Incidence, clinicopathological features, and clinical outcomes of low HER2 expressed, inoperable, advanced, or recurrent gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

According to the DESTINY-Breast04 trial, treating patients with breast cancer and low human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expressions (HER2-low) varies from that of those with no HER2 expression. However, it is interesting to know if HER2-low indicates for anti-HER2 therapy in the gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Hence we conducted this study to assess the incidence, clinicopathological features, and treatment outcomes of patients with HER2-low G/GEJ adenocarcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective observational study. Patients with previously untreated G/GEJ adenocarcinoma were classified based on their HER2 status using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with or without in situ hybridization (ISH) as follows: HER2 negative (IHC 0), HER2-low (IHC 1+ or 2+/ISH-), and HER2-positive (IHC2+/ISH+ or 3+).

RESULTS

In total, 734 patients with G/GEJ adenocarcinoma were divided into three groups (HER2-negative, n = 410; HER2-low, n = 154, and HER2-positive, n = 170). The intestinal-type histology, peritoneal metastasis, and higher serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels differed significantly among patients with negative, low, and positive HER2 statuses: intestinal-type histology (21.0%, 44.2%, and 59.8%, respectively), peritoneal metastasis (56.3%, 44.8%, and 21.8%, respectively), and higher serum CEA level (32.2%, 41.6%, and 56.5%, respectively). Improved survival was observed in the HER2-positive group than in the HER2-negative G/GEJ adenocarcinoma group [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59-0.89; P = 0.002]. However, the prognoses of the HER2-low and HER2-negative groups were similar (HR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.82-1.23; P = 0.843).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HER2-low G/GEJ adenocarcinoma exhibited intermediate and distinct characteristics than those in the HER2-negative group. Similarly, the HER2-low group's prognosis was worse than that of the HER2-positive group. Therefore developing novel therapeutic strategies targeting HER2-low G/GEJ adenocarcinoma is required.

Comparative Risk of Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementia Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated With Targeted Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Agents

IMPORTANCE

Cytokine signaling, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and interleukin (IL)-6, through the Janus-kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway, was hypothesized to attenuate the risk of Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD) in the Drug Repurposing for Effective Alzheimer Medicines (DREAM) initiative based on multiomics phenotyping.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between treatment with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNF inhibitors compared with abatacept and risk of incident ADRD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study was conducted among US Medicare fee-for-service patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged 65 years and older from 2007 to 2017. Patients were categorized into 3 cohorts based on initiation of tofacitinib (a JAK inhibitor), tocilizumab (an IL-6 inhibitor), or TNF inhibitors compared with a common comparator abatacept (a T-cell activation inhibitor). Analyses were conducted from August 2020 to August 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was onset of ADRD based on diagnosis codes evaluated in 4 alternative analysis schemes: (1) an as-treated follow-up approach, (2) an as-started follow-up approach incorporating a 6-month induction period, (3) incorporating a 6-month symptom to diagnosis period to account for misclassification of ADRD onset, and (4) identifying ADRD through symptomatic prescriptions and diagnosis codes. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were calculated from Cox proportional hazard regression after adjustment for 79 preexposure characteristics through propensity score matching.

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity score matching to patients using abatacept, a total of 22 569 propensity score-matched patient pairs, including 4224 tofacitinib pairs (mean [SD] age 72.19 [5.65] years; 6945 [82.2%] women), 6369 tocilizumab pairs (mean [SD] age 72.01 [5.46] years; 10 105 [79.4%] women), and 11 976 TNF inhibitor pairs (mean [SD] age 72.67 [5.91] years; 19 710 [82.3%] women), were assessed. Incidence rates of ADRD varied from 2 to 18 per 1000 person-years across analyses schemes. There were no statistically significant associations of ADRD with tofacitinib (analysis 1: HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.55-1.51]; analysis 2: HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.53-1.13]; analysis 3: HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.72-2.33]; analysis 4: HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.21-1.20]), tocilizumab (analysis 1: HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.55-1.21]; analysis 2: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.81-1.35]; analysis 3: HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.75-1.96]; analysis 4: HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.44-1.39]), or TNF inhibitors (analysis 1: HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.72-1.20]; analysis 2: HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.86-1.20]; analysis 3: HR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.86-1.48]; analysis 4: 0.90 [95% CI, 0.60-1.37]) compared with abatacept. Results from prespecified subgroup analysis by age, sex, and baseline cardiovascular disease were consistent except in patients with cardiovascular disease, for whom there was a potentially lower risk of ADRD with TNF inhibitors vs abatacept, but only in analyses 2 and 4 (analysis 1: HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.50-1.16]; analysis 2: HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.99]; analysis 3: HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.65-1.61]; analysis 4: HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21-0.98]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study did not find any association of risk of ADRD in patients treated with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNF inhibitors compared with abatacept.

Association of Type of Oral Anticoagulant Dispensed With Adverse Clinical Outcomes in Patients Extending Anticoagulation Therapy Beyond 90 Days After Hospitalization for Venous Thromboembolism

IMPORTANCE

Guidelines for managing venous thromboembolism (VTE) recommend at least 90 days of therapy with oral anticoagulants. Limited evidence exists about the optimal drug for continuing therapy beyond 90 days.

