Real-World Treatment Patterns, Clinical Outcomes, and Symptom Burden in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis Prescribed Ixekizumab in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe the real-world characteristics and clinical status of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) currently prescribed ixekizumab.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi PsA Plus Disease Specific Programme (DSP), a cross-sectional survey conducted in the United States between September 2021 and March 2022. Rheumatologists provided data for their next five consulting patients currently receiving ixekizumab, including demographic and clinical characteristics, disease severity, treatment history, reasons for treatment choice, satisfaction with current treatment, and current and historic symptom burden. Patients voluntarily completed questionnaires, providing perceptional data on symptom burden and satisfaction with current treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, 68 rheumatologists provided data on 275 patients with PsA, 90 of whom completed the voluntary questionnaire. Patients had been prescribed ixekizumab for a mean of 11.7 (SD 10.6) months. Clinical characteristics, disease severity, and symptom burden of patients with PsA improved significantly from ixekizumab initiation to the most recent consultation, including symptom burden, tender and swollen joint counts, and body surface area affected by psoriasis (all P < 0.001). Both rheumatologists and patients were satisfied with ixekizumab treatment and reported improvements in pain and fatigue. Improvements were noted after more than three months of ixekizumab treatment duration and regardless of whether the patients had prior exposure to an advanced therapy or were treatment naïve.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that ixekizumab was efficacious in the treatment of PsA in real-world clinical practice, complementing efficacy data from randomized controlled clinical trials. The results of this study may assist rheumatologists and their patients in making informed treatment choices.

Patterns of Lipid Lowering Therapy Use Among Older Adults in a Managed Care Advantage Plan in the United States

Background: The prevalence of cardiovascular events is increasing. There are many new lipids lowering therapies available in recent years. Increased evidence through literature and guidelines suggests that the use of lipid lowering therapy (LLT) benefits patients who are at risk for cardiovascular events. Objective: The objective of this study was to describe the current LLT use as well as patterns of treatment modification among adults ≥ 65 years. Methods: A retrospective analysis of administrative claims data between January 2016 and May 2018 was conducted. Patients with a LLT refill and continuous enrollment during 1-year prior and 1-year follow-up were identified. The treatment episodes captured were interruption of therapy, intensity changes, dose changes, treatment augmentation, switching, and discontinuation. An analysis of treatment patterns among patients ≥75 years was also performed. Results: The study included 14,360 patients with a LLT of which 99% of patients were on statins as monotherapy or combination. Overall non-statin therapy use either as monotherapy or combination was 2.1%. There were significant differences among new initiators and existing users of therapy. Among prevalent users 57.4% had no changes in the follow-up period, 13.6% interrupted therapy, and 6.6% discontinued. Among new users, 47.9% patients had interrupted therapy, 25% had no changes, and 21.9% discontinued therapy. Conclusion: Most patients were on monotherapy and statins with low non-statin use. The new users among them were more likely to discontinue and interrupt therapy, highlighting the limitations and issues that older patients face that need to increase adherence.

Evaluating the efficacy of biologics with and without methotrexate in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

An important consideration in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is whether the addition of methotrexate (MTX) to biologics has greater efficacy than biologic monotherapy with respect to efficacy outcomes in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing biologics by treatment class with and without MTX for treatment of adults with active PsA.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) identified randomised, double-blinded, controlled trials, and a Bayesian NMA compared biologics with and without MTX by treatment class (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-23 inhibitors (IL-23i) and IL-17i). Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50% and 70% (ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70) improvement response.

RESULTS

The SLR initially identified 31 studies, of which 17 met feasibility criteria for the NMA by containing the 'without MTX' subgroup. For ACR20 efficacy (the most robust assessment examined), all active treatments were significantly better than placebo. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between biologic monotherapy (for all classes examined) and biologics in combination with MTX for ACR20/50. IL-17i were comparable to IL-23i, and IL-17i were significantly better than TNFi for ACR20. Although limited by fewer trials, TNFi, IL-23i and IL-17i were not statistically different for ACR50/70.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant use of MTX and biologics did not improve ACR efficacy outcomes versus biologic monotherapy. MTX does not appear to be necessary as a background therapy when biologics are used for the achievement of ACR20/50 responses in patients with PsA.

Treatment patterns in paediatric and adult patients with SLE: a retrospective claims database study in the USA

OBJECTIVE

To assess real-world treatment regimens and patterns in childhood-onset SLE (cSLE) and adult-onset SLE (aSLE) cohorts, including similarities in treatments, duration of use and adherence.

METHODS

This retrospective study utilised data from Merative L.P. MarketScan Research Databases (USA). Index date was the date of first SLE diagnosis (2010-2019). Patients aged <18 years (cSLE) and ≥18 years (aSLE) at index date with confirmed SLE diagnosis and ≥12 months continuous enrolment during pre-index and post-index periods were included. The cohorts were stratified based on the presence (existing) or absence (new) of pre-index SLE. Primary outcomes (post-index period) included treatment regimens (all patients), and adherence (proportion of days covered (PDC)) and discontinuation of therapies initiated within 90 days of diagnosis (new patients). Univariate comparisons between cSLE and aSLE cohorts were performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and χ² (or Fisher's exact) tests.

RESULTS

cSLE cohort included 1275 patients (mean age=14.1 years) and aSLE cohort included 66 326 patients (mean age=49.7 years). Antimalarials and glucocorticoids were commonly used among new (cSLE=64.4%/62.0%; aSLE=51.8%/49.7%) and existing (cSLE=68.6%/58.9%; aSLE=63.8%/51.3%) patients in both cohorts. Median oral glucocorticoid dose (prednisone equivalent) was higher in cSLE vs aSLE (new=22.1 vs 14.0 mg/day; existing=14.4 vs 12.3 mg/day; p<0.05). Mycophenolate mofetil use was higher in patients with cSLE vs aSLE (new=26.2% vs 5.8%; existing=37.6% vs 11.0%; p<0.0001). Compared with aSLE, more patients used combination therapies in cSLE (p<0.0001). Median PDC was higher in cSLE vs aSLE for antimalarials (0.9 vs 0.8; p<0.0001) and oral glucocorticoids (0.6 vs 0.3; p<0.0001). Treatment discontinuation was lower in cSLE vs aSLE for antimalarials (25.0% vs 33.1%; p<0.0001) and oral glucocorticoids (56.6% vs 71.2%; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Management of cSLE and aSLE includes the same medication classes; differences include more intensive use of therapy in cSLE, warranting the need for approved safe medications for cSLE.

