Assessment of algorithms for identifying patients with triple-class refractory multiple myeloma using real-world data

Objective: Patients with triple-class refractory (TCR) multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and poor prognoses. This high unmet need has prompted the development of new therapies allowing for improved outcomes for these patients. Recently, new targeted therapies for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory MM have been approved based on single-arm clinical trial results. Real-world (RW) data enable a better understanding of the effectiveness of new therapies in clinical practice and provide external controls for single-arm studies. However, using RW data to identify patients with TCR MM is challenging and subject to limitations. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study of an analysis of the COTA electronic health record (EHR) database, we used four algorithms to define refractory status and created four groups of patients with TCR MM initiating post-TCR therapy. Each algorithm relied on slightly different criteria to identify TCR patients, but all were based on the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG)-derived and/or healthcare provider (HCP)-reported progressions within the database. Results: A total of 3815 patients with newly diagnosed MM met the eligibility criteria for this study. The choice of the algorithm did not impact the characteristics of identified patients with TCR MM (Algorithm 1 [n = 404], Algorithm 2 [n = 123], Algorithm 3 [n = 404], and Algorithm 4 [n = 375]), including their demographic and disease characteristics, MM treatment history, or treatment patterns received after becoming TCR. However, identifying TCR MM using a combination of IMWG-derived and HCP-reported progressions allowed up to a 70% increase in the size of the identified group of patients compared with using only IMWG-derived progressions. Conclusion: In RW settings, progressions from both IMWG-derived data and physician reports may be used to identify patients with TCR MM.

Impact of elranatamab on quality of life: Patient-reported outcomes from MagnetisMM-3

The physical and emotional burden of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has been strongly correlated with declining health-related quality of life (QOL) in the patients it affects. This analysis evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-naive (n = 123) and -exposed (n = 64) patients with RRMM enrolled in the MagnetisMM-3 study (NCT04649359) and treated with the humanized, bispecific BCMA-CD3 antibody elranatamab. Patients received two step-up doses of elranatamab (12 mg on day 1, 32 mg on day 4) before starting the full dose of 76 mg on day 8 (each cycle = 28 days). Global health status, functioning and symptom data were collected electronically using validated and myeloma-specific questionnaires. Improvements in PROs occurred early, with marked reductions in pain and disease symptoms and notable improvements in patients' outlook for their future health. Additionally, 40.2% of BCMA-naive and 52.6% of BCMA-exposed patients perceived their disease as 'a little better' or 'much better' by Cycle 1, Day 15. The results from this analysis demonstrated that elranatamab maintained or improved symptomology and general health status, regardless of prior BCMA-directed therapy. Thus, in addition to its clinical benefits, elranatamab therapy may sustain or improve QOL in heavily pretreated patients with RRMM.

Interpreting the Relationship Among Itch, Sleep, and Work Productivity in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of JADE MONO-2

BACKGROUND

Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily Janus kinase 1-selective inhibitor, improved itch severity, sleep, and work productivity versus placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate relationships among itch, sleep, and work productivity in the phase III JADE MONO-2 clinical trial.

METHODS

A repeated-measures longitudinal model was used to examine relationships between itch (using the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [PP-NRS] or Nighttime Itch Scale [NTIS]) and sleep disturbance/loss (using the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure sleep item and SCORing AD Sleep Loss Visual Analog Scale) and, separately, between itch and work productivity (using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Atopic Dermatitis Version 2.0 questionnaire). Mediation modelling was used to investigate the effect of treatment (abrocitinib vs placebo) on work impairment via improvements in itch and sleep.

RESULTS

The relationships between itch/sleep and itch/work productivity were approximately linear. PP-NRS scores of 0, 4-6, and 10 were associated with 0 days, 3-4 days, and 7 days per week of disturbed sleep, respectively. PP-NRS or NTIS scores of 0-1, 4-5, and 10 were associated with 0-10%, 20-30%, and >50% overall work impairment, respectively. Seventy-five percent of the effect of abrocitinib on reducing work impairment was indirectly mediated by improvement in itch, followed by sleep.

CONCLUSION

These results quantitatively demonstrate that reducing itch severity is associated with improvements in sleep and work productivity. Empirical evidence for the mechanism of action of abrocitinib showed that itch severity is improved, which reduces sleep loss/sleep disruption and, in turn, improves work productivity.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03575871.

Comparing how well abrocitinib and dupilumab treat atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms: a plain language summary

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?

Atopic dermatitis (AD, also called atopic eczema) is a skin disease that that can affect a person for a long time and causes red or flaky skin that can be itchy and uncomfortable. Healthcare providers can prescribe medicated creams and ointments to reduce the visible signs and symptoms of AD, but these treatments are not always enough to keep it under control. A new medicine called abrocitinib is taken every day as a tablet. Abrocitinib works by slowing a part of the body's defense mechanism, called immune response, that is not functioning properly in AD. The clinical study described in this plain language summary, called JADE DARE, investigated how well and how safely 26 weeks of treatment with abrocitinib worked in adults with AD compared to an injected medicine, called dupilumab, that is also approved for AD.

WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?

The study showed that abrocitinib was more effective than dupilumab in providing itch relief after 2 weeks. In addition, people who were taking abrocitinib for 4 and 16 weeks experienced greater improvement in the visible skin signs of AD than people who were taking dupilumab. The number of people who had health complaints while taking abrocitinib was similar to the number of people who had health complaints while taking dupilumab. Most of these complaints were minor.

WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?

Abrocitinib was more effective than dupilumab in quickly improving the signs and symptoms of moderate or severe AD in people who did not show improvement with prescribed medications like creams or ointments. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04345367 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Efficacy and Safety of Abrocitinib in Patients with Severe and/or Difficult-to-Treat Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Randomized Phase 3 JADE COMPARE Trial

BACKGROUND

Traditional systemic immunosuppressants and advanced therapies improve signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). However, data are limited in severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. In the phase 3 JADE COMPARE trial of patients with moderate-to-severe AD receiving background topical therapy, once-daily abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg showed significantly greater reductions in the symptoms of AD than placebo and significantly greater improvement in itch response (with abrocitinib 200 mg) than dupilumab at week 2.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib and dupilumab in a subset of patients with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD in a post hoc analysis of the JADE COMPARE trial.

METHODS

Adults with moderate-to-severe AD received once-daily oral abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg, dupilumab 300 mg subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks, or placebo with concomitant medicated topical therapy. Severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD subgroups were classified by baseline characteristics [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 4, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) > 21, failure or intolerance to prior systemic agents (excluding patients who took only corticosteroids), percentage of body surface area (%BSA) > 50, upper quartiles of EASI (EASI > 38) and %BSA (%BSA > 65), and combined subgroup of IGA 4, EASI > 21, and %BSA > 50, and failure or intolerance to prior systemic agents (excluding patients who took only corticosteroids)]. Assessments included IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and a ≥ 2-point improvement from baseline, ≥ 75% and ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in EASI (EASI-75 and EASI-90), ≥ 4-point improvement from baseline in Peak Pruritus-Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4), time to PP-NRS4, least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in 14-day PP-NRS (days 2-15), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) up to week 16.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients achieving IGA 0/1, EASI-75, and EASI-90 responses was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.05) across all subgroups with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. Across most subgroups, PP-NRS4 response was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.01); the time to achieve this response was shorter with abrocitinib 200 mg (range 4.5-6.0 days) than abrocitinib 100 mg (range 5.0-17.0 days), dupilumab (range 8.0-11.0 days), and placebo (range 3.0-11.5 days). LSM change from baseline in POEM and DLQI was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.001) across all subgroups. Clinically meaningful differences were observed between abrocitinib and dupilumab for most evaluated endpoints across several subgroups, including in patients who failed or were intolerant to prior systemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Abrocitinib provided rapid and substantially greater improvements in skin clearance and quality of life compared with placebo and dupilumab in subgroups of patients with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. These findings support the use of abrocitinib for severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03720470.

Improvements in disease activity partially mediate the effect of tofacitinib treatment on generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life in patients with ulcerative colitis: data from the OCTAVE program

BACKGROUND

Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) often report impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Tofacitinib is an oral small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of UC. In addition to previous demonstrations of improved clinical measures (e.g., Mayo score), tofacitinib has been shown to improve HRQoL in patients with UC. This analysis explored the interrelationships among tofacitinib treatment, HRQoL, and disease activity (measured using Mayo subscores) using mediation modeling.