OBJECTIVE

To compare having prescriptions dispensed for apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin after an initial 90 days of anticoagulation therapy for the outcomes of hospitalization for recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and death.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This exploratory retrospective cohort study used data from fee-for-service Medicare (2009-2017) and from 2 commercial health insurance (2004-2018) databases and included 64 642 adults who initiated oral anticoagulation following hospitalization discharge for VTE and continued treatment beyond 90 days.

EXPOSURES

Apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin prescribed after an initial 90-day treatment for VTE.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes included hospitalization for recurrent VTE and hospitalization for major bleeding. Analyses were adjusted using propensity score weighting. Patients were followed up from the end of the initial 90-day treatment episode until treatment cessation, outcome, death, disenrollment, or end of available data. Weighted Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

The study included 9167 patients prescribed apixaban (mean [SD] age, 71 [14] years; 5491 [59.9%] women), 12 468 patients prescribed rivaroxaban (mean [SD] age, 69 [14] years; 7067 [56.7%] women), and 43 007 patients prescribed warfarin (mean [SD] age, 70 [15] years; 25 404 [59.1%] women). The median (IQR) follow-up was 109 (59-228) days for recurrent VTE and 108 (58-226) days for major bleeding outcome. After propensity score weighting, the incidence rate of hospitalization for recurrent VTE was significantly lower for apixaban compared with warfarin (9.8 vs 13.5 per 1000 person-years; HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49-0.99]), but the incidence rates were not significantly different between apixaban and rivaroxaban (9.8 vs 11.6 per 1000 person-years; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.53-1.19]) or rivaroxaban and warfarin (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.65-1.16]). Rates of hospitalization for major bleeding were 44.4 per 1000 person-years for apixaban, 50.0 per 1000 person-years for rivaroxaban, and 47.1 per 1000 person-years for warfarin, yielding HRs of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.78-1.09) for apixaban vs warfarin, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.71-1.04) for apixaban vs rivaroxaban, and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.93-1.24) for rivaroxaban vs warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this exploratory analysis of patients prescribed extended-duration oral anticoagulation therapy after hospitalization for VTE, prescription dispenses for apixaban beyond 90 days, compared with warfarin beyond 90 days, were significantly associated with a modestly lower rate of hospitalization for recurrent VTE, but no significant difference in rate of hospitalization for major bleeding. There were no significant differences for comparisons of apixaban vs rivaroxaban or rivaroxaban vs warfarin.

Correlation between magnesium pre-loading and cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity in 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin combination therapy for esophageal cancer

The use of cisplatin may cause nephrotoxicity in patients. Hydration solutions supplemented with magnesium could reduce cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity. In this study, we evaluated the preventive effect of magnesium pre-loading on cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity in patients with esophageal cancer. We retrospectively evaluated the prevalence of, and risk factors for, nephrotoxicity in 160 patients with esophageal cancer treated with the 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin regimen from 2014 to 2016 with and without magnesium supplementation. Significant differences were observed between the magnesium and non-magnesium groups in terms of frequency of estimated creatinine clearance of grade 2 or higher that was at 4% (n = 3) and 13% (n = 10) (p = 0.027), respectively. The logistic regression analysis revealed that eCcr of grade 2 or higher was significantly associated with the non-magnesium regimen (odds ratio (OR), 4.175; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.061-16.430; p = 0.041) and age ≥ 65 years (OR, 13.951; 95% CI = 1.723-112.974; p = 0.014). This study suggests that 20 mEq magnesium pre-loading significantly reduces the prevalence of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity. Furthermore, when cisplatin is administered to individuals older than 64 years, a close observation for the onset of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity is crucial.

Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors Versus Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Routine Care Patients With Diabetes Across Categories of Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

Both sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have shown cardiovascular benefits in placebo-controlled trials of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and established cardiovascular disease (CVD).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 RAs are associated with differential cardiovascular benefit among T2D patients with and without CVD.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

SETTING

Medicare and 2 U.S. commercial claims data sets (April 2013 to December 2017).

PARTICIPANTS

1:1 propensity score-matched adult T2D patients with and without CVD (52 901 and 133 139 matched pairs) initiating SGLT2 inhibitor versus GLP-1 RA therapy.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke hospitalization and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and rate differences (RDs) per 1000 person-years were estimated, with 95% CIs, controlling for 138 preexposure covariates.

RESULTS

The initiation of SGLT2 inhibitor versus GLP-1 RA therapy was associated with a slightly lower risk for MI or stroke in patients with CVD (HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.82 to 0.98]; RD, -2.47 [CI, -4.45 to -0.50]) but similar risk in those without CVD (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.97 to 1.18]; RD, 0.38 [CI, -0.30 to 1.07]). The initiation of SGLT2 inhibitor versus GLP-1 RA therapy was associated with reductions in HHF risk regardless of baseline CVD in patients with CVD (HR, 0.71 [CI, 0.64 to 0.79]; RD, -4.97 [CI, -6.55 to -3.39]) and in those without CVD (HR, 0.69 [CI, 0.56 to 0.85]; RD, -0.58 [CI, -0.91 to -0.25]).