Changes in musculoskeletal disease activity and patient-reported outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with ixekizumab: results from a real-world US cohort

Introduction

Ixekizumab has demonstrated efficacy in pivotal trials in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), both those naïve to prior biologic therapy and those with prior inadequate response or intolerance to biologics; however, minimal information is currently available on the effectiveness of ixekizumab in routine clinical practice. The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical effectiveness of ixekizumab for the treatment of PsA over 6- and 12-month follow-up periods in a real-world setting.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients who initiated treatment with ixekizumab from the OM1 PremiOM^TM PsA dataset, a dataset of over 50,000 patients with claims and electronic medical record (EMR) data. Changes in musculoskeletal outcomes, such as tender and swollen joint count and patient-reported pain, as well as physician and patient global assessment, as measured using the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) were summarized at 6 and 12 months. The RAPID3, CDAI score, and their individual components were assessed in multivariable regressions adjusting for age, sex, and baseline value. The results were stratified by biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) status (naïve vs. experienced) and monotherapy status (monotherapy vs. combination therapy with conventional synthetic DMARDs). Changes in a 3-item composite score derived from a physician global assessment, patient global assessment, and patient-reported pain score were summarized.

Results

Among the 1,812 patients identified receiving ixekizumab, 84% had prior bDMARD treatment and 82% were monotherapy users. All outcomes improved at 6 and 12 months. For RAPID3, the mean (SD) change at 6 and 12 months was -1.2 (5.5) and -1.2 (5.9), respectively. Patients overall, bDMARD experienced, and monotherapy patients achieved statistically significant mean change in CDAI and all components from baseline to 6 and 12 months in adjusted analyses. Patients experienced an improvement in the 3-item composite score at both time points.

Conclusion

Treatment with ixekizumab was associated with improvements in musculoskeletal disease activity and PROs as assessed by several outcome measures. Future research should assess ixekizumab's clinical effectiveness in the real world across all PsA domains using PsA-specific endpoints.

Real-world treatment patterns of immunosuppressants in Adults with systemic lupus erythematosus: A claims database analysis in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To explore initiation, persistence, and adherence to second^-line prescribed treatments for SLE, specifically regarding the immunosuppressants azathioprine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate (conventional DMARDs), and belimumab (a biologic).

METHODS

Clinical and insurance records were obtained for 801 patients with SLE who initiated treatment with azathioprine, belimumab, methotrexate, or mycophenolate between July 2015 and June 2019. The date of initiation defined the index date, with a 6-month pre-index and 12-month post-index period. Patient characteristics (age, gender, race, sex, ethnicity, geographic region of the US, diagnosing specialty, and type of insurance) and treatment patterns were tabulated overall and by each index medication. Logistic regression was used to model predictors of persistence for the entire sample and for each treatment cohort.

FINDINGS

Approximately one-third of patients initiated methotrexate (n = 282, 35.2%) or mycophenolate (n = 258, 32.2%), with the remaining receiving azathioprine (n = 173, 21.6%) or belimumab (n = 88, 11.0%). 30% of patients were persistent with their index immunosuppressant therapy over the 12-month follow-up. The most common non-persistent treatment pattern was discontinuation which occurred in 55% of patients and was highest in the mycophenolate (58%) and lowest in the azathioprine (47%) groups. In total, 17% of patients switched to a different immunosuppressant, which was highest for the belimumab (25%) group. The average time to discontinuation was over 3 months and average time to switch was about 5 months, with patients receiving azathioprine tending to have shorter and belimumab having longer times to discontinuation or switch.Predictors of persistence were limited. Patients under the care of rheumatologists versus primary care and having higher co-morbidity assessed by CCI were associated with non-persistence for the overall sample. Race, number of SLE-related medications, census region, sex, and age were not found to be significantly related to non-persistence of immunosuppressants in this study.

Real-world treatment patterns and use of adjunctive pain and anti-inflammatory medications among patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with IL-17A inhibitors in the United States