METHODS

Data were collected from two 8-week induction studies (OCTAVE Induction 1 and 2) in patients with moderate to severe UC treated with tofacitinib or placebo. Two mediation models were specified. First, Mayo subscores were mediators between the binary treatment variable (tofacitinib vs placebo) and the eight Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF 36) domain scores as outcomes. Second, the four Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) domain scores served as outcomes. Both models used data collected at Week 8.

RESULTS

Overall, 1073 and 1079 patients were included in the SF-36- and IBDQ-based models, respectively. For all SF-36 domains, improvements in Mayo subscores were estimated to explain 65.6% (bodily pain) to 92.9% (mental health) of the total treatment effect on SF-36 domain scores (all p<0.05). For all IBDQ domains, improvements in Mayo subscores explained 71.6% (systemic symptoms) to 84.7% (emotional function) of the total treatment effect (all p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Mayo scores and Mayo subscores are significant but incomplete contributors to tofacitinib's effect on HRQoL in patients with moderate to severe UC.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT01465763; NCT01458951.

Early Itch Response with Abrocitinib Is Associated with Later Efficacy Outcomes in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Subgroup Analysis of the Randomized Phase III JADE COMPARE Trial

BACKGROUND

Abrocitinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, provided significant itch relief by week 2 in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in the phase III JADE COMPARE trial.

OBJECTIVES

This post-hoc analysis of JADE COMPARE aimed to further characterize itch response and determined whether early itch relief could predict subsequent improvements in AD severity.

METHODS

JADE COMPARE was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial. Adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with moderate-to-severe AD were randomly assigned to receive oral abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg once daily, subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg every other week (after a 600-mg loading dose), or placebo, plus medicated topical therapy for 16 weeks. Assessments were ≥ 4-point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4) from days 2 to 15, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) scores at week 12. Association between week 2 PP-NRS4 and efficacy at week 12 was evaluated by chi-squared tests. The predictive value of early response for later efficacy was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

As early as day 4 after treatment, a significantly greater proportion of patients achieved PP-NRS4 response with abrocitinib 200 mg (18.6%) versus dupilumab (5.6%; p < 0.001) and placebo (6.0%; p < 0.003). A similar trend was observed with abrocitinib at the 100-mg dose, with significantly greater PP-NRS4 response rates versus placebo as early as day 9. With both doses of abrocitinib, week 12 IGA 0/1, EASI-75, EASI-90, and DLQI 0/1 response rates were greater in week 2 PP-NRS4 responders than nonresponders; no differences were observed between week 2 PP-NRS4 responders and nonresponders in the dupilumab and placebo groups. Early improvement in PP-NRS at week 2 was associated with skin clearance at week 12 in abrocitinib-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Abrocitinib resulted in rapid relief from itch in patients with moderate-to-severe AD, with significant improvement in itch as early as day 4 after treatment with abrocitinib 200 mg compared with dupilumab and placebo. Abrocitinib-induced itch relief by week 2 was associated with subsequent improvements at week 12. [Video abstract available.] TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03720470. Early itch response with abrocitinib is associated with later efficacy outcomes in patients withmoderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: subgroup analysis of the randomized phase III JADE COMPARE trial (MP4 335,375kb).

Magnitude and Time Course of Response to Abrocitinib for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Emerging treatments for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) may provide greater and faster improvement in AD signs and symptoms than current therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To examine JADE COMPARE (NCT03720470) data using stringent efficacy end points.

METHODS

Adults with moderate-to-severe AD were randomly assigned 2:2:2:1 to receive oral abrocitinib 200 or 100 mg once daily, subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (600-mg loading dose), or placebo, with medicated topical therapy for 16 weeks. Stringent response thresholds were applied for Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment, Dermatology Life Quality Index, Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, and Night Time Itch Scale severity.

RESULTS

At week 16, 48.9%, 38.0%, and 38.8% of the abrocitinib 200-mg, 100-mg, and dupilumab groups, respectively, achieved greater than or equal to 90% improvement from baseline in EASI versus 11.3% placebo; 14.9%, 12.6%, and 6.5% achieved Investigator's Global Assessment 0 (clear) versus 4.8% placebo; 29.7%, 21.6%, and 24.0% achieved Dermatology Life Quality Index 0/1 (no/minimal impact on quality of life) versus 10.6% placebo; and 57.1%, 44.5%, and 46.1% achieved Night Time Itch Scale severity 0/1 (no/minimal night-time itch) versus 31.9% placebo. Kaplan-Meier median time to greater than or equal to 90% improvement from baseline in EASI was 59, 113, and 114 days in the abrocitinib 200-mg, 100-mg, and dupilumab groups, respectively, and was not evaluable for placebo; median time to Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale 0/1 (no/very minimal itch) was 86 and 116 days for abrocitinib 200-mg and dupilumab groups, respectively, and was not evaluable for abrocitinib 100-mg and placebo groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A greater proportion of patients treated with abrocitinib than placebo had almost complete control of AD signs and symptoms.

Patient perspectives of atopic dermatitis: comparative analysis of terminology in social media and scientific literature, identified by a systematic literature review

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic skin disease that significantly impacts patient quality of life (QoL). It is unknown whether patients and physicians have the same interpretation of AD burden. Unmet needs and AD disease burden were evaluated by comparing terminology used in social media with terminology used in scientific literature. AD terminology in social media was identified using the NetBase platform, and natural language processing was performed. Topics and words driving negative sentiment were evaluated overall and in relation to specific symptoms. The systematic review of scientific literature identified publications that included AD and QoL terms was identified from PubMed. Term analysis of titles and abstracts was conducted via natural language processing. The occurrence of topics and co-occurrence of words associated with QoL terms were evaluated. More than 3 million social media mentions (2018-2020) and 1519 scientific publications (2000-2020) were evaluated. There were more negative than positive social media mentions, and flare and pain were common symptoms driving negative sentiment. Face and hands were major drivers of negative sentiment in relation to AD symptoms in social media. Sleep and pain were often mentioned together. In scientific literature, pruritus and depression were the most frequently occurring symptoms. Similarly, pruritus was the most common AD symptom co-occurring with QoL terms in the assessed scientific literature. Social media analyses provide a unique view into the patient experience of AD. Symptoms driving negative sentiment in social media appear to be discordantly represented in scientific literature. Incorporating patient perspectives may improve disease understanding and management.

Retrospective Database Analysis: Dose Escalation and Adherence in Patients Initiating Biologics for Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

Biologic therapies are often used in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who are nonresponsive to conventional treatments. However, nonresponse or loss of response to biologics often occurs, leading to dose escalation, combination therapy, and/or treatment switching. We investigated real-world treatment patterns of biologic therapies among patients with UC in the USA.

METHODS

This study analyzed data from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases (medical/pharmacy claims for >250 million patients in the USA) to identify patients with UC initiating a biologic therapy (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, or vedolizumab) with 12 months of follow-up post-initiation. Key measures were patient baseline characteristics, dose escalation (average maintenance dose >20% higher than label), adherence (proportion of days covered), and ulcerative colitis-related healthcare costs in the 12 months following biologic therapy initiation.

RESULTS

Of 2,331 patients included in the study (adalimumab [N = 1,291], infliximab [N = 810], golimumab [N = 127], and vedolizumab [N = 103]), 28.1% used concomitant immunosuppressant therapy within 12 months post-initiation. Overall, 23.6% (adalimumab), 34.8% (infliximab), 9.9% (golimumab), and 39.2% (vedolizumab) of patients dose escalated within 12 months. Patients who dose escalated incurred USD 20,106 higher total UC-related healthcare costs over 12 months than those who did not. Adherence (covariate-adjusted proportion of days covered) ranged from 0.63 to 0.73, and 39.3% of patients discontinued within 12 months (median treatment duration = 112 days).

CONCLUSION

Dose escalation was common, and incurred higher costs, in patients with UC initiating biologic therapies. Suboptimal adherence and/or discontinuation within 12 months of initiation occurred frequently, highlighting the challenges in managing these patients.

Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Phase 3 trials have assessed efficacy of abrocitinib versus placebo in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, a common immunoinflammatory skin disease. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-treatment, phase 3 trial enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who requir=ed systemic therapy or had inadequate response to topical medications. Participants were enrolled from 151 sites, located in Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the USA. These participants were then randomly assigned (1:1) with block randomisation to receive oral abrocitinib (200 mg per day) or subcutaneous dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks) for 26 weeks. Participants were required to apply topical corticosteroids (medium or low potency), topical calcineurin inhibitors, or a topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor to active lesion areas. Primary endpoints were response based on achieving a 4 point or higher improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4) at week 2 and a 90% or better improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-90) at week 4. Family-wise type 1 error was controlled via a sequential multiple-testing procedure (two sided, α=0·05). Randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study intervention were included in the efficacy and safety analysis sets. This trial was completed on July 13, 2021 (NCT04345367).

FINDINGS

Between June 11, 2020, and Dec 16, 2020, 940 patients were screened and 727 were enrolled (362 in the abrocitinib group and 365 in the dupilumab group). Compared with dupilumab, a larger proportion of patients treated with abrocitinib reached the primary outcomes, PP-NRS4 at week 2 (172 [48%] of 357, 95% CI 43·0-53·4 vs 93 [26%] of 364, 21·1-30·0; difference 22·6%, 15·8-29·5; p<0·0001), and EASI-90 at week 4 (101 [29%] of 354, 23·8-33·2 vs 53 [15%] of 364, 10·9-18·2; difference 14·1%, 8·2-20·0; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 268 (74%) of 362 patients treated with abrocitinib and by 239 (65%) of 365 patients treated with dupilumab. Two non-treatment-related deaths occurred in the abrocitinib group.

INTERPRETATION

Abrocitinib 200 mg per day was more efficacious than dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis on background topical therapy in inducing early reductions of itch and atopic dermatitis disease signs. Both treatments were well tolerated over 26 weeks.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

Real-World Effectiveness of Newly Initiated Systemic Therapy for Atopic Dermatitis in the United States: A Claims Database Analysis

Introduction

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with significant quality-of-life and economic burdens. Real-world evidence is needed to identify optimal treatment pathways for AD. Here we evaluate real-world effectiveness of systemic therapies for moderate-to-severe AD in the USA.

Methods

Data (September 2016 to December 2019) were from the IQVIA Health Plan Claims data set (IQVIA, Danbury, CT) from patients aged 12 years or older with AD (ICD-9/10-CM, 691.8/L20.x) initiating a systemic immunosuppressive (SIS) agent (methotrexate, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, or azathioprine) or dupilumab and continuously enrolled for at least 6 months before and after the index date. Indicators of non-response (i.e., adding on/switching systemic therapy, AD-related inpatient/emergency room visits, or incident staphylococcal/streptococcal skin infection) and predictors of non-response were evaluated. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan–Meier rates and times were obtained; Cox regression models were used.

Results

In 3249 patients, 45.4% exhibited at least one indicator of non-response, with median time to non-response being longer for dupilumab than for any SIS therapy (27.0 vs 4.0–7.7 months, respectively). Key non-response predictors were age, geographic region, and baseline number of annual AD-related medical visits.

Conclusion

Non-response was common in patients with AD who required systemic treatment, and non-response indicators occurred significantly more frequently with SIS treatment than with dupilumab treatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-022-02197-z.

Abrocitinib monotherapy in Investigator's Global Assessment nonresponders: improvement in signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis and quality of life

BACKGROUND

Abrocitinib, a once-daily, oral Janus kinase 1 selective inhibitor, was shown to be an effective treatment for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in phase 2 b/3 monotherapy trials.

METHODS

These analyses included data for Investigator's Global Assessment responder (clear [0] or almost clear [1] with ≥2-grade improvement) and nonresponder patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who received abrocitinib (200 mg or 100 mg) or placebo in three abrocitinib monotherapy trials (phase 2 b, NCT02780167; two phase 3, NCT03349060/JADE MONO-1 and NCT03575871/JADE MONO-2). Outcomes measuring skin clearance, itch, and quality of life were evaluated.

RESULTS

Both nonresponders (n = 548) and responders (n = 260) treated with abrocitinib had rapid and clinically meaningful improvement in skin clearance, itch, and quality of life compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis treated with abrocitinib who did not achieve an Investigator's Global Assessment 0/1 response at week 12 still experienced rapid, clinically meaningful improvements across several other validated measures of efficacy and quality of life.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV

NCT02780167, NCT03349060, NCT03575871.

High threshold efficacy responses in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis are associated with additional quality of life benefits: pooled analyses of abrocitinib monotherapy studies in adults and adolescents

Background

Once‐daily abrocitinib treatment provided meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in randomized controlled studies.

Objective

To evaluate proportions of patients with responses meeting higher threshold efficacy responses than commonly used efficacy end points and to determine if these responses were associated with quality‐of‐life (QoL) benefits.

Methods

Data from a phase 2b (NCT02780167) and two phase 3 studies (NCT03349060/JADE MONO‐1; NCT03575871/JADE MONO‐2) in adult and adolescent patients (N = 942) with moderate‐to‐severe AD receiving once‐daily abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg or placebo were pooled. Commonly used (Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI]‐75 and ≥4‐point improvement in Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [PP‐NRS4]) and higher threshold efficacy end points (EASI‐90 to <EASI‐100, EASI‐100 or PP‐NRS0/1 response) were evaluated. Proportions of patients across Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index/Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI/DLQI) band descriptors who achieved various efficacy end points were analysed.

Results

More abrocitinib‐treated patients achieved commonly used or higher threshold efficacy end points at week 12 vs. placebo. More abrocitinib‐treated patients who achieved higher threshold efficacy end points reported ‘no effect’ of AD on QoL (by CDLQI/DLQI) at week 12 vs. those who achieved commonly used but not higher threshold efficacy end points (PP‐NRS0/1 vs. PP‐NRS4 but not PP‐NRS0/1 responders [200 mg: 66.3% vs. 17.5%; 100 mg: 62.1% vs. 20.0%]; EASI‐100, EASI‐90 to <EASI‐100 vs. EASI‐75 to <EASI‐90 responders [200 mg: 67.6%, 48.9% vs. 28.8%; 100 mg: 63.2%, 48.1% vs. 36.7%]).

Conclusions

Substantial proportions of patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD receiving abrocitinib met higher threshold efficacy end points, and this was associated with meaningful additional QoL benefits compared with those who did not meet these higher efficacy thresholds. Not only do a substantial proportion of abrocitinib‐treated patients achieve higher threshold efficacy end points but they also do so in a similar timeframe as the more commonly used thresholds for efficacy end points.

Clinical trials

NCT02780167, NCT03349060 and NCT03575871.

Living with Ulcerative Colitis in Japan: Biologic Persistence and Health-Care Resource Use

Objective

The aim of the study was to improve understanding of adherence and persistence to biologics, and their association with health-care resource utilization (HCRU), in Japanese patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods

Data were from Medical Data Vision, a secondary care administrative database. A retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis was conducted of data from UC patients initiating biologic therapy between August 2013 and July 2016. Data collected for 2 years prior (baseline) and 2 years after (follow-up) the index date were evaluated. Patients completing biologic induction were identified, and adherence/persistence to biologic therapy calculated. HCRU, steroid, and immunosuppressant use during baseline and follow-up were assessed. Biologic switching during the follow-up was evaluated. Descriptive statistics (e.g., means and proportions) were obtained and inferential analyses (from Student's t tests, Fisher's exact tests, χ² tests, the Cox proportional hazard model, and negative binomial regression) were performed.

Results

The analysis included 649 patients (adalimumab: 265; infliximab: 384). Biologic induction was completed by 80% of patients. Adherence to adalimumab was higher than that to infliximab (p < 0.001). Persistence at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was higher with infliximab than with adalimumab (p < 0.05). Overall, gastroenterology outpatient visits increased, and hospitalization frequency and duration decreased, from baseline to follow-up. UC-related hospitalizations were fewer and shorter, and endoscopies fewer, in persistent than in nonpersistent patients, although persistent patients made more outpatient visits than nonpersistent patients. Hospitalization duration was lower in persistent than nonpersistent patients. Approximately 50% of patients received an immunosuppressant during biologic therapy; 5% received a concomitant steroid during biologic therapy. Overall, 17% and 3% of patients, respectively, received 2nd line and 3rd line biologics.

