy leadership, managed care, finance, the revenue cycle, accreditation, and the supply chain. Future partnership opportunities include creation of a longitudinal student pharmacist track and joint project coordination between UWSOP students and UWH residents.

Conclusion

This partnership has provided a pathway for students to gain expertise in specialty pharmacy business fundamentals as well as postgraduate training opportunities for future specialty pharmacy leaders. IDN and school of pharmacy partnerships can expand educational opportunities for future specialty pharmacy leaders and help fulfill the market gap in specialty pharmacy leaders.

Comparison of provider satisfaction with specialty pharmacy services in integrated health-system and external practice models: A multisite survey

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to obtain insight into providers’ satisfaction with services offered by health-system integrated specialty pharmacies and to determine whether providers’ perceptions of services offered under an integrated model differ from perceptions of external specialty pharmacy services.

Methods

A multi-site, cross-sectional, online survey of specialty clinic healthcare providers at 10 academic health systems with integrated specialty pharmacies was conducted. The questionnaire was developed by members of the Vizient Specialty Pharmacy Outcomes and Benchmarking Workgroup and was pretested at 3 pilot sites prior to dissemination. Prescribers of specialty medications within each institution were identified and sent an email invitation to participate in the study that included a link to the anonymous questionnaire. Respondents were asked to rate their agreement with 10 statements regarding quality of services of integrated and external specialty pharmacies on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). An analysis to determine differences in providers’ overall satisfaction with the integrated and external specialty pharmacy practice models, as well as differences in satisfaction scores for each of the 10 statements, was performed using paired-samples t tests.

Results

The mean (SD) score for overall satisfaction with integrated specialty pharmacies was significantly higher than the score for satisfaction with external specialty pharmacies: 4.72 (0.58) vs 2.97 (1.20); 95% confidence interval, 1.64-1.87; P &lt; 0.001. Provider ratings of the integrated specialty pharmacy model were also higher for all 10 items evaluating the quality of services (P &lt; 0.05 for all comparisons).

Conclusion

The study results confirm that the health-system integrated specialty pharmacy practice model promotes high rates of provider satisfaction with services and perceived benefits.

Analysis of prior authorization success and timeliness at a community-based specialty care pharmacy

BACKGROUND

Specialty medications may require a prior authorization (PA) before a patient can access the medication. Providers often identify PA approval as a burden for the practice. Pharmacists can facilitate the completion of the PA process.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to evaluate the time to first PA decision (approval or denial) for dermatologic medications dispensed by a community-based specialty pharmacy. A secondary objective was to compare PA timeliness (time to PA approval and time to first medication fill) between a community-based specialty pharmacy and a dermatology provider office.

PRACTICE DESCRIPTION

Realo Specialty Care is a community-based independent specialty pharmacy that provides comprehensive care to patients with complex and chronic conditions such as plaque psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa, and atopic dermatitis. Pharmacy services include PA assistance, comprehensive medication management, patient education, and adherence monitoring.

PRACTICE INNOVATION

Pharmacy dispensing system data were used to conduct a retrospective analysis of the effectiveness at resolving PA requests. PAs are traditionally completed by a provider's practice, and data are documented within the pharmacy system as a PA task.

EVALUATION METHODS

Data included PA tasks for dermatology prescriptions for patients aged 18 years or older between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2019. Initial receipt of the prescription, PA decision, and PA decision date were noted in the PA task and confirmed via fax documentation. The date of first fill was confirmed by prescription data.

RESULTS

The pharmacy completed 677 PA tasks with a mean time to PA decision of 1.9 days, whereas the provider's office averaged 20.9 days (P < 0.001). The pharmacy demonstrated a mean time to first fill of 6.6 days, whereas the provider's office averaged 16.2 days (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacies can effectively complete PAs to expedite the filling process for patients and increase medication access. Provider practices could benefit from delegating these tasks to a partnered pharmacy.

Inclusion in limited distribution drug network reduces time to dalfampridine access in patients with multiple sclerosis at a health-system specialty pharmacy