BACKGROUND: Much of the current research on treatment patterns and use of adjunctive pain and anti-inflammatory medications among patients living with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) predates the approval and uptake of IL (interleukin)-17A inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: To compare real-world treatment patterns and use of adjunctive pain and antiinflammatory medications between patients with PsA initiating the IL-17A inhibitors, ixekizumab and secukinumab, in a US-managed care population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Patients with a PsA diagnosis who initiated ixekizumab or secukinumab treatment between December 1, 2017, and November 30, 2019, were identified. Two cohorts were created based on which of the 2 medications was initiated (index date), and patients with prior use of either drug were excluded, as were patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Patients had to be continuously enrolled in the health plan for 6 months prior to (baseline) and 12 months after the index date (post-index). Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to minimize confounding from baseline demographic and clinical differences between cohorts. Treatment patterns (dosing, persistence, discontinuation, and switching) and use of adjunctive pain/anti-inflammatory medications were assessed and compared between weighted cohorts using chi-square and t-tests. RESULTS: In total, 407 patients were identified in the ixekizumab cohort (mean age 51.6 years; 54% female) and 1,508 patients were identified in the secukinumab cohort (mean age 50.1 years; 59% female). Prior to weighting, presence of a psoriasis diagnosis code (ixekizumab: 60% vs secukinumab: 45%; standardized difference [std diff] = -0.30), specialty of the index prescriber (std diff = 0.38), and mean number of prior advanced therapies (2.0 vs 1.5; std diff = -0.33) were different between cohorts. Cohorts were well balanced after weighting. The majority of secukinumab patients (71%) received an index dose of 300 mg. Rates of persistence (ixekizumab: 40% vs secukinumab: 43%; P = 0.411) and switching (25% vs 20%; P = 0.072) were not statistically different between cohorts. Use of new adjunctive pain and anti-inflammatory medications was not statistically different between cohorts either (ixekizumab: 63% vs secukinumab: 58%; P = 0.187). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world treatment patterns and use of adjunctive pain and anti-inflammatory medications were similar in patients with PsA initiating ixekizumab and secukinumab in this US-managed care population. Further research examining reasons for discontinuation, switching, and use of adjunctive medications may help inform treatment decisions for patients living with PsA. DISCLOSURES: Ms Pizzicato, Ms Ketkar, and Dr Grabner are employees of HealthCore, Inc, which received funding from Eli Lilly and Company for the conduct of the study on which this manuscript is based. Ms Pepe was an employee of HealthCore, Inc., during the time the study was conducted. Dr Grabner is a shareholder of Elevance Health (legacy Anthem, Inc.). Dr Vadhariya, Dr Birt, and Ms Bolce are employees of Eli Lilly and Company, the manufacturer of ixekizumab (Taltz). Dr Birt and Ms Bolce are shareholders of Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Walsh is a paid consultant to Eli Lilly and Company and Novartis, the manufacturers of ixekizumab (Taltz) and secukinumab (Cosentyx), respectively. Additionally, Dr Walsh is a paid consultant for Pfizer, Janssen, AbbVie, and UCB and has contracts with Pfizer, AbbVie, and Merck.

POS0743 CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND BURDEN AMONG PATIENTS WITH SLE AND MUSCULOSKELETAL ORGAN INVOLVEMENT: RESULTS FROM A REAL-WORLD STUDY IN THE US

Background

Limited information exists concerning the clinical burden and unmet need of musculoskeletal (MSK) organ involvement among patients with SLE in clinical practice.

Objectives

To examine demographics, clinical status, treatment patterns, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients with SLE in clinical practices and assess the impact of MSK organ involvement.

Methods

Data were drawn from the Adelphi Real World Lupus IV (2021) Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of 79 US physicians and their patients with SLE. Physicians completed questionnaires regarding patient demographics, clinical status, and treatment. The same patients were invited to complete questionnaires containing the EuroQoL 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Subscale (FACIT-Fatigue) and Work Productivity & Activity Impairment questionnaire (WPAI) PRO tools.

Physicians stated their patients’ organ involvement at the time of data collection (current), in the categories of musculoskeletal, mucocutaneous, renal, cardiorespiratory, constitutional, haematologic, ophthalmologic, gastrointestinal, respiratory, or other.

Two mutually exclusive patient groups were analysed:

A.MSK – Current physician assessed musculoskeletal organ involvement (+/- other organ/tissue involvement).

B.Non-MSK – No current musculoskeletal organ involvement as assessed by the physician

Bivariate analysis was conducted for numeric variables using t-tests; binary categorical variables using a Fisher’s exact test; ordinal categorical variables using a Mann-Whitney test; and other categorical variables were compared using a chi-squared test.

Results

A total of 595 patients were included in this analysis: 64.7% MSK and 35.3% non-MSK. Mean[SD] patient age was 45.2[14.3] years, 83.2% were female, 53.3% were White/Caucasian, 27.9% were African American, and mean[SD] time diagnosed with any SLE was 5.3[6.2] years.

Point-in-time assessment of clinical status, treatment patterns and patient-reported outcomes, revealed that those with MSK organ involvement assessed by their rheumatologist had higher overall SLE disease severity, more flares in the last 12 months, and slightly worse quality of life scores and work impairment.

Table 1.

Point-in-time clinical status, treatment patterns and PROs among patients with SLE MSK organ involvement

TotalMSKNon-MSKp value(n=595)(n=385)(n=210)Physician-Reported Patient Clinical Status & Treatment HistoryCurrent SLE severity, n(%)Mild405 (68.1)243 (63.1)162 (77.1)<0.001Moderate169 (28.4)128 (33.3)41 (19.2)Severe21 (3.5)14 (3.6)7 (3.3)Current joint symptoms, n(%)Joint tenderness251 (42.2)210 (54.6)41 (19.5)<0.001Joint stiffness255 (42.9)212 (55.1)43 (20.5)<0.001Joint swelling135 (22.7)111 (28.8)24 (11.4)<0.001Mean [SD] Flares in the last 12 months1.6 [1.7]1.7 [1.8]1.2 [1.3]0.015Currently prescribed, n(%)Belimumab113 (19.0)79 (20.5)34 (16.2)0.198Immunosuppressant164 (27.6)105 (27.3)59 (28.1)0.830Corticosteroids333 (56.0)228 (59.2)105 (50.0)0.030Antimalarials429 (72.1)268 (69.6)161 (76.7))0.067Mean [SD] years on current treatment2.9 [3.6]2.5 [3.0]3.6 [4.4]<0.001Patient-Reported OutcomesMean [SD] EQ5D-5L Utility score (0= death to 1= full health)0.79 [0.20]0.76 [0.22]0.85 [0.16]0.002Mean [SD] FACIT-Fatigue score (0 worst fatigue to-52= no fatigue)32.4 [12.0]31.0 [11.5]35.4 [12.6]0.005Mean [SD] WPAI, overall work impairment score(0= no impact to 100= completely impacted)29.0 [21.0]30.5 [18.6]25.9 [25.2]0.223

Conclusion

In this large sample of patients with SLE followed in clinical practices in the U.S., compared to those with little or no rheumatologist assessed MSK involvement, those with MSK involvement, had lower quality of life, with higher impact on their work productivity. These results highlight the heterogeneity of SLE and the impact of major MSK manifestations on quality of life in SLE.