Conclusions

Poor biologic persistence was associated with increased non-medication-associated HCRU. Effective treatments with high persistence levels and limited associated HCRU are needed in UC.

Comparing abrocitinib and dupilumab in the treatment of atopic dermatitis: a plain language summary

Atopic dermatitis (AD, also called atopic eczema) is a long-term skin disease that causes intensely itchy, red skin. Healthcare providers can prescribe medicated creams and ointments to reduce the signs and symptoms of AD. However, these treatments are not always enough to provide relief. A new medicine called abrocitinib, which is taken every day as a tablet, reduces part of the body's immune response that happens in AD. The clinical study described in this plain language summary, called JADE COMPARE, investigated how well and how safely 16 weeks of treatment with abrocitinib worked in adults with AD compared to placebo ('dummy treatment') and a medicine that is already approved for AD, called dupilumab. The study showed that abrocitinib was better than placebo in improving the signs and symptoms of AD after 16 weeks. In addition, patients who were taking abrocitinib 200 mg for 2 weeks experienced greater relief from itch than patients who were taking abrocitinib 100 mg, placebo, or dupilumab. More people who took abrocitinib 200 mg reported side effects than those taking abrocitinib 100 mg, placebo, or dupilumab, but most of these side effects were mild or moderate. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT number: NCT03720470.

Patient-reported outcomes from the JADE COMPARE randomized phase 3 study of abrocitinib in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

In JADE COMPARE, abrocitinib improved severity of atopic dermatitis (AD) and demonstrated rapid itch relief.

OBJECTIVES

We examined clinically meaningful improvements in selected patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

JADE COMPARE was a multicentre, phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Adults with moderate-to-severe AD were randomized 2:2:2:1 to receive 16 weeks of oral abrocitinib 200 or 100 mg once daily, dupilumab 300 mg subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks, or placebo, with background topical therapy. PROs included Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Night Time Itch Scale (NTIS), Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis, Patient Global Assessment, SCORing Atopic Dermatitis, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

RESULTS

At week 16, the proportion of patients achieving POEM scores <3 was 21.3% and 11.7% for 200 and 100 mg abrocitinib, 12.4% for dupilumab, and 4.8% for placebo (vs. abrocitinib, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.04). Proportion achieving ≥4-point improvement from baseline in NTIS severity was 64.3% and 52.4% for 200 and 100 mg abrocitinib, 54.0% for dupilumab, and 34.4% for placebo (vs. abrocitinib, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.007). Proportion achieving ≥4-point improvement from baseline in DLQI was 85.0% and 74.4% for 200 and 100 mg abrocitinib, 83.4% for dupilumab, and 59.7% for placebo (vs. abrocitinib, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Significant improvements in PROs were demonstrated with both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo, and abrocitinib 200 mg provided numerically greater effects compared with dupilumab in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

Impact of oral abrocitinib on signs, symptoms and quality of life among adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: an analysis of patient-reported outcomes

Background

A significant improvement in clinical signs was demonstrated with abrocitinib relative to placebo in adolescents with moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in three phase 3, randomized, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled studies (JADE TEEN [ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03796676], JADE MONO‐1 [NCT03349060] and JADE MONO‐2 [NCT03575871]).

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of abrocitinib on patient‐reported signs/symptoms, including sleep loss and quality of life among adolescents with moderate‐to‐severe AD.

Methods

JADE TEEN, JADE MONO‐1 and JADE MONO‐2 were conducted in the Asia‐Pacific region, Europe and North America and included patients aged 12–17 years with moderate‐to‐severe AD and inadequate response to ≥ 4 consecutive weeks of topical medication or treatment with systemic therapy for AD. Patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1, JADE TEEN; 2 : 2 : 1, JADE MONO‐1/‐2) to receive once‐daily oral abrocitinib (200 or 100 mg) or placebo for 12 weeks in combination with topical therapy (JADE TEEN) or as monotherapy (JADE MONO‐1/‐2). Data from adolescent patients in JADE MONO‐1/‐2 were pooled for these analyses.

Results

At week 12, more adolescents treated with abrocitinib (200 or 100 mg) vs. placebo achieved a ≥ 4‐point improvement from baseline in the Patient‐Oriented Eczema Measure in JADE TEEN (83.9% and 77.0% vs. 60.2%) and JADE MONO‐1/‐2 (83.0% and 69.4% vs. 43.5%) and a ≥ 6‐point improvement from baseline in the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index in JADE TEEN (73.8% and 67.5% vs. 56.5%) and JADE MONO‐1/‐2 (70.0% and 57.1% vs. 19.0%). Significant improvements in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis Visual Analog Scale for sleep loss scores were demonstrated with abrocitinib vs. placebo at weeks 2‐12 in JADE TEEN and JADE MONO‐1/‐2.

Conclusions

Patient‐reported signs/symptoms, including reduction of sleep loss and quality of life, were substantially improved with abrocitinib monotherapy or combination therapy relative to placebo in adolescents with moderate‐to‐severe AD.

Efficacy and Safety of Abrocitinib in Combination With Topical Therapy in Adolescents With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: The JADE TEEN Randomized Clinical Trial

Question

What is the short-term efficacy and safety of oral abrocitinib in adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis?

Findings

In the randomized clinical trial JADE TEEN, a phase 3 study of abrocitinib in combination with topical therapy that included 285 adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, significantly more adolescents who were treated with abrocitinib compared with placebo achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment response or clear or almost clear, at least 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index response, and/or at least 4-point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale response. Serious adverse events were reported for fewer than 3% of patients.

Meaning

Oral abrocitinib in combination with topical therapy was effective and well-tolerated in adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

Importance

Dupilumab subcutaneous injection is approved for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in adolescents, but there has been too little research on an efficacious systemic oral treatment with a favorable benefit-risk profile for adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD.

Objective

To investigate the efficacy and safety of oral abrocitinib plus topical therapy in adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study JADE TEEN was conducted in countries of the Asia–Pacific region, Europe, and North America in patients aged 12 to 17 years with moderate-to-severe AD and an inadequate response to 4 consecutive weeks or longer of topical medication or a need for systemic therapy for AD. The study was conducted between February 18, 2019, and April 8, 2020. The data were analyzed after study completion.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive once-daily oral abrocitinib, 200 mg or 100 mg, or placebo for 12 weeks in combination with topical therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Coprimary end points were achievement of an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) response of clear (0) or almost clear (1) with improvement of 2 or more grades from baseline (IGA 0/1) and 75% or greater improvement from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75) response at week 12. Key secondary end points included 4-point or greater improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4) at week 12. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored.

Results

This study included 285 adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD (145 boys [50.9%] and 140 girls [49.1%]), of whom 160 (56.1%) were White and 94 (33.0%) were Asian; the median age was 15 years (interquartile range 13-17 years). Substantially more patients treated with abrocitinib (200 mg or 100 mg) vs placebo achieved an IGA response of 0/1 (46.2%; 41.6% vs 24.5%; P < .05 for both), EASI-75 (72.0%; 68.5% vs 41.5%; P < .05 for both), and PP-NRS4 (55.4%; 52.6% vs 29.8%; P < .01 for 200 mg vs placebo) at week 12. Adverse events were reported for 59 (62.8%), 54 (56.8%), and 50 (52.1%) patients in the 200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo groups, respectively; nausea was more common with abrocitinib, 200 mg (17 [18.1%]) and 100 mg (7 [7.4%]). Herpes-related AEs were infrequent; 1 (1.1%), 0, and 2 (2.1%) patients had serious AEs.

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that oral abrocitinib combined with topical therapy was significantly more effective than placebo with topical therapy in adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD, with an acceptable safety profile.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03796676

Tofacitinib Treatment Safety in Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis: Comparison of Observational Population Cohort Data From the IBM MarketScan® Administrative Claims Database With Tofacitinib Trial Data

BACKGROUND

Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to estimate the overall incidence of safety events in patients with UC in a real-life population cohort for comparison with the tofacitinib UC clinical trial program.

METHODS

Clinical trial-like criteria were applied to an IBM MarketScan® claims database population-based cohort (n = 22,967) of patients with UC (October 2010 to September 2015) to identify a UC trial-like cohort treated with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi; n = 6366) to compare with the tofacitinib UC clinical trial cohort (n = 1157).