BACKGROUND: Dalfampridine improves walking speed in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but accessing specialty medications such as dalfampridine can be hindered by insurance restrictions, high costs, and limited distribution networks (LDNs) imposed by manufacturers. Some integrated health-systems specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) embed pharmacists in clinics and dispense medications from their internal pharmacies if included within the LDN. OBJECTIVE: To assess access to dalfampridine in patients at an HSSP before and after gaining admission to the LDN. METHODS: This study was conducted at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy (VSP), an integrated HSSP at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) with 2 clinical pharmacists embedded in the MS clinic. VSP gained access to the dalfampridine LDN on May 1, 2018, at which time the embedded pharmacists began to manage the comprehensive therapy initiation process. We performed a retrospective review of adult patients with MS who were prescribed dalfampridine from March 2010 to December 2018. Eligible prescriptions were new starts (no previous use) or restarts (after previous use and discontinuation). Prescriptions were classified as pre-VSP and post-VSP, which differentiates before and after VSP gained access to dispense dalfampridine. Study outcomes were insurance approval, initiation of therapy, and time from treatment decision to medication access. We used a proportional odds logistic regression model for time to medication access using the following covariates: pre-VSP versus post-VSP time period, insurance prior authorization (PA) denied versus approved/not needed, and baseline timed 25-foot walk. RESULTS: We included 262 patients and 290 prescriptions (260 pre-VSP and 30 post-VSP). In pre-VSP and post-VSP prescriptions, 97% were approved by insurance, and 93% of patients started therapy. Median time to medication access was 22 days (IQR = 11-45) for pre-VSP prescriptions and 1 day (IQR = 0-3) for post-VSP prescriptions. In the proportional odds logistic regression model, the odds of having a longer medication access time were significantly higher for pre-VSP prescriptions (OR = 83.219, P < 0.001) and prescriptions whose PA was initially denied (OR = 9.50, P < 0.001); 25-foot walk time was not significant (OR = 0.95, P = 0.277). CONCLUSIONS: After obtaining access to dispense dalfampridine, the time to access therapy was reduced, suggesting that LDNs delay patient access to therapy at HSSPs. DISCLOSURES: No funding was provided for this study. The authors have no conflicting interests to disclose. Preliminary results have been previously presented at the American Society of Health-Systems Pharmacy Midyear Meeting in December 2019, the Vanderbilt Health Systems Specialty Pharmacy Outcomes Research Summit in August 2020, and the National Association of Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting in September 2020.

A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model

BACKGROUND: Multiple barriers exist for appropriate use of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 enzyme inhibitors (PCSK9i) in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolemia despite standard therapies. Among these barriers, high payer rejection rates and inadequate prior authorization (PA) documentation by providers hinder optimal use of PCSK9i. OBJECTIVES: To (a) identify and discuss provider and payer discordances on barriers to authorization and use of PCSK9i based on clinical and real-world evidence and (b) align understanding and application of clinical, cost, safety, and efficacy data of PCSK9i. METHODS: Local groups of 3 payers and 3 providers met in 6 separate locations across the United States through a collaborative project of AMCP and PRIME Education. Responses to selected pre- and postmeeting survey questions measured changes in attitudes and beliefs regarding treatment barriers, lipid thresholds for considering PCSK9i therapy, and tactics for improving PA processes. Statistical analysis of inter- and intragroup changes in attitudes were performed by Cox proportional hazards test and Fisher's exact test for < 5 variables. RESULTS: The majority of providers and payers (67%-78%) agreed that high patient copayments and inadequate PA documentation were significant barriers to PCSK9i usage. However, payers and providers differed on beliefs that current evidence does not support PCSK9i cost-effectiveness (6% providers, 56% payers; P = 0.003) and that PA presents excessive administrative burden (72% providers, 44% payers; P = 0.09) Average increases pre- to postmeeting were noted in provider beliefs that properly documented PA forms expedite access to PCSK9i (22%-50% increase) and current authorization criteria accurately distinguish patients who benefit most from PCSK9i (6%-22%). Payers decreased in their belief that current authorization criteria accurately distinguish benefiting patients (72%-50%). Providers and payers increased in their belief that PCSK9i are cost-effective (44%-61% and 28%-50%, respectively) and were more willing to consider PCSK9i at the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol threshold of > 70 mg/dL for patients with ASCVD (78%-83% and 44%-67%, respectively) or FH (22%-39% and 22%-33%). Payers were more agreeable to less stringent PA requirements for patients with FH (33%-72%, P = 0.019) and need for standardized PA requirements (50%-83%, P = 0.034); these considerations remained high (89%) among providers after the meeting. Most participants supported educational programs for patient treatment adherence (83%) and physician/staff PA processes (83%-94%). CONCLUSIONS: Provider and payer representatives in 6 distinct geographic locations provided recommendations to improve quality of care in patients eligible for PCSK9i. Participants also provided tactical recommendations for streamlining PA documentation processes and improving awareness of PCSK9i cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy. The majority of participants supported development of universal, standardized patient eligibility criteria and PA forms. DISCLOSURES: The study reported in this article was part of a continuing education program funded by an independent educational grant awarded by Sanofi US and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals to PRIME Education. The grantor had no role in the study design, execution, analysis, or reporting. AMCP received grant funding from PRIME to assist in the study, as well as in writing the manuscript. McCormick, Bhatt, Bays, Taub, Caldwell, Guerin, Steinhoff, and Ahmad received an honorarium from PRIME for serving as faculty for the continuing education program. McCormick, Bhatt, Bays, Taub, Caldwell, Guerin, Steinhoff, and Ahmad were involved as participants in the study. Bhatt discloses the following relationships: Advisory board: Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Level Ex, Medscape Cardiology, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences; Board of directors: Boston VA Research Institute, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, TobeSoft; Chair: American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Data monitoring committees: Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo), Population Health Research Institute; Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Vice chair, ACC Accreditation Committee), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today's Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME steering committees); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Research funding: Abbott, Afimmune, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Synaptic, The Medicines Company; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Cardiovascular Intervention: A Companion to Braunwald's Heart Disease); Site co-investigator: Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Svelte; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded research: FlowCo, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Takeda. Bays' research site has received research grants from 89Bio, Acasti, Akcea, Allergan, Alon Medtech/Epitomee, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Axsome, Boehringer Ingelheim, Civi, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Evidera, Gan and Lee, Home Access, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Lexicon, Matinas, Merck, Metavant, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Selecta, TIMI, and Urovant. Bays has served as a consultant/advisor for 89Bio, Amarin, Esperion, Matinas, and Gelesis, and speaker for Esperion. McCormick, Caldwell, Guerin, Ahmad, Singh, Moreo, Carter, Heggen, and Sapir have nothing to disclose.