References

N/A

Disclosure of Interests

Aisha Vadhariya Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Julie Birt Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Jianmin Wu Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Kirstin Griffing Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Fiona Bailey: None declared, James Hetherington: None declared, Elke Rottier: None declared, Sophie Barlow: None declared, Karen Costenbader Consultant of: Lilly, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Amgen, Glaxo Smith Kline, Grant/research support from: Exagen, Gilead, Merck

AB0554 CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND BURDEN AMONG PATIENTS WITH SLE STRATIFIED BY SLEDAI DERIVED SEVERITY: RESULTS FROM A REAL-WORLD STUDY IN THE US

Background

Data are limited concerning the distribution of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) scores among patients with SLE in clinical practice and the characteristics of patients with specific SLEDAI scores.

Objectives

To investigate SLE patient demographics, clinical status, treatment patterns, and patient reported outcomes (PROs), overall and stratified by SLEDAI score.

Methods

Data were drawn from the Adelphi Real World Lupus IV (2021) Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of 79 US rheumatologists and patients with SLE. Rheumatologists completed questionnaires regarding patient demographics, clinical status, and treatment. The same patients were invited to complete questionnaires containing the EuroQoL 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Subscale (FACIT-Fatigue) and Work Productivity & Activity Impairment questionnaire (WPAI) Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) tools.

Physicians completed 24 questions based on the SLEDAI-2K questionnaire regarding their patients’ current clinical manifestations, from which a SLEDAI score was derived1. Patients were grouped based on their score: SLEDAI=0 (none), SLEDAI=1-6 (mild), SLEDAI=7-12 (moderate), and SLEDAI>12 (severe)2.

Data from patients without rheumatologist-perceived renal organ involvement and ≥ 1 year of SLE duration were included for analysis using bivariate tests.

Results

A total of 273 patients were included in this analysis. Mean [SD] patient age was 47.0[14.2] years, 83.9% were female, 57.1% were White/Caucasian, and 24.9% were African American.

Table 1.

Point-in-time clinical status, treatment patterns and PROs among patients with SLE stratified by SLEDAI score

Table 1.Total Sample (n=273)SLEDAI=0 (n=60, 22%)SLEDAI=1-6 (n=79, 28.9%)SLEDAI=7-12 (n=70, 25.6%)SLEDAI>12 (n=64, 23.4%)p valuePhysician-Reported Clinical Status and Treatment HistoryCurrent SLE severity, n(%)Mild221 (81.0)51 (85.0)70 (88.6)53 (75.7)47 (73.4)0.057Moderate49 (18.0)9 (15.0)9 (11.4)16 (22.9)15 (23.4)Severe3 (1.1)0 (0.0)0 (0.0)1 (1.4)2 (3.1)Current joint symptoms, n(%)Joint tenderness109 (39.9)24 (40.0)27 (34.2)28 (40.0)30 (46.9)0.498Joint stiffness121 (44.3)22 (36.7)33 (41.8)37 (52.9)29 (45.3)0.293Joint swelling60 (22.0)17 (28.3)13 (16.5)19 (27.1)11 (17.2)0.190Mean [SD] Flares in the last 12 months1.6 [1.5]1.3 [1.2]1.7 [1.7]1.5 [1.3]1.8 [1.5]0.550Currently prescribed, n(%)Belimumab58 (21.3)14 (23.3)18 (12.9)8 (10.1)15 (21.4)0.011Immunosuppressants48 (17.6)7 (11.7)26 (18.6)10 (12.7)13 (18.6)0.052Corticosteroids138 (50.6)35 (58.3)62 (44.3)29 (36.7)32 (45.7)0.003Antimalarials206 (75.5)28 (46.7)108 (77.1)64 (81.0)59 (84.3)<0.001Patient-Reported OutcomesMean [SD] EQ5D-5L Utility score (0=death to 1= full health)0.79 [0.19]0.83 [0.12]0.82 [0.21]0.79 [0.14]0.69 [0.25]0.024Mean [SD] FACIT-Fatigue score (0=worst fatigue to 52= no fatigue)32.7 [12.2]36.8 [8.7]36.1 [12.5]29.1 [9.8]26.4 [14.3]<0.001Mean [SD] WPAI overall (0= no impact to 100= completely impacted)26.8 [21.2]25.2 [15.8]19.5 [23.6]35.7 [20.2]31.9 [26.7]0.131

49% of SLE patients were categorized as SLEDAI 7-12 or >12 (moderate or severe).

Among the SLEDAI 7-12 (moderate) patients, 75.7% were subjectively categorized by their physician as having mild SLE. Of the SLEDAI >12 patients (severe), 73.4% were categorized as having mild SLE.

Joints symptoms and flaring in the last 12 months were not significantly different across SLEDAI groups.

Patients with greater SLEDAI reported lower EQ5D and greater FACIT-Fatigue scores. There was no statistical difference in WPAI between the SLEDAI groups.

Conclusion

A disconnect between point-in-time SLEDAI and physician-perceived severity exists. Patients with SLE, irrespective of SLEDAI, had high prevalence of joint symptoms, but higher SLEDAI impacted quality of life.

References

[1]Gladman D et al., Journal of Rheumatology, 2002.

[2]Fanouriakis A et al., Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2019.

Disclosure of Interests

Aisha Vadhariya Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Julie Birt Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Jianmin Wu Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Kirstin Griffing Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Fiona Bailey: None declared, James Hetherington: None declared, Elke Rottier: None declared, Sophie Barlow: None declared, Karen Costenbader Consultant of: Lilly, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Amgen, Glaxo Smith Kline, Grant/research support from: Exagen, Gilead, Merck

POS1060 CHANGES IN DISEASE ACTIVITY AND PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS TREATED WITH IXEKIZUMAB IN A REAL-WORLD US COHORT

Background

Ixekizumab (IXE), an IL-17A inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials1-3 but real-world effectiveness (RWE) data are limited.4

Objectives

To describe changes in disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6 and 12 months follow-up among psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients initiating IXE in a routine clinical setting.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients from the OM1 PsA Registry (OM1, Boston, MA), a linked electronic medical record and administrative claims dataset with over 50,000 patients. Eligible patients had ≥1 prescription for IXE (first = index), were ≥18 years old at index, had ≥1 diagnosis code for PsA in the 12 months before or on index, and had ≥12 months of baseline and ≥6 months of follow-up data as of June 2021. For patients with baseline and follow-up measures available, changes in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), PROs, and other clinical outcomes from baseline to 6 and 12 months were described. For patients on IXE monotherapy, change in CDAI score from baseline to 6 and 12 months was assessed using mixed effects linear models adjusted for age, sex, and baseline CDAI score.