RESULTS

Incidence rates (events per 100 patient-years; [95% confidence interval]) in the UC trial-like cohort were as follows: serious infections, 3.33 (2.73-4.02); opportunistic infections (OIs; excluding herpes zoster [HZ]), 1.45 (1.06-1.93); HZ, 1.77 (1.34-2.29); malignancies (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]), 0.63 (0.43-0.90); NMSC, 1.69 (1.35-2.10); major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), 0.51 (0.31-0.79); pulmonary embolism (PE), 0.54 (0.30-0.89); deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 1.41 (1.00-1.93); and gastrointestinal perforations, 0.31 (0.16-0.54). Compared with the UC trial-like cohort, tofacitinib-treated patients had numerically lower incidence rates for serious infections (1.75 [1.27-2.36]), OIs (excluding HZ; 0.16 [0.04-0.42]), NMSC (0.78 [0.47-1.22]), PE (0.16 [0.04-0.41]), and DVT (0.04 [0.00-0.23]), and a higher rate for HZ (3.57 [2.84-4.43]); rates for malignancies (excluding NMSC), MACE, and gastrointestinal perforations were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

When acknowledging limitations of comparing claims data with controlled clinical trial data, incidence rates for HZ among TNFi-treated patients in the UC trial-like cohort were lower than in the tofacitinib UC clinical trial cohort; rates for serious infections, OIs, NMSC, PE, and DVT were numerically higher.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV

NCT00787202, NCT01465763, NCT01458951, NCT01458574, NCT01470612.

Patient and Caregiver Preferences on Treatment Attributes for Atopic Dermatitis

BACKGROUND

The expanding number of potential treatment options for atopic dermatitis (AD) highlights the need to better understand the treatment preferences of individuals with AD.

OBJECTIVE

This study identified attributes that most greatly influenced treatment preferences of adults/adolescents/caregivers of children with mild/moderate/severe AD.

METHODS

Adults (≥18 years), adolescents (12-17 years), and caregivers of children (2-11 years) with mild, moderate, or severe AD in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) participated in semistructured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to identify and generate themes across the interview results describing the treatment attributes of greatest importance to participants.

RESULTS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 35 adults, 35 caregivers, and 33 adolescent participants across both countries (n = 103; US =51; UK =52) and all severity groups (mild =43; moderate =47; severe =13). The most important treatment attributes included efficacy (96.1%; speed and duration of symptom relief), mode of administration (66.0%; route of administration, frequency, and convenience), and side effects (55.3%, short-term, long-term, and general).

CONCLUSION

Efficacy, mode of administration, and side effects were the most important attributes that influenced AD treatment preferences for patients and caregivers across different countries, ages, and disease severity. These results may assist patients/caregivers/clinicians in shared decision-making discussions to improve treatment adherence and outcomes.

Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

Given the lack of head-to-head studies of systemic therapies in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD), network meta-analyses (NMAs) can provide comparative efficacy and safety data to inform clinical decision-making. In this NMA, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before 24 October 2019 were identified by a systematic literature review. Short-term (12-16 weeks) efficacy (Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] and Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] responses), patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety data from each trial were abstracted and analysed separately for monotherapy and combination therapy (systemic plus topical anti-inflammatory therapy). RCTs were analysed in fixed-effects and random-effects Bayesian NMA models. Overall, 19 phase 2 and phase 3 RCTs of abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, tralokinumab and upadacitinib were included. In monotherapy RCTs, upadacitinib 30 mg once daily (QD) had the numerically highest efficacy (83.6% achieved ≥50% improvement in EASI [EASI-50 response]), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg QD (74.6%), upadacitinib 15 mg QD (70.5%), dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) (63.4%) and abrocitinib 100 mg QD (56.7%). Similar trends in EASI-75 and EASI-90 response were observed. In combination therapy RCTs, abrocitinib 200 mg QD had the highest EASI-50 (86.6%), followed by dupilumab 300 mg Q2W (82.4%) and abrocitinib 100 mg QD (79.7%). Similar findings were observed for IGA response and PROs. In monotherapy and combination therapy RCTs, the probability of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was higher among all active treatments than with placebo (except for dupilumab 300 mg Q2W [odds ratio (OR), 0.96; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.45-2.18] and abrocitinib 100 mg QD [OR, 0.95; 95% CrI, 0.35-2.66] in combination therapy RCTs), although active treatments did not significantly differ from one another. Abrocitinib, dupilumab and upadacitinib were consistently the most effective systemic therapies in adult and adolescent patients with AD, with no significant TEAE differences in short-term RCTs.

Abrocitinib versus Placebo or Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis

BACKGROUND

The oral Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor abrocitinib, which reduces interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, is being investigated for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Data from trials comparing JAK1 inhibitors with monoclonal antibodies, such as dupilumab, that block interleukin-4 receptors are limited.

METHODS

In a phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with atopic dermatitis that was unresponsive to topical agents or that warranted systemic therapy (in a 2:2:2:1 ratio) to receive 200 mg or 100 mg of abrocitinib orally once daily, 300 mg of dupilumab subcutaneously every other week (after a loading dose of 600 mg), or placebo; all the patients received topical therapy. The primary end points were an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response (defined as a score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] on the IGA [scores range from 0 to 4], with an improvement of ≥2 points from baseline) and an Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) response (defined as ≥75% improvement from baseline in the score on the EASI [scores range from 0 to 72]) at week 12. The key secondary end points were itch response (defined as an improvement of ≥4 points in the score on the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [scores range from 0 to 10]) at week 2 and IGA and EASI-75 responses at week 16.

RESULTS

A total of 838 patients underwent randomization; 226 patients were assigned to the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 238 to the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 243 to the dupilumab group, and 131 to the placebo group. An IGA response at week 12 was observed in 48.4% of patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 36.6% in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 36.5% in the dupilumab group, and 14.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo); an EASI-75 response at week 12 was observed in 70.3%, 58.7%, 58.1%, and 27.1%, respectively (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo). The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. Nausea occurred in 11.1% of the patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group and 4.2% of those in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, and acne occurred in 6.6% and 2.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial, abrocitinib at a dose of either 200 mg or 100 mg once daily resulted in significantly greater reductions in signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis than placebo at weeks 12 and 16. The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. (Funded by Pfizer; JADE COMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03720470.).

Efficacy and Safety of Abrocitinib in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily Janus kinase 1 selective inhibitor, was effective and well tolerated in a phase 3 monotherapy trial of patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD).

Objective

To investigate the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD in an identically designed trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This phase 3, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group randomized clinical trial included patients 12 years or older with a clinical diagnosis of moderate-to-severe AD for at least 1 year and inadequate response to topical medications given for at least 4 weeks within 6 months. Patients were enrolled from 115 centers in Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Czechia, Germany, Hungary, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Poland, United Kingdom, and the United States from June 29, 2018, to August 13, 2019. Data were analyzed from September 13 to October 25, 2019.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to receive once-daily oral abrocitinib in 200- or 100-mg doses or placebo for 12 weeks.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The coprimary end points were the proportion of patients achieving Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) response (ie, clear [0] or almost clear [1], with improvement of ≥2 grades) and the proportion of patients achieving at least 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index score (EASI-75) at week 12. Key secondary end points included the proportion of patients achieving a Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) response (ie, improvement of ≥4 points) at week 12. Other secondary end points included the proportion of patients achieving at least 90% improvement in EASI score (EASI-90). Safety was assessed via adverse events and laboratory monitoring.

Results

A total of 391 patients (229 male [58.6%]; mean [SD] age, 35.1 [15.1] years) were included in the analysis; of these, 155 received abrocitinib, 200 mg/d; 158, abrocitinib, 100 mg/d; and 78, placebo. Among patients with available data at week 12, greater proportions of patients in the 200- and 100-mg abrocitinib groups vs the placebo group achieved IGA (59 of 155 [38.1%] and 44 of 155 [28.4%] vs 7 of 77 [9.1%]; P < .001) and EASI-75 (94 of 154 [61.0%] and 69 of 155 [44.5%] vs 8 of 77 [10.4%]; P < .001), greater estimated proportions achieved PP-NRS (55.3% [95% CI, 47.2%-63.5%] and 45.2% [95% CI, 37.1%-53.3%] vs 11.5% [95% CI, 4.1%-19.0%]; P < .001), and/or greater proportions achieved EASI-90 (58 of 154 [37.7%] and 37 of 155 [23.9%] vs 3 of 77 [3.9%]) responses. Adverse events were reported for 102 patients (65.8%) in the 200-mg group, 99 (62.7%) in the 100-mg group, and 42 (53.8%) in the placebo group; serious adverse events were reported for 2 patients (1.3%) in the 200-mg group, 5 (3.2%) in the 100-mg group, and 1 (1.3%) in the placebo group. Decreases in platelet count (2 [1.3%]) and laboratory values indicating thrombocytopenia (5 [3.2%]) were reported in the 200-mg group.