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition in cardiovascular disease: current status and future perspectives

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) targets the degradation of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors; it has been proved that its inhibition improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Herein, we review the current status of PCSK9 inhibitors in clinical practice and the future scope of PCSK9 inhibition. The results of two recent large clinical trials reveal that two PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies evolocumab and alirocumab reduce the risk of a cardiovascular event on top of background statin therapy in patients with stable ASCVD and those with recent acute coronary syndrome, respectively. However, there are several ongoing concerns regarding the efficacy in reducing mortality, cost-effectiveness, and long-term safety of extremely low LDL cholesterol levels with PCSK9 inhibition. The results of ongoing cardiovascular outcomes trials with PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies for primary prevention and with small interfering RNA to PCSK9 for secondary prevention may help to shape the use of this new therapeutic class.

An Integrated Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Model for Coordinating Transitions of Care: Specialty Medication Challenges and Specialty Pharmacist Opportunities

Adherence and persistence to specialty medications are necessary to achieve successful outcomes of costly therapies. The increasing use of specialty medications has exposed several unique barriers to certain specialty treatments' continuation. Integrated specialty pharmacy teams facilitate transitions in sites of care, between different provider types, among prescribed specialty medications, and during financial coverage changes. We review obstacles encountered within these types of transitions and the role of the specialty pharmacist in overcoming these obstacles. Case examples for each type of specialty transition provide insight into the unique complexities faced by patients, and shed light on pharmacists' vital role in patient care. This insightful and real-world experience is needed to facilitate best practices in specialty care, particularly in the growing number of health-system specialty pharmacies.

Future role of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors in preventive cardiology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies to target proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) represents a novel approach to the management of hypercholesteremia and prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. We review the most recent literature relevant to PCSK9 inhibition with emphasis on how recent results and ongoing trials have and will continue to shape the use of this new therapeutic class in preventive cardiology.

RECENT FINDINGS

PCSK9 inhibitors reduce plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations but a mechanistic understanding remains elusive. Evaluation of evolocumab for use in patients without prior myocardial infarction or stroke is underway (NCT03872401). Concerns regarding the cost-effectiveness of PCSK9 inhibitors have continued to thwart access to these drugs, though innovative models of care delivery and price reductions have improved this situation. Inclisiran, a small interfering ribonucleic acid (siRNA), reduces translation of PCSK9 and demonstrates more durable reductions in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C). It is currently evaluated in the context of a phase III cardiovascular outcome trial in patients with established vascular disease (NCT03705234).

SUMMARY

The current scope of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy in preventive cardiology is limited to patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and/or established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Future cardiovascular outcome trial results with PCSK9 blocking antibodies in primary prevention and with siRNA to PCSK9 in secondary prevention, improved understanding of the drivers of lipoprotein(a) reduction with PCSK9 inhibition, and cost-effectiveness will determine the future role of this therapeutic class.