LIMITATION

Treatment selection was not randomized.

CONCLUSION

Use of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 RAs was associated with consistent reductions in HHF risk among T2D patients with and without CVD, although the absolute benefit was greater in patients with CVD. There were no large differences in risk for MI or stroke among T2D patients with and without CVD.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.

460 Remote Orthopaedic Clinics during COVID-19: Lessons for a Sustainable Future

Aim

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a focus on non-face to face (NF2F) orthopaedic clinics. Our aim was to establish whether NF2F clinics were sustainable according to the ‘Triple Bottom Line’ framework by taking account of the impact on patients, the planet and financial cost.

Method

This retrospective cohort study was carried out at a large DGH with 261 patients identified as having undergone F2F or NF2F orthopaedic consultations (April 2020). These patients were contacted by telephone to establish their experience, mode of transport and preference for future consultations. Data was also collected relating to environmental and financial costs to the patient and trust.

Results

Final analysis included 180 patients (69%): 42% had a F2F consultation and 58% a NF2F consultation. There was no significant difference between each group in terms of convenience, ease of communication, subjective patient safety, or overall satisfaction rating (p>0.05). 80% of NF2F patients would be happy with virtual consultations in future. Mean journey distance was 18.6 miles leading to a reduction in total carbon emissions of 563.9kg CO2e (66%), equating to 2106 miles in a medium sized car. The hospital visit carbon cost (heating, lighting, and waste generation) was reduced by 3,967kg CO2e (58%). The financial cost (petrol and parking) was also reduced by an average of £8.96 per person.

Conclusions

NF2F consultations are aligned to the NHS ‘Long Term Plan’. They (i) deliver high patient satisfaction with equivalent outcomes to F2F consultations; (ii) have reduced carbon emissions from transportation and hospital running; and (iii) are cheaper.

External validation of a claims-based model to predict left ventricular ejection fraction class in patients with heart failure

Background

Ejection fraction (EF) is an important prognostic factor in heart failure (HF), but administrative claims databases lack information on EF. We previously developed a model to predict EF class from Medicare claims. Here, we evaluated the performance of this model in an external validation sample of commercial insurance enrollees.

Methods

Truven MarketScan claims linked to electronic medical records (EMR) data (IBM Explorys) containing EF measurements were used to identify a cohort of US patients with HF between 01-01-2012 and 10-31-2019. By applying the previously developed model, patients were classified into HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) or preserved EF (HFpEF). EF values recorded in EMR data were used to define gold-standard HFpEF (LVEF ≥45%) and HFrEF (LVEF<45%). Model performance was reported in terms of overall accuracy, positive predicted values (PPV), and sensitivity for HFrEF and HFpEF.

Results

A total of 7,001 HF patients with an average age of 71 years were identified, 1,700 (24.3%) of whom had HFrEF. An overall accuracy of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.80–0.82) was seen in this external validation sample. For HFpEF, the model had sensitivity of 0.96 (95%CI, 0.95–0.97) and PPV of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.81–0.82); while for HFrEF, the sensitivity was 0.32 (95%CI, 0.30–0.34) and PPV was 0.73 (95%CI, 0.69–0.76). These results were consistent with what was previously published in US Medicare claims data.

Conclusions

The successful validation of the Medicare claims-based model provides evidence that this model may be used to identify patient subgroups with specific EF class in commercial claims databases as well.

Effectiveness of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor treatment versus renin-angiotensin system blockade in older adults with heart failure in clinical care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) versus renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade alone in older adults with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study using US Medicare fee-for-service claims data (2014-2017). Patients with HFrEF ≥65 years were identified in two cohorts: (1) initiators of ARNI or RAS blockade alone (ACE inhibitor, ACEI; or angiotensin receptor blocker, ARB) and (2) switchers from an ACEI to either ARNI or ARB. HR with 95% CI from Cox proportional hazard regression and 1-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference with 95% CI were calculated for a composite outcome of time to first worsening heart failure event or all-cause mortality after adjustment for 71 pre-exposure characteristics through propensity score fine-stratification weighting. All analyses of initiator and switcher cohorts were conducted separately and then combined using fixed effects.

RESULTS

51 208 patients with a mean age of 76 years were included, with 16 193 in the ARNI group. Adjusted HRs comparing ARNI with RAS blockade alone were 0.92 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.00) among initiators and 0.79 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.85) among switchers, with a combined estimate of 0.84 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.89). Adjusted 1-year RMST difference (95% CI) was 4 days in the initiator cohort (-1 to 9) and 12 days (8 to 17) in the switcher cohort, resulting in a pooled estimate of 9 days (6 to 12) favouring ARNI.

CONCLUSION

ARNI treatment was associated with lower risk of a composite effectiveness endpoint compared with RAS blockade alone in older adults with HFrEF.

Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Dermatologist-Diagnosed Chronic Inflammatory Skin Diseases

Importance

Several studies have linked chronic inflammatory skin diseases (CISDs) with venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a range of data sources with mixed conclusions.