Conclusions and Relevance

Monotherapy with once-daily oral abrocitinib was effective and well tolerated in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03575871.

The Economic and Psychosocial Comorbidity Burden Among Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Europe: Analysis of a Cross-Sectional Survey

Introduction

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory disease of the skin, which may have a substantial impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of this study was to quantify the economic burden (direct and indirect costs) of moderate-to-severe AD and evaluate the prevalence and impact of psychosocial comorbidities among patients in the European Union-5 (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK).

Methods

Data were analyzed from the 2017 EU5 National Health and Wellness Survey. Respondents with a physician diagnosis of AD/eczema who were considered to have moderate-to-severe AD based on a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score  ≥ 6 were included. Direct costs, indirect costs, and psychosocial comorbidities (sleep difficulties and anxiety based on self-report, depression based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) were reported descriptively. Generalized linear models were used to examine the relationship between psychosocial comorbidities and health outcomes (the Short Form-36 version 2 [SF-36v2], EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire, and healthcare resource utilization).

Results

Overall, 1014 patients were included in the analysis. Total annual direct costs ranged from €2242 to €6924 and total annual indirect costs ranged from €7277 to €14,236, depending on the level of disease severity. Sleep difficulties, anxiety, and depression were reported by 61.6%, 52.7%, and 75.8% of patients, respectively. These comorbidities were significantly associated with reduced physical and mental component summary scores from SF-36v2 and increased overall work impairment (p < 0.05 for all).

Conclusions

A significant economic burden was observed for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Sleep difficulties, depression, and anxiety were observed in more than half of moderate-to-severe AD patients and were significantly associated with decrements in HRQoL and with work-related impairment. Reducing the burden of these psychosocial comorbidities in AD could have significant benefit to patients and society.

Tofacitinib in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire Items in Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Induction Studies

BACKGROUND

Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). We examined the effect of tofacitinib induction treatment on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) items in adults with moderate to severe UC.

METHODS

Data were pooled from the randomized, 8‑week, double-blind, phase 3 OCTAVE Induction 1 and 2 studies. The IBDQ was self-administered by patients at baseline, week 4, and week 8, with higher scores indicating better health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Change from baseline in IBDQ items was analyzed for 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily (BID) vs placebo using a linear mixed-effects model, with no multiplicity adjustment performed. Effect sizes were calculated. Subgroup analyses by tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) experience were performed.

RESULTS

Significant improvements (nominal P < 0.05) were observed in all IBDQ items with 10 mg of tofacitinib BID vs placebo at weeks 4 and 8. For the overall population, the largest treatment differences across all items were reported for "bowel movements been loose" at weeks 4 and 8, and "problem with rectal bleeding" at week 8 (mean treatment differences all 1.1; both in bowel symptoms domain). These items also showed the largest effect sizes. Treatment benefits were generally slightly numerically higher in TNFi-experienced vs TNFi-naïve patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib induction therapy improved all IBDQ items vs placebo in patients with UC, reflecting improvements in HRQoL, with greatest benefits reported in bowel symptoms domain items (Funded by Pfizer Inc; OCTAVE Induction 1 and OCTAVE Induction 2; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01465763 and NCT01458951, respectively).

Costs and Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Atopic Dermatitis Using Advanced Therapies in the United States: Analysis of a Retrospective Claims Database

INTRODUCTION

For many, atopic dermatitis (AD) is not adequately controlled with topical regimens. This analysis examined treatment using advanced therapies and associated costs.

METHODS

The IQVIA Health Plan Claims data set was analyzed. Patients aged ≥ 12 years with AD who newly initiated advanced therapy after the availability of dupilumab (March 28, 2017) and had ≥ 6 months continuous enrollment before and after their first advanced therapy claim (index date) were included. Advanced therapies included dupilumab, systemic corticosteroids (SCSs), systemic immunosuppressants (SISs), and phototherapy. A multivariate regression model was used to predict annualized follow-up healthcare costs.

RESULTS

In total, 1980 patients were included (61.1% female; mean age, 41.2 years [SD, 17.4]; 11.3% < 18 years). Pre-index date, 65.2% of patients used topical corticosteroids (TCSs; 40.7% and 32.1% used medium and high potency, respectively). The most common advanced therapy was SCSs (N = 1453 [73.4%]; 69.2% prednisone) followed by dupilumab (N = 265 [13.4%]), SISs (N = 99 [5.0%]; 47.5% methotrexate), and phototherapy (N = 163 [8.2%]). Of patients treated with dupilumab, SISs, and phototherapy, 17.4%, 26.3%, and 14.1%, respectively, were prescribed SCSs post-index date. Overall, 62.6% of patients initiating SCSs, 49.1% initiating dupilumab, 64.6% initiating SISs, and 36.2% initiating phototherapy were prescribed TCSs post-index date. Mean annualized total costs (SD) post-index date were $20,722 ($47,014): $11,196 ($41,549) in medical costs ($7973 [$35,133] in outpatient visit costs) and $9526 ($21,612) in pharmacy costs. Mean annualized total cost (SD) varied significantly (P < 0.05) by index treatment: dupilumab, $36,505 ($14,028); SCSs, $17,924 ($49,019); SISs, $24,762 ($47,583); phototherapy, and $17,549 ($57,238).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching to combination therapy with SCSs and TCSs was common within 6 months of initiating advanced therapy in patients with AD. Patients also incurred significant pharmacy and outpatient costs. These results highlight the difficulty of managing AD with these existing treatment options.

Living with ulcerative colitis in Germany: a retrospective analysis of dose escalation, concomitant treatment use and healthcare costs

Aims: To investigate treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) using real-world German health insurance claims data.Materials and methods: A retrospective, longitudinal cohort study was conducted from a German statutory health insurance database for adult patients with UC indexed on biologic therapy initiation (2013-2015). Anonymized data were evaluated for 12 months prior to (baseline) through 24 months after (follow-up) indexing. Biologic dose escalations, steroid and immunosuppressant use, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs were evaluated, with significant differences assessed across and between index biologics. Descriptive statistics, chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, and analysis of variance were performed.Results: The analysis included 304 patients (adalimumab, n = 125; golimumab, n = 47; infliximab, n = 114; vedolizumab, n = 18). Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar across biologics. Dose escalations occurred in 58% of patients (73% of patients receiving adalimumab), with 41% receiving subsequent de-escalation. Steroids were used during follow-up by 74% of patients; 25% received steroids >14 weeks after indexing. Overall, 41% of patients received an immunosuppressant during follow-up. Steroid and immunosuppressant use were similar across biologics. Total direct healthcare costs were higher during follow-up than baseline and differed significantly across treatments (p < .05), with highest costs for golimumab. Biologic costs contributed to a major portion of follow-up costs. HCRU and costs for most resources were higher in the first 12-month follow-up period than baseline. All resource use except gastroenterology visits returned to, or below, baseline levels 13-24 months post-index date.Limitations: There was potential for inappropriate inclusion/exclusion due to miscoding. Patients may have received biologics >12 months prior to the index date. Biologic originators and biosimilars could not be differentiated.Conclusions: These data suggest that control with current biologics is suboptimal. Further treatment options that provide sustained steroid-free remission for this patient population without the need for dose escalations or concomitant therapies may be warranted.

Patient and economic burdens of postherpetic neuralgia in China

Background

Little is known about the patient-reported and economic burdens of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) among China’s urban population.