Results

The study population included 1,812 patients with a mean age of 53.7 years (Table 1). Psoriasis was present in 82% and enthesitis in 28%. Over 60% of patients were obese, and the mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 1.3. Most patients (84%) had prior treatment with a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) and 40% with a targeted synthetic DMARD (tsDMARD). The mean number of bDMARDs and tsDMARDs used during all available prior history was 2.3 and 1.1, respectively. The most common prior bDMARDs were secukinumab (n=428, 24%) and adalimumab (n=245, 14%).

Table 1.

Demographic and Clinical Characteristics by Therapy Status

All Patients(N=1,812)Monotherapy(N=1,485)Combination Therapy(N=327)Age (years)Mean (s.d.)53.7 (12.2)53.9 (12.3)52.9 (11.7)Median (Q1-Q3)55 (46-62)55 (46-62)54 (45-61)SexFemale1,108 (61.1%)909 (61.2%)199 (60.9%)Male704 (38.9%)576 (38.8%)128 (39.1%)Charlson Comorbidity IndexMean (s.d.)1.3 (1.6)1.3 (1.6)1.5 (1.7)Median (Q1-Q3)1 (0-2)1 (0-2)1 (0-2)BMIUnderweight: <18.510 (0.6%)10 (0.7%)0 (0.0%)Normal weight: 18.5-24.9210 (12.2%)172 (12.2%)38 (12.1%)Overweight: 25-29.9455 (26.5%)379 (27.0%)76 (24.2%)Obese: >= 301,045 (60.8%)845 (60.1%)200 (63.7%)Missing927913Domains of PsA: PsoriasisYes1,490 (82.2%)1,222 (82.3%)268 (82.0%)No322 (17.8%)263 (17.7%)59 (18.0%)Domains of PsA: EnthesitisYes510 (28.1%)409 (27.5%)101 (30.9%)No1,302 (71.9%)1,076 (72.5%)226 (69.1%)

Of patients with a baseline CDAI score, 61% had moderate or severe disease activity. For all patients, CDAI scores improved (decreased) by an average of 3.4 and 3.7 points at 6 and 12 months, respectively, from a baseline mean of 15.4. All disease activity measures and PROs improved from baseline to 6 and 12 months (Figure 1). In patients persistent with IXE, 35.3% and 33.7% were in CDAI remission or low disease activity at 6 and 12 months after initiation, respectively. For IXE monotherapy users (82% of patients), at baseline, patients had a mean CDAI of 14.3 (n=131) and 15.1 (n=105) for the 6 and 12 month analyses, respectively. Adjusted mean changes in CDAI from baseline to 6 months (-3.6 points, p < 0.0001) and 12 months (-4.9 points, p < 0.0001) were statistically significant.

Conclusion

In this cohort of PsA patients with multiple prior b/tsDMARD failures, improvements in disease activity and PROs were observed at 6 and 12 months after initiating treatment with IXE. Improvements were observed in patients overall and in the monotherapy subgroup. More real-world research on IXE and other bDMARDs are important to understand the effect of treatment choices on clinical and PROs in both bDMARD-naive and experienced PsA patients.

References

[1]Mease PJ. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2017;76(1):79-87

[2]Nash P. Lancet. 2017;389(10086):2317-2327

[3]Mease PJ. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2020;79(1):123-131

[4]Berman J. Biologics. 2021 Nov 18;15:463-470

Disclosure of Interests

Julie Birt Shareholder of: Shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Employee of Eli Lilly and Company, William Tillett Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis,, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, UCB, Cristi Cavanaugh: None declared, Yoojin Jung: None declared, Aisha Vadhariya Shareholder of: Shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Employee of Eli Lilly and Company, Sarah Ross Shareholder of: Shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Employee of Eli Lilly and Company, Jess Paulus: None declared, Aubrey Trevelin Sprabery Shareholder of: Shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Employee of Eli Lilly and Company, Ennio Lubrano: None declared

Outcomes of "Real-World" Insulin Strategies in the Management of Hospital Hyperglycemia

Context

Guidelines recommend scheduled long-acting basal and short-acting bolus insulin several times daily to manage inpatient hyperglycemia. In the “real world,” insulin therapy is complicated, with limited data on the comparative effectiveness of different insulin strategies.

Objective

This work aimed to evaluate the association of different insulin strategies with glucose control and hospital outcomes after adjustment for patient and physician factors that influence choice of therapy.

Methods

This retrospective, observational study took place at an academic hospital. Participants included noncritically ill hospitalized medical/surgical patients (n = 4558) receiving subcutaneous insulin for 75% or longer during admission. Insulin therapy was grouped into 3 strategies within the first 48 hours: basal bolus (BB: scheduled long and short/rapid n = 2358), sliding scale (SS: short/rapid acting n = 1855), or basal only (BO: long only: n = 345). Main outcome measures included glucose control: hypoglycemic days, hyperglycemic days, euglycemic days, mean glucose; and hospitalization: in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), and readmissions.

Results

Initial therapy with BB was associated with more hypoglycemic (2.40; CI, 2.04 to 2.82) (P < .001) and fewer euglycemic days (0.90; CI, 0.85 to 0.97) (P = .003) than SS, whereas BO was associated with fewer hyperglycemic days (0.70; CI, 0.62 to 0.79) (P < .001), lower mean glucose (–18.03; CI, –22.46 to –12.61) (P < .001), and more euglycemic days (1.22; CI, 1.09 to 1.37) (P < .001) compared to SS. No difference in mortality, LOS, and readmissions was found. However, decreased LOS was observed in the BB subgroup with a medical diagnostic related group (0.93; CI, 0.89 to 0.97) (P < .001).