Objective

To examine the incidence of VTE in patients with vs without CISD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cohort study using commercial insurance claims data from a nationwide US health care database from January 1, 2004, through 2019 was conducted. A total of 158 123 patients with dermatologist-recorded psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, vitiligo, or hidradenitis suppurativa were included. Risk-set sampling identified patients without a CISD. Patient follow-up lasted until the first of the following occurred: VTE, death, disenrollment, or end of data stream.

Exposures

Patients with vs without CISD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Venous thromboembolism events were identified with validated algorithms. Incidence rates were computed before and after 1:1 propensity-score matching to account for VTE risk factors. Hazard ratios were estimated to compare the incidence of VTE in the CISD vs non-CISD cohorts.

Results

A total of 158 123 patients were identified with CISD: with psoriasis (n = 96 138), atopic dermatitis (n = 30 418), alopecia areata (n = 17 889), vitiligo (n = 7735), or HS (n = 5934); 9 patients had 2 of these conditions. A total of 1 570 387 patients were without a CISD. The median follow-up time was 1.9 years (interquartile range, 0.8-4.0 years) in patients with CISD. The incidence rate (per 1000 person-years) of outpatient or inpatient VTE was 1.57 in psoriasis, 1.83 in atopic dermatitis, 0.94 in alopecia areata, 0.93 in vitiligo, 1.65 in HS and 1.53 in CISD overall, compared with 1.76 in patients without a CISD. Incidence rates increased in patients aged 50 years or older (2.3 per 1000 person-years) and decreased in those aged 18 to 49 years (0.8 per 1000 person-years). After propensity-score matching to patients without a CISD, the hazard ratio (HR) of VTE was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75-0.99) in psoriasis, 1.19 (95% CI, 0.95-1.48) in atopic dermatitis, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.65-1.46) in alopecia areata, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.49-1.65) in vitiligo, 1.64 (95% CI, 0.82-3.27) in hidradenitis suppurativa, and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.84-1.05) in CISD overall.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this large-scale cohort study, CISDs were not associated with an increased incidence of VTE after controlling for relevant VTE risk factors in a representative dermatology patient population.

A Multi-modal Approach to Evaluate the Impact of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Programs

INTRODUCTION

Since 2007, the US Food and Drug Administration has had the authority to require risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) programs for certain medications with serious safety concerns to help ensure the benefits of the medication outweigh its risks. Such programs can include requirements for patient monitoring, restrictions on dispensing or administration, and physician and pharmacy training and certification. However, there has been only scattered evidence on the impact of REMS programs on informed decision making, medication access, or patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article was to describe a study that researchers at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School will conduct in partnership with the Food and Drug Administration's Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology to investigate systematically how REMS programs have operated in practice.

METHODS

Investigations include health insurance claims-based analyses to understand patterns of drug use, adherence to safety requirements, and patient outcomes under REMS programs; surveys and interviews to understand physician and patient experiences with REMS; and REMS program material-based and interview-based analyses to understand the effectiveness of risk communication in REMS programs.

CONCLUSIONS

These research activities will evaluate the performance of REMS programs, provide information on the benefits and burdens to patients and healthcare providers, and generate recommendations for actionable steps to improve REMS programs overall.

Epidemiologic Characterization of Heart Failure with Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction Populations Identified Using Medicare Claims

BACKGROUND

Administrative claims do not contain ejection fraction information for heart failure patients. We recently developed and validated a claims-based model to predict ejection fraction subtype.

METHODS

Heart failure patients aged 65 years or above from US Medicare fee-for-service claims were identified using diagnoses recorded after a 6-month baseline period of continuous enrollment, which was used to identify predictors and to apply the claims-based model to distinguish heart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF or HFpEF). Patients were followed for the composite outcome of time to first worsening heart failure event (heart failure hospitalization or outpatient intravenous diuretic treatment) or all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3,134,414 heart failure patients with an average age of 79 years were identified, of which 200,950 (6.4%) were classified as HFrEF. Among those classified as HFrEF, men comprised a larger proportion (68% vs 41%) and the average age was lower (76 vs 79 years) compared with HFpEF. History of myocardial infarction was more common in HFrEF (32% vs 13%), while hypertension was more common in HFpEF (71% vs 77%). One-year cumulative incidence of the composite endpoint was 42.6% for HFrEF and 36.9% for HFpEF. One-year all-cause mortality incidence was similar between the groups (27.4% for HFrEF and 26.4% for HFpEF), however, cardiovascular mortality was higher for HFrEF (15.6% vs 11.3%), whereas noncardiovascular mortality was higher for HFpEF (11.8% vs 15.1%).

CONCLUSION

We replicated well-documented differences in key patient characteristics and cause-specific outcomes between HFrEF and HFpEF in populations identified based on the application of a claims-based model.

130 Improving Documentation of Bowel Movement on Geriatric Wards

Introduction

Constipation is a widely prevalent issue in older adults that may result in complications such as urinary retention, delirium and bowel obstruction. Previous studies have indicated that while stool charts are well completed by nursing staff, they are infrequently monitored by doctors. This project aimed to improve the documentation of bowel movement by doctors on ward rounds to 85%, by the end of a 3-month period.