Methods

This noninterventional study was conducted among adults ≥40 years with PHN who were seeking medical care at eight urban hospitals in China. At one study site, patients completed a questionnaire evaluating the patient-reported disease burden (N=185). The questionnaire consisted of validated patient-reported outcomes including the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), 5-dimension, 3-level EuroQol (EQ-5D-3L), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Specific Health Problems. Questions on non-pharmacologic therapy and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses were also included. At all study sites, physicians (N=100) completed a structured review of patient charts (N=828), which was used to derive health care resource utilization and associated costs from the societal perspective. Annual costs in Chinese Yuan Renminbi (RMB) for the year 2016 were converted to US dollars (US$).

Results

Patients (N=185, mean age 63.0 years, 53.5% female) reported pain of moderate severity (mean BPI score 4.6); poor sleep quantity (average of 5.3 hrs per night) and quality; and poorer health status on the EQ-5D-3L relative to the general Chinese population. Respondents also reported average annual OOP costs of RMB 16,873 (US$2541) per patient, mainly for prescription PHN medications (RMB 8990 [US$1354]). Substantial work impairment among employed individuals resulted in annual indirect costs of RMB 28,025 (US$4221). In the chart review, physicians reported that patients (N=828) had substantial health resource utilization, especially office visits; 98% had all-cause and 95% had PHN-related office visits. Total annual direct medical costs were RMB 10,002 (US$1507), mostly driven by hospitalizations (RMB 8781 [US$1323]).

Conclusion

In urban China, PHN is associated with a patient-reported burden, affecting sleep, quality-of-life, and daily activities including work impairment, and an economic burden resulting from direct medical costs and indirect costs due to lost productivity. These burdens suggest the need for appropriate prevention and management of PHN.

The Epidemiology of Herpes Zoster and Postherpetic Neuralgia in China: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Few studies have examined the epidemiology of herpes zoster (HZ) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) in China. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of HZ and PHN in China, and to examine the clinical characteristics of patients identified with PHN.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study conducted in 24 hospitals in seven cities in China. Prevalence of HZ and PHN was determined by physician (n = 100) chart review of patients (n = 36,170) aged ≥ 40 years seeking medical care over a 30- to 60-day period. The health history of patients identified with PHN was obtained and included time since diagnosis of HZ or PHN, time since onset of PHN-related pain, and the methods used for diagnosing HZ and PHN.

Results

The prevalence rates of HZ and PHN were 7.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.5–8.0] and 2.3% (95% CI 2.2–2.5), respectively. Of patients with HZ, 29.8% developed PHN. Rates of HZ and PHN increased with age and were highest in patients aged ≥ 70 years (10.6% and 4.1%, respectively). The majority of patients with PHN were diagnosed with HZ (80.9%) and PHN (83.8%) for < 1 year, and had experienced PHN-related pain for < 1 year (80.5%). Patient description and clinical examination were most commonly used to diagnose HZ and PHN.

Conclusion

These results provide current estimates of the prevalence of HZ and PHN in the general adult population in urban China. These rates are similar to previously reported rates in China and worldwide, and highlight the global nature of HZ and PHN.

Funding

Pfizer Inc.

Patient and physician preferences for ulcerative colitis treatments in the United States

Purpose: This study aimed to elicit patient and physician preferences for ulcerative colitis (UC) treatments in the United States (US).

Patients and methods: The following UC treatment attributes included in the discrete-choice experiment (DCE) were identified during qualitative interviews with both patients and physicians: time to symptom improvement, chance of long-term symptom control, risks of serious infection and malignancy, mode and frequency of administration, and need for steroids. The DCE survey instruments were developed and administered to patients and physicians. A random-parameters logit model was used to estimate preference weights and conditional relative importance for these attributes.

Results: A total of 200 patients with moderate to severe UC (status determined using self-reported medication history) and 200 gastroenterologists completed the survey. Patients’ average age was 42 years; most (59%) were female. Patients considered symptom control 2.5 times as important as time to symptom improvement and 5-year risk of malignancy almost as important as long-term symptom control (relative importance, 0.79 vs 0.96 for long-term symptom control); they preferred oral to subcutaneous or intravenous administration (relative importance, 0.47 vs 0.11 and 0.18, respectively). For physicians, symptom control was the most important attribute and was five times as important as the risk of malignancy.

Conclusion: Both patients and physicians considered long-term symptom control the most important attribute relative to others; however, risk of malignancy was of almost-equal importance to patients but not physicians. Differences between patients’ and physicians’ preferences highlight the need for improved communication about the relevant benefits and risks of different UC treatments to improve therapeutic decision-making.

Population-based cohort of 500 patients with Gaucher disease in Israel

OBJECTIVE

To characterise a population-based cohort of patients with Gaucher disease (GD) in Israel relative to the general population and describe sociodemographic and clinical differences by disease severity (ie, enzyme replacement therapy [ERT] use).

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted.

SETTING

Data from the Clalit Health Services electronic health record (EHR) database were used.

PARTICIPANTS

The study population included all patients in the Clalit EHR database identified as having GD as of 30 June 2014.

RESULTS

A total of 500 patients with GD were identified and assessed. The majority were ≥18 years of age (90.6%), female (54.0%), Jewish (93.6%) and 34.8% had high socioeconomic status, compared with 19.0% in the general Clalit population. Over half of patients with GD with available data (51.0%) were overweight/obese and 63.5% had a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥1, compared with 46.6% and 30.4%, respectively, in the general Clalit population. The majority of patients with GD had a history of anaemia (69.6%) or thrombocytopaenia (62.0%), 40.4% had a history of bone events and 22.2% had a history of cancer. Overall, 41.2% had received ERT.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing a population-based cohort of patients with GD is essential to understanding disease progression and management. In this study, we highlight the need for physicians to monitor patients with GD regardless of their ERT status.

Obesity in Germany and Italy: prevalence, comorbidities, and associations with patient outcomes

Purpose

This study investigated the association between body mass index (BMI) and three comorbid conditions (type 2 diabetes [T2D], prediabetes, and hypertension) on humanistic and economic outcomes.

Patients and methods

This retrospective observational study collected data from German (n=14286) and Italian (n=9433) respondents to the 2013 European Union National Health and Wellness Survey, a cross-sectional, nationally representative online survey of the general adult population. Respondents were grouped, based on their self-reported BMI, and stratified into three other comorbid conditions (T2D, prediabetes, and hypertension). Generalized linear models, controlling for demographics and health characteristics, tested the relationship between BMI and health status, work productivity loss, and health care resource utilization. Indirect and direct costs were calculated based on overall work productivity loss and health care resource utilization, respectively. The same generalized linear models were also performed separately for those with T2D, prediabetes, and hypertension.

Results

The sample of German respondents was 50.16% male, with a mean age of 46.68 years (SD =16.05); 35.24% were classified as overweight and 21.29% were obese. In Italy, the sample was 48.34% male, with a mean age of 49.27 years (SD =15.75); 34.85% were classified as overweight, and 12.89% were obese. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that, in both countries, higher BMI was associated with worse humanistic outcomes and only those from Germany also reported greater direct and indirect costs. Differences in the impact of BMI on outcomes by country were additionally found when the sample was stratified into those with prediabetes, T2D, and hypertension.

Conclusion

The high percentage of patients who are overweight or obese in Germany and Italy remains problematic. Better elucidating the impact of overweight or obese BMI, as well as the incremental effects of relevant comorbid conditions, on humanistic and economic outcomes is critical to quantify the multifaceted burden on individuals and society.

Burden of Ulcerative Colitis on Functioning and Well-being: A Systematic Literature Review of the SF-36® Health Survey

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This review is the first to evaluate the burden of ulcerative colitis [UC] on patients' quality of life by synthesizing data from studies comparing scores from the SF-36® Health Survey, a generic measure assessing eight quality-of-life domains, between UC patients and matched reference samples.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published literature identified articles reporting SF-36 domains or physical and mental component summary scores [PCS, MCS] from UC and reference samples. Burden of disease for each SF-36 domain was then summarized across studies by comparing weighted mean differences in scores between patient and reference samples with minimally important difference thresholds.