Conclusion

BO had a more favorable hyperglycemia profile than SS. BB, on the other hand, showed worse glycemic control as compared to SS. In the real-world hospital, BO may be a simpler and more effective insulin strategy.

Impact of a motivational interviewing intervention targeting statins on adherence to concurrent hypertension or diabetes medications

OBJECTIVE

This study explored if a motivational interviewing intervention customized for statins impacted adherence to concomitantly used antidiabetic/antihypertensive medications.

METHODS

The intervention was conducted among patients with a history of suboptimal adherence to statins and included 152 patients in intervention and 304 controls. This retrospective study design identified patients with claims for statins and either antidiabetic/antihypertensive medications. The outcome variable was adherence, measured as proportion of days covered ≥ 0.80, to antidiabetic/antihypertensive medications. Multivariable linear and logistic regression evaluated the effect of intervention on adherence to antidiabetic/antihypertensive medications during the 6 months post-intervention.

RESULTS

The antidiabetic group had 53 intervention patients and 102 controls. The antihypertensive group had 80 intervention patients and 159 controls. There was no significant improvement in adherence for antidiabetic/antihypertensive medications following the intervention. Adherence at baseline was a significant predictor of adherence post-intervention in the antidiabetic (OR = 6.5;P < 0.0001) and antihypertensive (OR = 4.1; P = 0.0001 & β = 0.09; P = 0.008) users. Physician specialty (OR = 3.902; P = 0.01& β = 0.09; P = 0.015) among antidiabetic users and age >70 years (OR = 2.148; P = 0.025) among antihypertensive users were predictors of adherence.

CONCLUSION

The intervention targeting statin did not significantly improve antihypertensive/antidiabetic adherence.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Targeted interventions tailored to patient past adherence and specific medications should be explored.

Evaluating perceptions of social determinants of health and Part D star performance of Medicare Advantage-contracted primary care providers serving a South Texas market

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic factors can have a significant impact on a patient's health status and could be responsible for as much as 70%-80% of a patient's overall health. These factors, called the social determinants of health (SDoH), define a patient's day-to-day experiences. While the influence of such factors is well recognized, who ultimately is responsible for addressing SDoH in health care remains unclear. Physicians and other clinicians are suitably placed to assess SDoH factors that can impact clinical decision making. Understanding Medicare Advantage (MA)-contracted primary care provider (PCP) SDoH perceptions has yet to be fully explored. OBJECTIVES: To (a) understand MA-contracted PCP perceptions of SDoH and (b) investigate correlations between PCP perceptions and their CMS Part D star performances, as well as their hospital admissions and emergency room admissions. METHODS: Survey data were collected from MA-contracted PCPs serving a South Texas market during 2019. An 8-item survey consisting of short answer, ranking, and multiple-choice questions was deployed at attendance-mandatory provider meetings from August to October. Analyses were conducted to understand the providers' SDoH perceptions. PCP responses were first summarized as frequencies and percentages. Baseline descriptive characteristics of the providers were compared by Medicare star ratings using chi-square tests (for categorical variables) and t-tests (for continuous variables). Group differences in physician beliefs on how SDoH affects patients' overall health (question 1), as well as provider beliefs regarding how SDoH affects patients' medication adherence practices (question 2), were assessed using chi-square and t-tests. Associations of provider SDoH perceptions with hospital admissions and emergency room admissions were also assessed. A Fischer's chi-square test was used to examine associations between how PCPs answered the question regarding lack of consistent transportation (question 3) and emergency room admissions. The relationships between PCP perceptions of whose job it is to address SDoH (question 7) and hospital admissions were also evaluated. RESULTS: The response rate for returned surveys was 89%. Analysis revealed that the top 3 barriers were financial insecurity (24.87%), low health literacy (18.65%), and social isolation (15.03%). However, about 36% of PCPs felt they should be the primary addressor of SDoH. There was a significant association between years of practice and CMS Part D star ratings (P = 0.005). A significant association between responses in belief towards patients' overall health and CMS Part D star ratings was examined (P = 0.047). There was a statistically significant difference in mean hospital admissions with PCP perception of who should address SDOH (P = 0.03). Emergency room admissions was significantly associated with perceptions regarding lack of consistent transportation (P = 0.04). No differences with star ratings were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Previous literature recognize safety and food insecurity as key SDoH barriers. However, they were not among the top SDoH barriers in our survey. Future research should examine patient perceptions of SDoH in this population to identify ways providers can better serve their patients. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was provided by CareAllies, a Cigna business. Statistical analysis was completed in partnership with the University of Houston. Payne, Esse, Qian, Serna, Villarreal, and Becho-Dominguez are employees of CareAllies. Mohan and Abughosh are employed by the University of Houston College of Pharmacy. Abughosh reports grants from Valeant and Regeneron/Sanofi, unrelated to this work. Vadhariya has nothing to disclose. This research was presented virtually at the AMCP Pharmacist Virtual Learning Days event, April 2020, as well as the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Virtual Poster Symposium, May 26-27, 2020.

Patient-reported barriers to statin adherence: Excerpts from a motivational interviewing intervention in older adults

OBJECTIVE

Despite a known benefit in the reduction of cardiovascular risk, adherence to statins remains suboptimal. A qualitative analysis was conducted within an intervention that identified trajectories of statin adherence in patients and used motivational interviewing (MoI) to improve adherence. The objective of this qualitative study was to evaluate transcripts of an MoI telephonic intervention to identify potential, past, and current barriers to statin adherence and barriers specific to distinct adherence trajectories.