Methods

Formulation of the project was achieved using group work and a fishbone diagram which focussed on how doctors can improve on documenting bowel movements. Baseline data were collected from inpatient notes on weekdays over a three-week period on a geriatric ward in Northern General Hospital, Sheffield. Interventions of posters and stickers of the poo emoji were placed on walls and in inpatient notes respectively as a reminder. Post-intervention data were collected on weekdays over two weeks, and then repeated a month later to assess for a sustained change.

Results

The data on bowel activity documentation were collected from 28 patients. The baseline data showed that bowel activity was monitored daily on the ward 56.25% of the time. There was a significant increase in documentation of 85.75% following the interventions. The sustainability study showed that bowel activity was documented on the ward 59.09% of the time.

Conclusions

This study shows how a strong effect on behavioural change can be accomplished through simple interventions such as stickers and posters. As most wards currently still use paper notes, this is a generalisable model that other wards can trial. However, this study also shows the difficulty in maintaining behavioural change over extended periods of time. Further PDSA cycles should examine the reasons behind the difficulty sustaining the change and implement new changes that aim to overcome them.

Targeting abnormal metabolism in Alzheimer's disease: The Drug Repurposing for Effective Alzheimer's Medicines (DREAM) study

Drug discovery for disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) based on the traditional paradigm of experimental animal models has been disappointing. We describe the rationale and design of the Drug Repurposing for Effective Alzheimer's Medicines (DREAM) study, an innovative multidisciplinary alternative to traditional drug discovery. First, we use a systems biology perspective in the "hypothesis generation" phase to identify metabolic abnormalities that may either precede or interact with the accumulation of ADRD neuropathology, accelerating the expression of clinical symptoms of the disease. Second, in the "hypothesis refinement" phase we propose use of large patient cohorts to test whether drugs approved for other indications that also target metabolic drivers of ADRD pathogenesis might alter the trajectory of the disease. We emphasize key challenges in population-based pharmacoepidemiologic studies aimed at quantifying the association between medication use and ADRD onset and outline robust causal inference principles to safeguard against common pitfalls. Candidate ADRD treatments emerging from this approach will hold promise as plausible disease-modifying therapies for evaluation in randomized controlled trials.

Application of a Medicare claims-based model predicting left ventricular ejection fraction subtype to investigate the epidemiology of heart failure in the US Medicare program

Introduction

Administrative claims do not contain ejection fraction (EF) information for heart failure (HF) patients. To address this limitation, we recently developed a claims-based model to classify HF patients into reduced EF (rEF) or preserved EF (pEF) using 35 predictors.

Purpose

To report distribution of key patient characteristics and rates of HF decompensation and mortality in model-identified rEF and pEF patients from nationwide Medicare claims (2012–2016) and compare with estimates from the literature.

Methods

We identified HF patients ≥65 years from US Medicare claims using recorded diagnosis after ≥6 months of continuous enrollment. The date of HF diagnosis was the cohort entry date. The 6-month baseline period prior to the cohort entry date was used to identify predictors and apply the claims-based model to distinguish rEF and pEF. Patients were followed for the composite outcome of time to first HF decompensation (HF hospitalization or outpatient IV diuretic treatment) or all-cause mortality. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize baseline patient characteristics. Cumulative incidence estimates along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the composite endpoint as well as all-cause and cause-specific mortality (derived from National Death Index linkage) using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

A total of 3,134,414 HF patients with an average age of 79 years were identified, of which 200,950 (6.4%) were classified as rEF. Among those classified as rEF, men comprised a larger proportion (68% vs 41%), the average age was lower (76 vs 79 years), and history of myocardial infarction was more frequent (32% vs 13%) compared to pEF. One-year cumulative incidence (95% CI) of the composite endpoint was 42.6% (42.4–42.8%) for rEF and 36.9% (36.7–37.0%) for pEF. One-year all-cause mortality incidence was similar between the groups (27.4% [27.2–27.6%] for rEF and 26.4% [26.3–26.4%] for pEF), however, cardiovascular mortality was higher for rEF (16.7% [16.5–16.8%] vs 12.3% [12.2–12.3%]), whereas non-cardiovascular mortality was higher for pEF (12.9% [12.7–13.1%] vs 16.0% (16.0–16.1%) (Figure 1). These results were in line with estimates from other well-established cardiovascular cohorts including the Get With The Guidelines-HF cohort and the Olmstead County HF epidemiology cohort.

Conclusion

We replicated well-documented differences in key patient characteristics and endpoints between rEF and pEF in these populations identified based on application of a claims-based model. Our results support use of this model for identifying cohorts of rEF and pEF to conduct subtype specific investigations of treatment outcomes. However, a notably lower proportion of patients were identified as having rEF compared to previous reports indicating low sensitivity of this approach for rEF and suggesting that model-based classification may not be useful in tracking subtype specific incidence or prevalence of HF using Medicare claims.

Cumulative incidence of outcomes in HF

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): Novartis Inc.

Treatment with macitentan for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) associated with congenital heart disease (CHD): real-world experience from the combined OPUS and OrPHeUS data sets

Introduction

Restrictive inclusion criteria can exclude some CHD-PAH patients from clinical trials. The OPsumit® USers (OPUS) Registry and the OPsumit® Historical USers (OrPHeUS) data sets provide real-world data in PAH patients newly started on macitentan, including patients with CHD-PAH regardless of defect type.