RESULTS

Thirty articles met pre-specified inclusion criteria. SF-36 scores were extracted from five samples of patients with active disease, 11 samples with a mixture of disease activity, five samples of patients in clinical remission, and 13 samples of patients following proctocolectomy with ileostomy or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, along with respective reference samples. Clinically meaningful burden was observed in samples with active or mixed disease activity [deficits: PCS = 5.6, MCS = 5.5] on all SF-36 domains except Physical Functioning. No burden was observed in samples in remission or post-surgical patients [deficits: PCS = 0.8, MCS = 0.4] except for the General Health perception domain.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with active UC experience a clinically meaningful burden of disease across most aspects of quality of life. Patients with inactive UC exhibit negligible disease burden and are comparable to the general population on most quality-of-life outcomes. Thus, treatments which effectively induce and maintain remission may restore physical and mental health status.

Physician perceptions of pharmacologic treatment options for chorea associated with Huntington disease in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To survey neurologists and obtain clinical perceptions of tetrabenazine for the treatment of chorea in patients with Huntington disease (HD).

METHODS

Board-certified/board-eligible neurologists, in practice for ≥5 years, who had treated treat ≥3 HD patients in the past 2 years, were recruited from an online physician panel to participate in a cross-sectional, web-based survey. Respondents provided information about themselves, their practice, approaches to HD chorea management and perceptions of available treatments.

RESULTS

Two hundred neurologists responded to the survey. Based on clinician responses, the most common reasons to treat chorea are impairment in activities of daily living (54%) and quality of life (41%). Although tetrabenazine was the only approved treatment for chorea in HD patients at the time of this analysis, it was only prescribed to ∼50% of patients with HD-related chorea. More than half of physicians perceive tetrabenazine as having minimal or no effectiveness in improving chorea. More than 40% of physicians consider tetrabenazine to be a non-optimal treatment, and 51% of physicians agree that they are unable to titrate to efficacious doses due to adverse side effects or tolerability concerns. Physicians report that side effects leading to dose interruptions (33%) and reductions (30%) occur in their patients "often" or "almost always". The most common side effects that led to insufficient dosing and disruptions in titration were sedation and somnolence (41%), depression (24%) and anxiety (22%).

CONCLUSIONS

Many physicians who treat HD-related chorea report that tolerability issues with tetrabenazine impact their ability to effectively use tetrabenazine in their clinical practice.

The association between psoriasis and health-related quality of life, work productivity, and healthcare resource use in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune mediated inflammatory condition that affects a significant amount of the global population. Yet geographic variability in the consequences of psoriasis warrants region-level analyses.

OBJECTIVE

The current study contributes to the psoriasis outcomes literature by offering a comprehensive assessment of the humanistic and economic burden in Brazil.

METHODS

The 2012 Brazil National Health and Wellness Survey (N=12,000) was used to assess health-related quality of life (Short Form-12, version 2), work productivity, and healthcare resource use associated with experiencing psoriasis vs. no psoriasis, along with varying levels of psoriasis severity.

RESULTS

A total of 210 respondents reported diagnosis of psoriasis (N=157, 42, and 11 reporting mild, moderate, and severe psoriasis, respectively). Compared with controls, respondents with psoriasis reported diminished mental component summary scores and health utilities, as well as increased presenteeism, activity impairment, and physician visits over the past six months, adjusting for covariates. Among those with psoriasis, physical health decreased as psoriasis severity increased. Although work productivity and healthcare resource utilization did not differ with psoriasis severity, the high rates of productivity loss (e.g. 45.5% presenteeism in the severe psoriasis group) suggest an economic burden.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Cost analyses were not performed, and cross-sectional patient-reported data limit causal conclusions and may reflect reporting biases.

CONCLUSIONS

Nevertheless, these results suggest a significant burden to patients with psoriasis across both humanistic and economic outcomes. The association between psoriasis and mental health aspects and health utilities were particularly strong and exceeded what would be considered clinically meaningful.

Oncologists' Perceptions of Drug Affordability Using NCCN Evidence Blocks: Results from a National Survey

BACKGROUND

The increasing prevalence of cancer coupled with approvals of new drugs and technologies used in therapy have brought increased scrutiny to the cost and value of treatments in oncology. To address the rising concern about oncology drug costs, several organizations have developed value frameworks to help assess the value of oncology regimens. The objective of this study was to assess oncologists' perceptions, awareness, and knowledge of all oncology value frameworks in the United States and to understand oncologists' perceptions of affordability in the context of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Evidence Blocks.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) assess oncologists' awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and ratings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework (AVF), the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) value framework, NCCN Evidence Blocks, and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center's DrugAbacus; (b) assess oncologists' knowledge and perceptions of drug affordability as defined by the NCCN Evidence Blocks methodology; and (c) determine the factors that influence drug affordability ratings.

METHODS

Data were collected from an electronic cross-sectional survey of 200 U.S.-based oncologists from a variety of practice settings. Oncologists were asked about their knowledge and perceptions of 4 value frameworks-NCCN Evidence Blocks, AVF, the ICER value framework, and DrugAbacus. Using NCCN Evidence Blocks, oncologists were asked to rate a variety of hypothetical cancer therapies and assign costs (in U.S. dollars) to the 5 levels of affordability. Additional questions that assessed perceived patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and comfort level in assessing affordability were also included in the survey.

RESULTS

Oncologists were most familiar with NCCN Evidence Blocks (90%), followed by the AVF (84%), ICER value framework (57%), and DrugAbacus (56%). Oncologists rated affordability higher (mean rating 3: moderately expensive) versus the actual NCCN panel affordability rating (mean rating 1: very expensive). The affordability rating was similar across a variety of hypothetical cancer therapies and tumor types (rating: 3). Oncologists estimated the costs for this rating of 3 to range from $4,600 to $6,000 per month, which was inconsistent with actual drug costs. Oncologists estimated the mean monthly OOP costs for patients with insurance to range from $1,260 for a new oral medication to $1,700 for a new infused medication. Only 26% of oncologists were comfortable or very comfortable with rating costs associated with affordability levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveyed oncologists rated cancer therapies as more affordable (per NCCN Evidence Blocks criteria) than NCCN panel ratings. Costs associated with affordability were not consistent with actual treatment costs; however, most oncologists were not comfortable with rating affordability. Patient OOP costs had the biggest influence on affordability ratings; however, physicians overestimated patient OOP costs significantly. There is an opportunity to improve the value frameworks, especially with regard to affordability assessment.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Genentech. Shah-Manek is employed by Ipsos Healthcare, a health care consulting company that received funding from Genentech to conduct this study. DiBonaventura was employed by Ipsos Healthcare at the time of this study. Wong and Ravelo are employed by Genentech. Shah-Manek has consulted with Genentech, Merck, Alkermes, Avanis, Alnylam, Novo Nordisk, Teva, Lilly, and BMS. This work was presented as an oral presentation at the ASCO 2017 Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois, on June 2-6, 2017.

Oncologists’ perceptions of affordability in the NCCN evidence block value frameworks

6511

Background: The increasing prevalence of cancer coupled with approvals of new drugs and technologies used in therapy have brought increased scrutiny to the cost and value of treatments in oncology. To address the rising concern about oncology drug costs, NCCN has developed the Evidence Blocks (EB) framework to help assess the value of oncology regimens. The objective of this study was to assess and understand oncologist’s perceptions of affordability in the context of the NCCN EB framework. Methods: Data were collected from an electronic cross-sectional survey of 200 US-based oncologists recruited from an online panel. Using the NCCN EB framework, oncologists were asked to rate a variety of hypothetical cancer therapies and assign costs (in US dollars) to the five levels of affordability. Additional questions assessing perceived patient out-of-pocket costs and comfort level in assessing affordability were also included in the survey. Results: Oncologists’ ratings for an existing cancer immunotherapy were generally similar across the EBs (ratings of 4), however oncologists rated affordability higher (3: Moderately Expensive) vs. the actual NCCN panel affordability rating (1: Very Expensive). The affordability rating was similar across a variety of hypothetical cancer therapies and tumor types (rating of 3). Oncologists estimated the costs for this rating of 3 to range from $4600-$6000 per month, which was inconsistent with actual drug costs. Oncologists estimated the mean monthly out-of-pocket costs for patients with insurance to range from $1260 for a new oral medication to $1700 for a new infused medication. Only 26% of oncologists were comfortable or very comfortable with rating costs associated with affordability levels. Conclusions: Surveyed oncologists rated cancer therapies as more affordable than NCCN panel ratings. Costs associated with affordability were not consistent with actual treatment costs; however, most oncologists were not comfortable with rating affordability.