METHODS

The MoI intervention was customized by past 1-year adherence trajectories (rapid discontinuation, gradual decline, and gaps in adherence). Two authors independently extracted and documented barriers from phone transcripts. Themes were derived from literature a priori and by cataloging recurring themes from the transcripts.

RESULTS

The transcripts of calls made to 157 patients were reviewed of which 25.2% did not communicate a specific adherence barrier despite falling into a low-adherence trajectory when examining refill data. The most commonly reported barriers to statin adherence included adverse effects (40.1%), forgetfulness (30.0%), and lack of skills or knowledge pertaining to statins (25%). More patients in the rapid discontinuation group perceived medication as unnecessary, whereas more patients in the gaps in adherence group reported a communication barrier with their health care provider. Several barriers among patients who fell into low-adherence trajectories were reported. Some patients did not report any barriers, which may have indicated denial. MoI phone calls were useful in providing knowledge, clarifying medication regimens, and reinforcing the need to take statins.

CONCLUSION

This study identified patient-reported barriers to statin adherence elicited during an MoI telephonic intervention conducted by student pharmacists. There were differences in barriers reported by patients from each trajectory, which emphasize the need for additional tailored interventions to improve patient adherence.

Evaluating Success Factors of a Medication Adherence Tracker Pilot Program in Improving Part D Medication Adherence Metrics in a Medicare Advantage Plan: Importance of Provider Engagement

BACKGROUND

Health plans and providers can increase quality by improving adherence to chronic disease medications included in star ratings among Medicare Advantage Part D (MAPD) plan enrollees. Research is needed to evaluate effective means of collaboration between health plans and providers. The Medication Adherence Tracker (MAT) is a health plan initiative to help primary care providers use outreach to improve their patients' adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the contribution of structural and process factors on the success of a health plan-initiated tracking system in improving chronic disease medication adherence over 6 months.

METHODS

The MAT quality improvement initiative was carried out in South Texas from June to December 2016. Health plan pharmacists used claims data to identify MAPD enrollees at risk of nonadherence to triple-weighted star medications: renin-angiotensin system antagonists, oral diabetes medications, and statins. Actionable reports were delivered biweekly to each provider, either by fax or in person, by embedded health plan nurses. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical factors as well as the role of provider outreach in increasing paid pharmacy claims and medication adherence as measured by proportion of days covered (PDC) > 0.8.

RESULTS

Of 3,542 patients in 5 Texas physician-organized delivery system groups whose 67 providers received tracking reports from June through December 2016, 1,901 (54%) patients had more than 1 related prescription, and 3,064 (87%) received provider outreach on at least 1 prescription. 2,493 (70%) had at least 1 paid pharmacy claim. Provider outreach was associated with greater likelihood of paid prescription claims (relative risk [RR] = 4.59, 95% CI = 3.74-5.62) and greater year-end adherence (PDC > 0.8, RR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.63-2.12) in multivariable predictive models. 95% CIs for age, gender, low-income subsidy eligibility, and number of prescriptions did not exclude the null value.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider engagement is critical to effective health plan-provider partnerships to overcome barriers, change behavior, and improve chronic disease care quality and population outcomes.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Cigna. The manuscript was prepared as a work for hire. Hong, Esse, Gallardo, Serna, Fosshat, and Mamvou are employees of CareAllies, a Cigna company. Bruce was employed by Cigna at the time of the study. Vadhariya reports a past internship at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this work. Abughosh reports grants from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Valeant Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, and BMS/Pfizer, unrelated to this work.

A retrospective study of drug utilization and hospital readmissions among Medicare patients with hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a complication occurring in patients with cirrhosis and is associated with neuropsychiatric and motor abnormalities. Symptomatic HE episodes almost always require hospitalization and the frequent recurrence of episodes is associated with poor prognosis and increased medical costs. The utilization of existing therapies for management of HE and adherence to them has yet to be evaluated using real-world claims data.The aim of this study was to evaluate HE drug regimens and adherence and their association with hospital readmissions in Medicare Advantage plan patients.This was a retrospective cohort study of patients discharged from a HE-related hospitalization or emergency room visit. Based on subsequent enrollment in the plan they were categorized into cohorts of 1 month, 3, and 6 months follow-up, and medication regimen was evaluated within the first month. The drugs evaluated included lactulose, rifaximin, and neomycin. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to evaluate the association of drug regimen and medication adherence measured as proportion of days covered with HE readmissions.There were 347 patients hospitalized for HE with 184 patients having 30-day enrollment and either a drug refill or an outpatient visit in this duration. Medications were not refilled by 67 (36.4%) patients. Various drug regimens had different adherence with mean (standard deviation) proportion of days covered ranging from 0.56 (0.29) to 0.82 (0.16) at 3 months and 0.48 (0.3) to 0.77 (0.15) at 6 months. The results of logistic regression at 3 and 6 months did not show a significant association of medication use or medication adherence with hospital readmissions.Despite availability of therapy, medication utilization was alarmingly low after discharge of patients from HE-related hospitalization. Medication adherence was also low, which may affect the rate of recurrence and costs associated with readmissions. Efforts are needed in both care coordination of these patients to ensure they are prescribed appropriate medications and to enhance adherence to them.

Enhancing Statin Adherence Using a Motivational Interviewing Intervention and Past Adherence Trajectories in Patients with Suboptimal Adherence

BACKGROUND

Statins have been shown to be effective in reducing the occurrence of cardiovascular (CV) events and are widely prescribed for the risk reduction of CV diseases and recurrent CV events. However, poor adherence prevents some patients from receiving the maximum benefit of the therapy. Motivational interviewing (MoI) is a patient-centered collaborative approach that can be used to improve medication adherence. Group-based trajectory modeling depicts patterns of adherence over time and may help tailor the MoI intervention to further enhance adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of a phone-based MoI intervention tailored by patients' past adherence trajectory in improving adherence to statins among patients in a Medicare Advantage prescription drug plan (MAPD).

METHODS

Patients continuously enrolled in an MAPD from 2013 to 2017 with a statin prescription between January and June 2015 to allow 2 years of pre-index period and 1 year of follow-up were included in the study. Adherence to statins was measured monthly during the 1-year follow-up as proportion of days covered (PDC) and incorporated into a group-based trajectory model to provide 4 distinct patterns of adherence: adherent, rapid decline, gradual decline, and gaps in adherence. Patients in the 3 nonadherent groups were randomized to either control or intervention. The intervention was an initial counseling call and up to 2 monthly follow-up calls by pharmacy students trained in MoI, providing education consistent with a previously identified pattern of use. Refill data at 6 months post-intervention were evaluated to examine the intervention's effect on PDC, as continuous and dichotomized as PDC ≥ 0.8, as well as discontinuation. Multivariable regression adjusted for baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and past adherence trajectory.

RESULTS

There were 152 patients included in the analysis who received MoI phone calls and 304 randomly selected controls. Mean PDC for the intervention group (0.67 ± 0.3) was significantly higher than the control (0.55 ± 0.4; P < 0.001). The intervention group was also less likely to discontinue (OR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.19-0.76) and more likely to be adherent in the linear regression model (β = 12.4; P < 0.001) as well as in the logistic regression model (OR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.18-2.95). Previous adherence trajectories were significantly associated with adherence in the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received the MoI intervention were more likely to be adherent and less likely to discontinue the statin in the 6 months follow-up compared with controls. Future research can identify other approaches to tailor interventions and expand the intervention to other languages. This intervention may also prove valuable to improve adherence to other medications for chronic and asymptomatic diseases.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, which provided critical input during study design, implementation, and manuscript preparation. Abughosh reports grants from Sanofi, BMS/Pfizer, and Valeant Pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this study. Vadhariya reports a past internship at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this study. Esse, Serna, and Gallardo are employees of CareAllies, a Cigna subsidiary. Boklage is an employee of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. Choi was an employee of Sanofi during this study. Johnson, Essien, Fleming, and Holstad have nothing to disclose. A poster based on this study was presented at AMCP Nexus 2018; October 22-25, 2018; Orlando, FL.

Group-Based Trajectory Models to Identify Sociodemographic and Clinical Predictors of Adherence Patterns to Statin Therapy Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND

The benefits of statins in the prevention of primary and secondary atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease events have been well documented. Suboptimal adherence is a persistent problem associated with increased CV events and increased healthcare utilization. Proportion of days covered (PDC) is widely used to measure medication adherence, and provides a single value that does not adequately depict different adherence behavior patterns. Group-based trajectory modeling has been used to identify adherence patterns (or trajectories) over time. The identification of characteristics unique to each pattern can help in the early identification of patients who are likely to be poor adherents and can inform the development of interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To identify distinct trajectories of statin adherence in patients enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan and the sociodemographic and clinical predictors associated with each trajectory.

METHODS

Patients were included in the study if they were continuously enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan between 2013 and 2016 and had a statin prescription between January 2015 and June 2015. We observed each patient for 360 days and computed the monthly PDC. The monthly PDC was incorporated into a group-based trajectory model to provide distinct patterns of adherence. Using group-based trajectory modeling, the patients were categorized into groups based on their adherence patterns. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to identify the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with each group.

RESULTS

A total of 7850 patients were included in the analysis and were categorized into 4 distinct groups based on statin adherence-rapid discontinuation (7.8%), gradual decline (16.8%), gaps in adherence (17.2%), and high or nearly perfect adherence (58.2%). Significant predictors of being placed into one or more of the low-adherence trajectories compared with the high-adherence trajectory included sex, age, low-income subsidy, language, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, statin intensity, and 90-day refills.

CONCLUSIONS

The predictors identified in this study provide valuable insight into patient characteristics that increase the risk for statin nonadherence, which has the potential to inform targeted interventions. Identifying patient trajectories can inform the future development of protocols to individualize appropriate interventions for these patients.

Association between industry payments and prescribing costly medications: an observational study using open payments and medicare part D data

Background

While many new medications may offer advantages over existing drugs, some newer drugs are reformulations of existing products that provide little innovation or incremental benefit while driving up drug costs. Despite the lack of benefit of these medications, prescribers may be motivated by payments made by the pharmaceutical industry. The objective of the study was to determine the association between payments made to physicians by the pharmaceutical industry and prescriptions for certain selected costly brand name drugs.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, retrospective study linking the Open Payments Database and Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File for 2014, including 667,278 physicians who prescribed one of 6 brand-name drugs with less costly but similarly effective alternatives: lovastatin ER, almotriptan, amlodipine+olmesartan, ibuprofen+famotidine, saxagliptin+metformin and naproxen+esomeprazole. The primary outcome was the odds of a physician prescribing one of the selected drugs, and the primary predictor was the receipt of any payment from the pharmaceutical industry.

Results

The odds of prescribing 3 of the 6 drugs were increased among physicians who received industry payment, compared to those without payment: amlodipine+olmesartan, aOR 1.42, (95% CI 1.36–1.49); saxagliptin+metformin, aOR 1.50, (95% CI 1.42–1.59); and naproxen+esomeprazole, aOR 1.45, (95% CI 1.25–1.68). Payment from the manufacturer of the specific drug, compared to not receiving payment from the drug’s manufacturer, was associated with increased odds of prescribing 4 of the 6 drugs: amlodipine+olmesartan, aOR 2.40, (95% CI 2.29–2.52), ibuprofen+famotidine, aOR 8.06, (95% CI 5.42–12.00), saxagliptin+metformin, aOR 2.21, (95% CI 2.10–2.34) and naproxen+esomeprazole, aOR 5.96, (95% CI 5.08–7.00).

Conclusions

A physician-industry financial relationship was associated with increased odds of prescribing costly brand-name drugs of uncertain medical benefit. Patients, as healthcare consumers, should demand transparency from their physicians about payment from the pharmaceutical industry to increase shared decision-making. Physician and policy makers need increased awareness and reflection on how industry payment influences their prescribing practices.