Purpose

To describe the characteristics, safety and clinical outcomes of CHD-PAH patients newly treated with macitentan.

Methods

OPUS is a prospective, US, multicentre, observational drug registry ongoing since April 2014. OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicentre chart review; observation period Oct 2013–Mar 2017. This analysis reports information on CHD-PAH patients in the combined OPUS/OrPHeUS data set, descriptively compared with idiopathic/heritable PAH (I/HPAH) patients.

Results

As of Sept 2019, there were 4268 PAH patients with follow-up data, of whom 264 (6%) had CHD-PAH and 2396 (56%) had I/HPAH. For CHD-PAH and I/HPAH patients respectively at macitentan initiation: median age (Q1, Q3) was 48 (36, 62) and 65 (53, 73) years; 199 (75%) and 1748 (73%) were female; 67/114 (59%) and 802/1301 (62%) were WHO functional class III/IV; median (Q1, Q3) 6-minute walk distances were 350 (274, 420) and 289 (195, 375) m for the 82 and 840 patients with measurements; median (Q1, Q3) time from PAH diagnosis to macitentan initiation was 37.3 (4.5, 113.1) and 7.4 (1.4, 38.3) months; and 99 (38%) and 1056 (44%) initiated macitentan as monotherapy. The number of patients with ≥1 hepatic adverse event (HAE) was similar for CHD-PAH and I/HPAH (22 [8%] and 184 [8%]), as were the adverse event (AE) profiles (collected from OPUS only). Exposure, discontinuations, outcomes and most common AEs are shown in the table.

Conclusions

In general, compared with I/HPAH patients, CHD-PAH patients were younger and a greater proportion had prevalent disease than I/HPAH patients. Safety and outcomes were similar between the groups.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Other. Main funding source(s): Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd

Long-term outcomes in newly diagnosed pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients receiving initial triple oral combination therapy: insights from the randomised controlled TRITON study

Introduction

Long-term outcomes are important in PAH.

Purpose

To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of initial triple oral therapy with selexipag, macitentan and tadalafil vs initial double oral therapy with macitentan and tadalafil in PAH.

Methods

TRITON, a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b study, randomised 1:1 newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve PAH patients to initial triple vs double therapy. Macitentan and tadalafil were initiated at randomisation and selexipag/placebo at day 15 (uptitrated to wk 12). Efficacy and safety were assessed in a blinded manner until the last patient randomised completed wk 26 (end of observation period). Pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; primary endpoint) and 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) were assessed at wk 26. Other secondary endpoints included time to first disease progression event (centrally adjudicated) to end of observation period +7 days. Time to all-cause mortality up to end of observation period was analysed post-hoc.

Results

247 patients were randomised to initial triple (n=123) or initial double therapy (n=124); baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. Median follow-up was 77.6 (initial triple) and 75.8 wks (initial double). Initial triple and initial double therapy improved PVR (by 54% and 52%) and 6MWD (by 55 and 56 m), with no difference between groups. A 41% reduction in the risk of first disease progression event driven by PAH-related hospitalisation and all-cause death was observed with initial triple vs initial double therapy (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.32–1.09, p=0.087; Figure). Two patients died in the initial triple vs 9 in the initial double therapy group (hazard ratio 0.23, 95% CI 0.05–1.04). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of the study drugs.

Conclusions

In TRITON, assessments at wk 26 showed marked improvements in both treatment arms, with no difference between groups. Exploratory analysis indicated a signal for improved long-term outcome with initial triple versus initial double therapy.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Other. Main funding source(s): Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Combination therapy with macitentan and phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitor (PDE5i) in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH): real-world data from OPUS and OrPHeUS

Introduction

Guidelines for the management of PAH recommend combination therapy for most patients, yet real-world data on treatment patterns in PAH are limited.

Purpose

To describe the characteristics, safety and clinical outcomes of PAH patients newly treated with double combination therapy with macitentan and PDE5i in the OPsumit® USers (OPUS) Registry and the OPsumit® Historical USers cohort study (OrPHeUS) combined dataset.

Methods

OPUS is a prospective, US, multicentre, observational drug registry (NCT02126943) ongoing since April 2014. OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicentre chart review (NCT03197688); Oct 2013–Mar 2017. This cohort included patients initiating combination therapy with macitentan and a PDE5i (in any order) ≤60 days apart. Baseline was defined as the start date of the second therapy (i.e., start of combination therapy). Patient characteristics at baseline, changes in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and WHO functional class (FC) from baseline to follow-up, safety and outcomes are described.

Results

Of the 4428 OPUS/OrPHeUS PAH patients initiating macitentan, 2490 received this in combination with a PDE5i; of these patients, 740 (29.7%) initiated macitentan and a PDE5i concurrently (≤60 days apart). Data on disease duration was recorded in 729 patients at baseline; of these, 588 (80.7%) patients were incident (≤6 months since diagnosis) and 141 (19.3%) were prevalent (&gt;6 months since diagnosis); median time from diagnosis to start of combination therapy of was 1.4 (Q1=0.6, Q3=3.6) months. At baseline, median age was 60 (Q1=49, Q3=70) years and 73.6% of patients were female. Mean baseline 6MWD was 264.5 (SD=119.8) m, recorded in 240 (32.4%) patients. WHO FC was recorded at baseline for 347 (46.9%) patients; 263 (75.8%) were in FC III/IV. Median combination therapy exposure was 10.2 (Q1=3.4, Q3=21.8) months, with 58.8% of patients ongoing at data cut. Changes from baseline to follow up in FC and 6MWD are shown in the figure. There was ≥1 adverse event (AE) reported in 455 (61.5%) patients and ≥1 hepatic AE (HAE) in 76 (10.3%) patients. In total, 232 (31.4%) patients discontinued macitentan; 122 (16.5%) due to AEs, 4 (0.5%) due to HAEs, 98 (13.2%) not due to an AE/HAE, and 8 (1.1%) for unknown reasons. Of the 305 patients who discontinued combination therapy, 137 (18.5%) discontinued macitentan only, 73 (9.9%) discontinued PDE5i only, and 95 (12.8%) discontinued both drugs at the same time. Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% CI) showed that 60.7% (56.4, 64.8) of patients were free from hospitalisation and 88.7% (85.7, 91.1) were alive at 12 months.

Conclusions

In this real-world setting, less than one third of patients treated with macitentan received initial oral combination therapy, despite current expert consensus favouring such therapeutic approaches. Patients initiating macitentan+PDE5i ≤60 days apart had improved 6MWD and WHO FC from baseline to follow-up.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Other. Main funding source(s): Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd

P3674Patient characteristics and treatment patterns in the multicentre, retrospective chart review of first-time Opsumit (macitentan) users in the United States (OrPHeUS)

Introduction

The OPsumit® Historical USers cohort (OrPHeUS) is a multicentre, US, retrospective medical chart review conducted to supplement the OPsumit® USers (OPUS) Registry to fulfil the FDA request to characterise the safety of macitentan in clinical practice.

Purpose

To describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns, hepatic safety and survival in patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) newly treated with macitentan.

Methods

OrPHeUS (NCT03197688) aimed to include 2200 new users of macitentan, between October 2013 and March 2017, who were not enrolled in OPUS. Here we present patients with follow-up data, including characteristics and treatment patterns at macitentan initiation, hepatic adverse events (HAEs) identified using preferred terms in chart entries and pharmacovigilance reporting, hospitalisations and survival.

Results

OrPHeUS included 2982 patients newly treated with macitentan and with follow-up data; the reason for macitentan prescription was pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) in 2362 (79.3%) patients, other PH aetiologies in 612 (20.6%) patients and 8 patients with other/unknown reasons. At macitentan initiation, the median (Q1, Q3) age of the patients was 62 (51, 72) years and 73.9% were female. WHO functional class (FC) was documented in 654 (21.9%) patients, 35.6% of patients were in FC I/II and 64.4% in FC III/IV; median (Q1, Q3) 6-minute walk distance, documented in 411 (13.8%) patients, was 293 (200, 383) metres. At macitentan initiation, 41.5% (n=1239) of patients were not receiving PAH therapy, 46.3% (n=1382) were already receiving one PAH therapy and 11.9% (n=356) were already receiving two PAH therapies. The median (Q1, Q3) exposure to macitentan was 14.9 (5.6, 27.1) months; 57% and 43% of patients had exposures of >12 and >18 months. During the exposure period, 933 (31.3%) patients discontinued treatment, including 474 (15.9%) patients who discontinued due to an adverse event (AE), 6 (0.2%) due to a HAE, 449 (15.1%) for reasons other than an AE/HAE, and 4 (0.1%) for unknown reasons. There were 275 (9.2%) patients who experienced ≥1 HAE (incidence rate [IR]: 0.07 [95% CI, 0.06, 0.08] per 1 person-year); alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) ≥3x upper limit of normal (ULN) were experienced by 113 (3.8%) patients (IR: 0.028 [95% CI, 0.023, 0.033] per 1 person-year); ALT/AST ≥x3 ULN and bilirubin ≥2x ULN was experienced by 33 (1.1%) patients (IR: 0.008 [95% CI, 0.006, 0.011] per 1 person-year). There were 1148 (38.5%) patients who experienced at least one hospitalisation (IR: 0.36 [95% CI, 0.34, 0.39] per 1 person-year). The 12-month Kaplan-Meier survival estimate was 92% (95% CI, 91, 93).

Conclusion

OrPHeUS provides additional real-world evidence in patients newly treated with macitentan, confirming the hepatic safety profile of macitentan.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd

P4673Macitentan in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH): combined data from OPUS and OrPHeUS real-world data sets

Introduction

The OPsumit® USers Registry (OPUS) provides real-world data in patients (pts) with pulmonary hypertension newly started on macitentan. The OPsumit® Historical USers cohort (OrPHeUS) study was conducted to supplement OPUS to fulfil the FDA request to characterise the safety of macitentan in clinical practice. Both studies included pts with CTEPH.

Purpose

To describe the characteristics and safety outcomes of CTEPH pts newly treated with macitentan.

Methods

OPUS is a prospective, US, multicentre, long-term, observational drug registry (NCT02126943) ongoing since Apr 2014. OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicentre medical chart review (NCT03197688); data collected Oct 2013-Mar 2017. This subgroup analysis describes CTEPH patient characteristics at macitentan initiation, hospitalisations, survival and liver function tests (LFTs) in the combined OPUS/OrPHeUS data set. LFTs are also provided for the OPUS/OrPHeUS pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) population.

Results

As of Oct 2018, OPUS/OrPHeUS included 144 CTEPH pts with follow-up data. At macitentan initiation, median (Q1, Q3) age was 66 (56, 73) years; of the 53 pts with a WHO functional class (FC) assessment, 35.8%, 49.1% and 15.1% were in FC II, III and IV, respectively. Median (Q1, Q3) time from CTEPH diagnosis was 18.6 (7.4, 56.4) months (n=141). At macitentan initiation, 32.6% of pts had no PAH therapy, 63.9% were receiving one and 3.5% were receiving two PAH therapies. Median (Q1, Q3) exposure to macitentan was 15.9 (4.3, 30.4) months. There were 43 (29.9%) CTEPH pts who discontinued treatment; 23 due to an adverse event (AE), 0 due to a hepatic AE (HAE) and 20 not due to an AE/HAE. There were 58 (40.3%) CTEPH pts who experienced ≥1 hospitalisation and 9 (6.3%) pts died. LFTs are presented in the table.

LFTs CTEPH follow-up pts PAH follow-up pts (N=144) (N=4072) ALT or AST ≥3x ULN   Pts with ≥1 event, n (%) 1 (0.7) 132 (3.2)   Incidence rate per 1 person-year (95% CI) 0.005 (0.001, 0.035) 0.024 (0.020, 0.029) ALT or AST ≥3x ULN and total bilirubin ≥2x ULN   Pts with ≥1 event, n (%) 1 (0.7) 27 (0.7)   Incidence rate per 1 person-year (95% CI) 0.005 (0.001, 0.035) 0.005 (0.003, 0.007) ALT: alanine aminotransferase; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; CI: confidence interval; ULN: upper limit of normal.

Conclusions

Analysis of OPUS/OrPHeUS data provides further insight into real-world use of macitentan in CTEPH pts. The observed hepatic safety profile in CTEPH pts is in line with that of PAH pts.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd

4973Efficacy and safety of selexipag in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients with and without significant cardiovascular (CV) comorbidities

Introduction

Many PAH patients today have a number of CV comorbidities, yet data on the efficacy and safety of therapies in such patients remain scarce. Most recent PAH clinical trials also include patients with comorbidities.

Purpose

To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the oral, selective IP prostacyclin receptor agonist, selexipag, in PAH patients with and without significant CV comorbidities using post hoc analysis of GRIPHON data.

Methods

GRIPHON enrolled 1156 PAH patients randomised 1:1 to placebo:selexipag. The present analysis includes patients with right heart catheterisation within 1 year of randomisation who were categorised as with or without CV comorbidities. Patients with CV comorbidities were defined as having ≥3 of the following: body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2, history of essential hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or historical evidence of significant coronary artery disease; if PAWP/LVEDP was >12 but <15 mmHg, pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) had to be >500 dyn.sec/cm5; if PAWP/LVEDP was <12, then PVR had to be >300 dyn.sec/cm5. Selexipag effect on time to first morbidity/mortality (M/M) event up to end of treatment was assessed for both subgroups. Baseline (BL) adjusted treatment hazard ratios with 95% CIs were calculated using Cox models. Model building involved stepwise backward elimination of BL covariates.

Results

752 PAH patients could be categorised based on these criteria (99 with CV comorbidities, 653 without). At BL, patients with CV comorbidities were older (median [range] 60 [28–80] vs 46 [18–78] yrs), had higher BMI (mean [SD] 33.3 [7.23] vs 26.0 [5.64] kg/m2) and lower 6-minute walk distance (mean [SD] 319 [95.7] vs 354 [79.3] m) vs those without. A greater proportion were from Western Europe/Australia/North America (60.6% vs 38.9%) and in WHO functional class III (69.7% vs 49.9%). At BL, 82.8% of patients with CV comorbidities were receiving PAH therapies vs 75.7% of those without. As expected, at BL a higher proportion of patients with CV comorbidities (vs without) had previous/concomitant cardiac disease (62.6% vs 43.0%), metabolism/nutrition disorders (75.8% vs 31.2%), respiratory/thoracic/mediastinal disorders (59.6% vs 37.5%) and vascular disorders (76.8% vs 37.4%). Selexipag reduced the risk of M/M events vs placebo in both subgroups (Figure), with no evidence of an inconsistent treatment effect (interaction p-value=0.1544). Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were reported in 35.4% (25.9% selexipag, 46.7% placebo) of patients with CV comorbidities and 35.0% (32.0% selexipag, 38.0% placebo) of those without. Common prostacyclin associated side effects observed with selexipag (headache, diarrhoea, nausea) were reported at a similar incidence in both subgroups.

Conclusions

Selexipag had a beneficial effect on long-term outcome in PAH patients both with and without CV comorbidities. Safety in both groups was consistent with the known profile of selexipag.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd