Treatment Patterns and Economic Burden Among Elderly Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treated with Hypomethylating Agents: A SEER-Medicare Analysis

Abstract Introduction: Previously, we assessed the economic burden of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) among Medicare patients and found that the economic burden of relapse is high, at approximately 1.2 and 1.6 times the monthly per-patient costs associated with early and late post-remission therapy, respectively (Tabah A, et al. Blood 2020:136(suppl 1):45). A notably high proportion of patients (55%) received ≥ 1 cycle of a hypomethylating agent (HMA). Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the economic burden of AML among a subgroup of elderly patients who received only HMA monotherapy during induction and then achieved disease remission. Healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs associated with various phases (ie, induction, post-remission therapy, and post-relapse) were assessed. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, which comprised Medicare claims (parts A, B, and D from 2007 through 2016) and the US National Cancer Institute's SEER database (cancer diagnoses from 2007 to 2015). Included patients had an AML diagnosis in the SEER registry, were ≥ 65 years of age at the AML diagnosis date, had initiated HMA (and no other active treatment) in the outpatient (OP) setting during the first induction cycle post-AML diagnosis, and had an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision (ICD-9/10) diagnosis code for AML remission following the initiation of induction therapy. Patients were excluded if they had another blood malignancy (including a history of myelodysplastic syndromes), had received hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, or were enrolled in a clinical trial. The induction therapy period was defined as the first initiation of HMA post diagnosis (index date) to the end of the cycle during which a patient had a code for AML remission. The 6-month period prior to the index date was defined as the baseline period. The post-remission phase ended at the earliest of relapse or end of follow-up (ie, death, end of eligibility, or end of available data [December 31, 2016]). The post-relapse phase was from the date of first AML relapse ICD-9/10 code after remission to the end of follow-up. Patient characteristics during the baseline period were summarized descriptively. HCRU and costs (adjusted to 2019 US dollars) associated with induction and post-remission therapy were assessed during days that were part of a treatment cycle. The average per-patient monthly HCRU and costs were reported for the induction, post-remission, and post-relapse phases. Results: A total of 71 patients with newly diagnosed AML (azacitidine: n = 31; decitabine: n = 40) received HMA induction therapy and achieved remission. The median age at AML diagnosis was 78.8 years, 50.7% of patients were male, and 85.9% were White. The mean ± standard deviation (median) time from index date to the end of follow-up was 16.0 ± 12.3 (14.0) months. A total of 63.4% of patients (n = 45) received post-remission therapy. Among all patients, 43.7% relapsed and 85.9% died by the end of follow-up. OP visits were the most common type of visit across all phases with 95.6% of patients having ≥ 1 OP visit during post-remission therapy and 83.9% during the post-relapse phase. Inpatient (IP) visits were highest in the post-relapse phase with 77.4% of patients having ≥ 1 IP visit. The monthly mean per-patient healthcare costs were highest for the post-relapse phase, followed by post-remission therapy, and induction (Table). Costs associated with the OP setting were the greatest contributor to the induction costs (48.9%) while costs associated with the IP setting were the drivers of the costs in the post-remission therapy (56.2%) and post-relapse (72.8%) phases. Conclusions: The economic burden of AML treated with HMA induction therapy was highest in the post-relapse phase, at approximately 1.7 and 1.6 times the monthly per-patient costs during the induction and post-remission therapy phases, respectively. In addition, IP costs made up nearly two-thirds of total monthly per-patient costs in the post-relapse phase, up from approximately 44% and 56% of the induction and post-remission therapy phases, respectively. Treatment options that extend the post-remission phase would reduce the high economic burden associated with AML relapse. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Brunner: Celgene, Forty Seven Inc, Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Novartis, Celgene, Takeda, AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Huggar: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Copher: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhou: Sanofi: Research Funding; Analysis Group: Current Employment, Other: Employee of Analysis Group which received consulting fees for this project . Zichlin: Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Current Employment; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Anderson: Analysis Group, which received consultancy fees from GSK: Consultancy, Current Employment. Downes: nalysis Group (employment), Bristol Myers Squibb (consultancy): Consultancy, Current Employment. McBride: BMS: Current Employment.

Download Full-text

Economic Burden of Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Retrospective Study Using the SEER-Medicare Database

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-136768 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 45-45

Author(s):

Ashley Tabah ◽

David Huggar ◽

Krystal Huey ◽

Ronda Copher ◽

Zheng-Yi Zhou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Economic Burden ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Analysis Group ◽

Remission Period ◽

Medicare Database

Introduction: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) poses significant economic burden on the healthcare system, particularly during induction therapy and at disease relapse. The burden associated with ongoing post-remission therapy is less clear. In patients diagnosed with AML enrolled in Medicare who received an induction therapy and achieved disease remission, we assessed the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs associated with each disease period (induction, early/late post-remission, and post-relapse). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, comprising Medicare claims (parts A, B, and D from 2007 to 2016) and the US National Cancer Institute's SEER database (cancer diagnoses from 2007 to 2015). Identified patients had a diagnosis of AML in the SEER registry, were ≥ 65 years at the AML diagnosis date, initiated chemotherapy post-AML diagnosis (i.e. induction), and had an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision (ICD-9/10) diagnosis code for AML remission following the start of therapy. Patients were excluded if they had another blood malignancy, had received a prior hematopoietic stem cell transplant, or were enrolled in a clinical trial. Induction was defined as any therapy received from the date of first post-diagnosis chemotherapy initiation (index date) to the end of the cycle during which a patient had an ICD-9/10 code for AML remission. The 6 months prior to the index date was defined as the baseline period. Post-remission therapy was divided into an early post-remission period, which included any therapy initiated within the first 60 days (≤ 60 d) after end of induction, and a late post-remission period, which included therapy initiated more than 60 days (> 60 d) after end of induction. If specific treatment information was available, late post-remission therapy was defined by a treatment switch occurring > 60 d after end of induction. Post-remission therapy ended at the earliest of relapse or end of follow-up (i.e., death, end of eligibility, or end of available data [December 31, 2016]). The post-relapse period was from the date of first AML relapse ICD-9/10 code after remission to the end of follow-up. Baseline patient characteristics, as well as HCRU and costs (adjusted to 2019 US dollars) during the baseline, induction, post-remission, and post-relapse periods, were summarized descriptively. HCRU and costs associated with induction and post-remission therapy periods were assessed during days that were part of a treatment cycle. The average per patient per month (PPPM) HCRU and costs were reported. Duration of response (DoR) from the first remission to the earliest of relapse or death was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: A total of 530 patients were identified. The median age at AML diagnosis was 73 years, 53.6% of patients were male, and 80.6% were white. The median time from index date to the end of follow-up was 13.5 months. Most patients received therapy with hypomethylating agents during the AML treatment. A total of 31.9% of patients who achieved remission did not receive post-remission therapy during follow-up; for these patients, mean (median) time from end of induction to relapse or end of follow-up was 125 (23) days. A total of 63.2% of patients received chemotherapy in the early post-remission period, and 43.0% of all patients went on to receive chemotherapy in the late post-remission period. The median DoR was 5.8 months; a total of 48.9% of patients had relapsed and 80.2% had died by the end of follow-up. The mean PPPM healthcare costs were highest for induction, followed by post-relapse, early post-remission, and late post-remission periods (Table). Costs associated with the inpatient (IP) setting were the greatest contributor to PPPM costs across all periods. IP visits were most common during induction with 92.1% of patients having ≥ 1 IP visit, relative to 53.8% during baseline, 65.7% during early post-remission, 71.5% during late post-remission, and 91.1% post-relapse. Conclusions: The economic burden of relapse is approximately 1.2 and 1.6 times higher than the mean PPPM healthcare costs during early and late post-remission periods, respectively. There exists a large unmet need for therapies that will extend the duration of the post-remission period and reduce the overall economic burden of AML. Disclosures Tabah: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Huggar:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; FibroGen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Huey:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Copher:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Zhou:BMS: Other: Employee of Analysis Group Inc., which received consulting fees. Zichlin:BMS: Other: Employee of Analysis Group Inc., which received consulting fees. Koenigsberg:BMS: Other: Employee of Analysis Group Inc., which received consulting fees. Brunner:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Forty-Seven Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Survival Rates, Healthcare Resource Use and Costs of Elderly Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Receiving Dasatinib or Nilotinib As Second-Line Therapy

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.2618.2618 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 2618-2618

Author(s):

B. Douglas Smith ◽

Jun Liu ◽

Dominick Latremouille-Viau ◽

Zhou Zhou ◽

Annie Guerin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Baseline Period ◽

Harvard University ◽

Second Line ◽

Second Line Therapy ◽

Analysis Group ◽

Line Therapy

Abstract Introduction: Dasatinib and nilotinib are two second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that are well established as treatment options for patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myeloid leukemia (Ph+ CML) in chronic phase resistant or intolerant to imatinib and the treatment guidelines do not differentiate based on patient age. Importantly, elderly patients (≥65 years old) account for about half of CML patients; yet there are little data reported focusing on outcomes in this distinct group of patients, often with multiple medical problems and different socio-economic profiles when compared to younger patients. This study aimed to compare survival rates, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and medical service costs between elderly CML patients receiving dasatinib versus nilotinib as second-line therapy after imatinib. Methods: Patients aged ≥65 years with ≥2 CML diagnoses who received imatinib as first-line therapy followed by nilotinib or dasatinib as second-line therapy were identified using the Medicare Research Identifiable Files (RIF) from 2006 to 2012. Selected patients were continuously enrolled in the Part A (i.e., institutional claims), Part B (i.e., non-institutional claims), and Part D (i.e., drug events) for ≥6 months before and ≥1 month after the second-line TKI therapy initiation date (i.e., index date). Patients enrolled in a clinical trial, those with a stem-cell transplant, or receiving chemotherapy (except hydroxyurea) during the 6 months before the index date (i.e., baseline period) were excluded from the study. Based on the second-line TKI, patients were classified as nilotinib users or dasatinib users. Survival rates were estimated using Kaplan Meir analyses and compared between nilotinib and dasatinib users using Cox proportional-hazards models. HRU and healthcare costs (USD 2013; payer’s perspective) were observed from the index date up to the end of follow-up. Because the length of follow-up varied across patients, HRU and costs were reported per-patient-per-month (PPPM). Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated using Poisson regression models and monthly cost differences were estimated using general linear models with a log link and a gamma distribution or two-part models. Multivariate regression analyses were used to adjust for potential confounding factors measured during the baseline period or at the index date. Results: After applying the sample selection criteria, 659 patients using a second-line TKI therapy were selected; 280 were nilotinib users and 379 were dasatinib users. On average, patients had a follow-up of 24 months (median=22 months) after the index date. The mean age was 76 years and most patients were female (62%). Nilotinib and dasatinib users were generally similar in terms of gender, region of residence, prior imatinib treatment duration, CML complexity, and comorbidity profile. However, nilotinib users were slightly older than dasatinib users; a greater proportion of nilotinib users were 80+ years old at the index date (35% of nilotinib users vs. 27% of dasatinib users; p=.039). In addition, the proportion of patients with cardiovascular disease (40% of nilotinib users vs. 31% of dasatinib users; p=0.015) or congestive heart failure (23% of nilotinib users vs. 14% of dasatinib users; p=0.002) during the baseline period was higher in nilotinib users when compared to dasatinib users. Despite these differences, the median survival time was >4.9 years for nilotinib users and 4.0 years for dasatinib users (log rank test p=.032). After adjusting for potential confounding factors, nilotinib users had a mortality risk that was 38% lower than that of dasatinib users (p=.006) and, nilotinib users had 21% fewer inpatient admissions, 17% fewer inpatient days, 31% fewer emergency room visits, and 12% fewer outpatient visits when compared to dasatinib users (PPPM; all p≤.001). The adjusted monthly medical cost was $378 lower in nilotinib users when compared to dasatinib users (PPPM; p=.045). Conclusion: This retrospective study of elderly Medicare beneficiaries with CML receiving second-line therapy with dasatinib or nilotinib suggested that those receiving nilotinib had longer survival, lower HRU, and lower medical costs than those receiving dasatinib. Further health outcome researches and longer term studies focusing on elderly CML are needed to better define the best practice patterns. Disclosures Liu: Jun Liu is an employee of Harvard University which has received research funding from Analysis Group, Inc.: Employment. Latremouille-Viau:Dominick Latremouille-Viau is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which has received consulting fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Zhou:Zhou Zhou is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which has received consulting fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Guerin:Annie Guerin is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which has received consulting fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Fernandez:Daniel Fernandez is an employee of Harvard University which has received research funding from Analysis Group, Inc.: Employment. Yi:Dingdong Yi is an employee of Harvard University which has received research funding from Analysis Group, Inc.: Employment. Wang:Xufei Wang is an employee of Harvard University which has received research funding from Analysis Group, Inc.: Employment. Wu:Eric Q. Wu is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which has received consulting fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Mhatre:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Keir:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Novartis: stock options Other; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment.

Download Full-text

Benefits of Early Switching From Imatinib to a Second-Generation Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Following 12 Month Complete Cytogenetic Response Failure: A Chart Review Analysis.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.2792.2792 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 2792-2792

Author(s):

Daniel J. DeAngelo ◽

Lei Chen ◽

Annie Guerin ◽

Amy Styles ◽

Clemence Aberki ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Tyrosine Kinase ◽

Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor ◽

Disease Progression ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Second Generation ◽

Kinase Inhibitor ◽

Cytogenetic Response ◽

Analysis Group

Abstract Abstract 2792 Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines (version 1.2013) recommend that patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) should be tested for cytogenetic response 12 months following imatinib initiation. Failure to achieve complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) at 12 months should result in either an increased dose of imatinib (up to 800mg) or a change to a second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). This study observed patients who failed to achieve CCyR at 12 months following the initiation of imatinib and compared treatment response rates and disease progression between patients who switched to a second-generation TKI early versus patients who did not. Methods: An online chart abstraction form was used to survey US oncologists and hematologists. Physicians submitted de-identified information on up to 10 adult patients with CML-CP who initiated imatinib as first line therapy (between 01/01/2007 and 26/07/2010) and failed to achieve CCyR at 12 months (between 10–14 months). Patients either switched to a second-generation TKI within 3 months following CCyR failure (early-switchers), or remained on imatinib for ≥3 months following CCyR failure (non-switchers). Non-switchers may have later switched to a second-generation TKI. The index date was defined as the date of the 12-month CCyR failure. Detailed patient information was collected, including demographics, comorbidities, imatinib dosage, and hematologic and cytogenetic response prior to the index date. Cytogenetic response and disease progression was also collected after the index date. CCyR was defined as 0% Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) cells on cytogenetic testing. The proportion of patients achieving CCyR by 6, 12, and 24 months was reported among patients who had ≥1 cytogenetic test during these periods. Documented CCyR was defined as CCyR achievement analyzed among all patients, if patients were not tested for CCyR following the index date they were considered not to have achieved CCyR. Time to first documented CCyR achievement and time to disease progression were both estimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR), where exposure was calculated from the index date to the first documented CCyR achievement, or to the date of progression, respectively. Multivariate regression analyses controlled for age, sex, race, index year, Charlson comorbidity index, imatinib dose and hematological response prior to index date, percentage of Ph+ cells and CML disease duration at index date, number of days between CML diagnosis and imatinib initiation, and rise in transcript level and chromosome abnormalities in Ph+ cells reported prior to the index date. Results: The majority of the 108 surveyed physicians were from a private practice (72.2%) and a small/intermediate practice size (61.1%). Physicians provided information on 593 patients who failed to achieve CCyR at 12 months; 306 were early-switchers and 287 were non-switchers. Among the non-switchers, 78 later switched to a second-generation TKI, and 104 increased imatinib dose after the index date. Patient demographics and comorbidities were similar among early-switchers and non-switchers, however, results of the 12-month cytogenetic test revealed that early-switchers had a greater number of Ph+ positive cells (51. 5 ± 16.6) compared to non-switchers (47.2 ± 13.1, p=.002). The median follow-up time was 612.5 days (range = 91–1625) and 591 days (range = 365–1623), respectively. Among patients tested for cytogenetic response during the follow-up period (274 early-switchers and 252 non-switchers), 35% of early-switchers subsequently achieved CCyR, compared to 24 % of non-switchers (p=.006). Within 6 months after the index date, 4.7% of the early-switchers achieved CCyR vs. 0.4% of non-switchers; by 12 months, 20.1% vs. 12.3% achieved CCyR; and by 24 months, 33.6% vs. 21.8% achieved CCyR, respectively (all p<.016). After adjusting for confounding factors, early-switchers had an 80% greater documented CCyR achievement rate compared to that of non-switchers (HR=1.80; p=.002) and a progression rate that was 81% lower (3.8% vs.1.5%, HR=0.19, p=.034). Conclusion: Early switching from imatinib to a second-generation TKI following 12-month CCyR failure was associated with better cytogenetic response and a lower risk of progression. Disclosures: DeAngelo: Novartis: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Everolimus in AML. Chen:Novartis Oncology: Employment, Own stock in Novartis Other. Guerin:Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Employment, I am an employee of Analysis Group, Inc, which has received consulting fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Other, Research Funding. Styles:Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Employment, Research Funding. Aberki:Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Employment, Research Funding. Giguere-Duval:Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Employment, Research Funding. Wu:Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Employment, I am an employee of Analysis Group, Inc, which has received consulting fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Other, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Patients with Double-Class Refractory or Triple-Class Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective US Electronic Health Record Database Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-152301 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2705-2705

Author(s):

Feng Wang ◽

Boris Gorsh ◽

Maral DerSarkissian ◽

Prani Paka ◽

Rachel Bhak ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Funding ◽

Performance Status ◽

Treatment Patterns ◽

Multiple Drug ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Analysis Group ◽

Refractory Status ◽

Drug Classes ◽

Immunomodulatory Drug

Abstract Introduction: Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) resistant to multiple drug classes remain a high unmet need population, despite advances in MM patient care. The objective of this study was to assess real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with RRMM who had failed multiple prior lines of therapy (LOT) and were refractory to multiple drug classes to identify gaps in their treatment pathways. Methods: This longitudinal retrospective cohort study utilized the COTA de-identified real-world database derived from US electronic health records of partnered healthcare providers from Q3 1988 through Q1 2020. Adults with active RRMM previously exposed to a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and an immunomodulatory drug and who received ≥3 prior LOTs were identified. Patients were further categorized as refractory to a PI and an immunomodulatory drug (double-class refractory [DCR]) or additionally to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (i.e. daratumumab; triple-class refractory [TCR]). Determining refractory status was based on International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Index LOT was a new LOT after evidence of DCR or TCR status following ≥3 (DCR) or ≥4 (TCR) prior LOTs. Patient characteristics described included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, International Staging System (ISS) stage, cytogenetic risk, age, index date, sex, and follow up time. Treatment pattern assessments included treatments received before/during/after index LOT, reasons for discontinuation, refractory status, and retreatment characteristics. Patient outcomes (overall survival [OS], duration of treatment [DOT], and time to next therapy [TTNT]) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis methods. Results: After excluding patients who were aged <18 years at start of index LOT with no evidence of clinical activity and who participated in a clinical trial during index LOT, 381 (DCR) and 173 (TCR) patients were available for analysis. Median follow-up from index LOT initiation through end of data availability/death was 14 (DCR) and 8 (TCR) months. Demographic characteristics were consistent between DCR and TCR patients. Approximately half were aged ≥65 years (49% DCR; 53% TCR), majority had high-risk cytogenetics (56% DCR; 66% TCR) or prior autologous stem cell transplantation (>62%), and 14-16% had ISS stage III. Patients had a median of 3 (DCR) and 6 (TCR) prior LOTs. Prior to index LOT, bortezomib and lenalidomide were the most commonly received PI and immunomodulatory drug (received by >98% of DCR or TCR patients) and the most common PI and immunomodulatory drugs to which patients were refractory (71% and 84% DCR; 76% and 83% TCR, respectively). At index LOT, PI/immunomodulatory drug-based and daratumumab-based therapies remained the most common therapies. Bortezomib and lenalidomide had the longest time to refractory status and highest retreatment rates among DCR or TCR patients. Approximately 40% of TCR patients were retreated with daratumumab-based therapies after becoming refractory (Table). After index LOT, 70% of DCR and 58% of TCR patients continued to a subsequent LOT. Patients most frequently discontinued index LOT due to disease progression (59% DCR; 60% TCR), toxicity (23% DCR; 25% TCR), or doctor preference (14% DCR; 10% TCR). Median duration of gaps between LOTs generally were shorter than 1 month (Table). Median OS was 22.3 (DCR) and 11.6 (TCR) months. Median DOT was 3.3 (DCR) and 2.8 (TCR) months, and median TTNT was 4.1 (DCR) and 3.2 (TCR) months. In multivariate statistical analyses, inferior baseline ECOG performance scores, and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities were associated with worse prognosis (higher risk of death, shorter DOT, and shorter TTNT) in DCR and TCR patients. Age was not a significant factor after adjusting for other baseline factors. Conclusions: Treatment options are limited for US patients with DCR and TCR RRMM. DCR and TCR patients were frequently retreated with a PI, an immunomodulatory drug, or daratumumab, despite refractoriness to these agents. Many DCR and TCR MM patients stopped active MM treatment after discontinuing index treatment. Patients with DCR and TCR MM have poor prognosis, especially among high cytogenetic risk and poor performance status patients. This study provides the benchmark for new therapies, like BCMA-targeted agents, to be tested in this population. Funding: GSK (Study 217353). Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wang: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Gorsh: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. DerSarkissian: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment. Paka: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Bhak: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Boytsov: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zichlin: GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Analysis Group, Inc.: Consultancy, Current Employment. Sansbury: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yee: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Ferrante: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Khanal: GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment. Noman: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Duh: Novartis: Other: I am an employee of Analysis Group, a consulting company that received funding from Novartis for this research study..

Download Full-text

Thrombosis and Risk of Mortality in Newly Diagnosed High-Risk Polycythemia Vera: An Analysis of the Medicare Claims Database in the United States

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-141370 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 9-10

Author(s):

Naveen Pemmaraju ◽

Aaron T. Gerds ◽

Shreekant Parasuraman ◽

Jingbo Yu ◽

Anne Shah ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Risk Of Mortality ◽

Increased Risk ◽

History Of

Background Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events (TEs), a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Patients aged ≥60 years and/or with a history of thrombosis are considered to have high-risk PV. There is limited contemporary, real-world evidence exploring the effect of TEs on mortality in patients with PV. The aim of this analysis was to compare the risk of mortality in patients newly diagnosed with high-risk PV who experienced a TE vs those who did not experience a TE. Study Design and Methods All data from the Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims database (Parts A/B/D) from January 2010-December 2017 were used to identify patients with a PV diagnosis (all high risk based on cohort being ≥65 years of age) with ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims. The index date was the date of the first qualifying PV claim. Patients with a PV diagnosis or use of cytoreductive therapy within 12 months before the index date (pre-index period) were excluded; ≥12-months continuous medical and pharmacy enrollment pre-index dates was required. The study sample was categorized into TE and non-TE groups based on the occurrence of any of the following events during follow-up: deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, ischemic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack, peripheral arterial thrombosis, or superficial thrombophlebitis. TEs were evaluated from the index date to the end of follow-up. Cox regression analyses with time-varying effects were used to assess mortality risk among patients with PV, with post-index TE as a time-dependent variable, stratified by pre-index TE, and adjusting for patient demographic characteristics and comorbid conditions. Results A total of 56,176 Medicare FFS beneficiaries with PV diagnoses met inclusion criteria. The median age was 73 years, 51.9% were men, and 90.7% were white; 10,110 patients (18.0%) had a history of TE before diagnosis (ie, pre-index). In the follow-up period, 20,105 patients (35.8%) had a TE and 36,071 patients (64.2%) did not have a TE. In the comparison between the TE vs non-TE groups, the median (range) age (75.0 [65-104] vs 73.0 [65-106] years, respectively), mean (SD) Charlson comorbidity index score (3.1 [2.6] vs 2.2 [2.3]), and percentage of patients with a history of cardiovascular events (34.1% vs 23.8%), bleeding (13.3% vs 10.4%), or anemia (28.6% vs 23.4%) were higher (Table 1). Among all patients with PV, the median time from diagnosis to first post-index TE was 7.5 months. Among those with pre-index TE (n=10,093), median time from index to first post-index TE was 0.6 months, whereas patients without pre-index TE (n=46,083) had a median time to first post-index TE of 14.2 months. Among all patients with TE during follow-up, the most common TEs were ischemic stroke (47.5%), transient ischemic attack (30.9%), and acute myocardial infarction (30.5%). The risk of mortality was increased for patients who experienced a TE compared with those who did not (hazard ratio [HR; 95% CI], 9.3 [8.4-10.2]; P<0.0001). For patients who experienced a pre-index TE, the risk of mortality was increased for patients who experienced a subsequent TE during follow-up compared with patients who did not (HR [95% CI], 6.7 [5.8-7.8]; P<0.0001). Likewise, for patients who did not experience a pre-index TE, the risk of mortality was increased for patients who experienced a TE during follow-up compared with patients who did not (HR [95% CI], 13.1 [11.4-15.0]; P<0.0001). Conclusions In this real-world study, approximately one-third of patients with newly diagnosed high-risk PV experienced a TE during follow-up and had a 9-fold increased risk of mortality vs those who did not experience a TE. TE risk mitigation remains an important management goal in patients with PV, particularly in those with prior TE. Disclosures Pemmaraju: Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; SagerStrong Foundation: Other: Grant Support; Affymetrix: Other: Grant Support, Research Funding; MustangBio: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria; LFB Biotechnologies: Honoraria; Plexxikon: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pacylex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria; Roche Diagnostics: Honoraria; Cellectis: Research Funding; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria. Gerds:Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah:Avalere Health: Current Employment. Xi:Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation; Avalere Health: Current Employment. Kumar:Avalere Health: Current Employment; Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation. Scherber:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Verstovsek:Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Real-World Survival Among Patients with Intermediate- to High-Risk Myelofibrosis in the United States: Impact of Ruxolitinib Approval

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-140820 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 46-47

Author(s):

Srdan Verstovsek ◽

Shreekant Parasuraman ◽

Jingbo Yu ◽

Anne Shah ◽

Shambhavi Kumar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Time Frame ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Approval Time ◽

Risk Of Mortality ◽

Death Date

Background The myeloproliferative neoplasm myelofibrosis (MF) is associated with reduced overall survival (OS) compared with the general population (Hultcrantz M, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30[24]:2995-3001; Price GL, et al. PLoS One. 2014;9[3]:e90299). The Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in November 2011 for the treatment of adult patients with intermediate- or high-risk MF based on data from the phase 3 COMFORT trials, which showed significantly improved OS in patients who received RUX (Verstovsek S, et al. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10:156). Understanding the clinical benefit of RUX in real-world practice requires an understanding of changes in patient outcomes for those exposed to RUX compared with those never exposed to RUX, both before and after approval. The aim of this analysis was to assess the OS of patients newly diagnosed with intermediate- to high-risk MF before RUX approval, and for those who were RUX-unexposed vs -exposed in the post-RUX approval time frame. Study Design and Methods All data from the Medicare Fee-for-Service claims database (Parts A/B/D) from January 2010 to December 2017 were used to identify patients who were ≥65 years old (intermediate-1 or higher risk MF due to age) with ≥1 inpatient claim or ≥2 outpatient claims with a documented MF diagnosis. The index date was the date of the first qualifying MF claim; ≥12 months of pre-index continuous medical and pharmacy enrollment was required. Patients with evidence of an MF diagnosis ≤12 months before the index date were excluded. Patients with a diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome, hematologic malignancies (leukemias, multiple myeloma, and lymphomas), or solid tumors either ≤12 months before, on, or any time after index were also excluded in a stepwise manner. The study sample was classified into 3 groups: patients diagnosed with MF pre-RUX approval (index year 2010-2011; no post-index exposure to RUX); those diagnosed with MF post-RUX approval and unexposed to RUX (index year 2012-2017); and those diagnosed with MF post-RUX approval and exposed to RUX (index year 2012-2017). One-year survival rate and risk of mortality were estimated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. OS was measured from the index date until death or end of follow-up. Patients without a death date were censored at disenrollment or the end of the study period, whichever occurred first. Results Among eligible patients with an MF diagnosis (N=1677), median age was 78 years, 39.8% were male, and 84.1% were white. The analysis included 278 patients diagnosed pre-RUX approval (all RUX-unexposed) and 1399 diagnosed post-RUX approval (RUX-unexposed, n=1127; RUX-exposed, n=272). Median follow-up for the pre- and post-RUX approval groups was 12.5 and 11.3 mo (RUX-unexposed, 10.2 mo; RUX-exposed, 14.0 mo), respectively. In the pre-RUX approval group, 119 (42.8%) patients had a valid death date compared with 436 (31.2%) in the post-RUX approval group (RUX unexposed, n=382 [33.9%]; RUX exposed, n=54 [19.9%]). The 1-year survival rate (95% CI) was 55.6% (49.4%-61.3%) for the pre-RUX approval group, 72.5% (69.5%-75.2%) for the post-RUX approval RUX-unexposed group, and 82.3% (76.7%-86.7%) for the post-RUX approval RUX-exposed group (Figure). The risk of mortality was lowest among RUX-exposed patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26-0.50; P<0.0001 vs the pre-RUX approval group). Patients in the post-RUX approval group who had never been exposed to RUX also had a lower risk of mortality, although less pronounced than RUX-exposed patients, compared with the pre-RUX approval group (adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.80; P<0.0001). Conclusions In this real-world study of US patients diagnosed with intermediate- or high-risk MF, 1-year OS was improved in patients diagnosed after RUX approval compared with before RUX approval. Notably, in the post-RUX approval time frame, 1-year OS was greater for those who received RUX than for those who did not receive RUX. These findings complement the survival benefit results demonstrated in the COMFORT studies using real-world data. Disclosures Verstovsek: Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah:Avalere Health: Current Employment. Kumar:Avalere Health: Current Employment; Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation. Xi:Avalere Health: Current Employment; Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation. Harrison:Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Real-World Incidence and Clinical and Economic Burden of Managing Ocular Events in Patients with Active Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-139265 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 15-16

Author(s):

Feng Wang ◽

Shannon Ferrante ◽

Eric M Maiese ◽

Jenny Willson ◽

Chi-Chang Chen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Dry Eye ◽

Real World ◽

Economic Burden ◽

Research Funding ◽

Insurance Companies ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Private Company ◽

Blurred Vision

Introduction: Some novel cancer and supportive care therapies, such as chemotherapy, steroids, and immunotherapies, are known to cause eye-related side effects such as dryness or altered vision (Fu et al Oncotarget 2017). However, there is a paucity of evidence documenting their disease burden in practice. The aim of this retrospective, cohort study was to assess the incidence, and clinical and economic burden of managing ocular events (OEs) in patients receiving multiple myeloma (MM) treatment in clinical practice. Methods: A cohort of adult patients with MM was identified from a large U.S. insurance claims database (IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database), which is sourced from commercial insurance companies. Incidence, outpatient care, emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and costs were assessed for 5 OEs of interest: keratopathy/keratitis, blurred vision/decreased acuity, dry eye, eye pain, and photophobia. These OEs were identified by cross-walking from MedDRA 'corneal disorders' codes to international classification of disease (ICD) codes, which were confirmed by clinical experts. Incidence of OEs was assessed as the proportion of patients with OE after MM treatment initiation who did not have diagnosis indicative of OE in the 12-month baseline period. Descriptive analyses were performed, and resource utilization and costs (in US dollars) were reported on a per-patient-per-month (PPPM) basis. A separate cohort of hematology patients (N=26,923) was identified from the same database. The results were benchmarked against this larger cohort of patients. Results: Of the 2120 patients with incident MM (mean [SD] age: 60.2 [9.8]) included in the cohort, 248 (11.7%) patients had at least 1 incident OE during an average of 29.8 months of follow-up after initial MM treatment. Proportion of patients with at least 1 incident OE was 7.4% in the benchmark hematology cohort. Dry eye (n=129, 6.1%), blurred vision/decreased acuity (n=73, 3.4%), and keratopathy/keratitis (n=52, 2.5%) were the most frequent OEs observed. The incidence remained largely constant across baseline demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, and lines of MM therapies. Most incident OEs were diagnosed in the outpatient (OP)/physician's office setting by ophthalmologists (69.5%), except for blurred vision, which was predominantly diagnosed in non-ophthalmologist/non-optometrist setting. Median PPPM costs for managing OEs was $27, which is <1% of median all-cause costs during the follow-up period (median total all-cause PPPM costs: $17,286; median MM-related PPPM costs: $13,851). These costs were predominantly contributed by OP care (median PPPM cost: $19), including prescriptions (median PPPM cost: $16). ER visits (median PPPM cost: $66) and inpatient visits (median PPPM cost: $16) were uncommon (Table). Median PPPM costs for managing these OEs in hematology cohort was $20. Conclusions: Incident OEs were observed in ~12% of patients receiving treatment for MM based on real-world data, with the most common OEs being keratopathy/keratitis, dry eye, and blurred vision. When evaluated from the perspective of median PPPM costs, the clinical and economic burden for treating OEs was very low when compared with total all-cause PPPM costs or MM-related PPPM costs. The vast majority of these OEs require only OP care. ER visits or inpatient care were extremely rare. Further real-world evidence is warranted to assess the relationship between OEs and MM treatment. Funding: GSK (study: 208295). Table. Median OE-related PPPM Costs (US Dollars) in Incident MM Cohort (N=2,120) Table Disclosures Wang: GSK: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ferrante:GSK: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Maiese:GSK: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Willson:GSK: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Chen:GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding. Nunna:GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sun:GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kleinman:GSK: Consultancy; Eyeon Therapeutics, LLC.: Current equity holder in private company; Triphase Accelerator U.S Corporation: Consultancy; ONL Therapeutics, Inc: Consultancy; Revolution Medicines, Inc: Consultancy; Editas Medicine, Inc: Consultancy; Cleave Therapeutics, Inc: Consultancy; Coherus Biosciences, Inc: Consultancy; Synergy Research Inc: Consultancy; Zenith Epigenetics Ltd: Consultancy. Sansbury:GSK: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Download Full-text

Real-World Effectiveness of Voxelotor for Treating Sickle Cell Disease in the US

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-140525 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 25-25

Author(s):

Ahmar Urooj Zaidi ◽

Thokozeni Lipato ◽

Ofelia A. Alvarez ◽

Alexander Lonshteyn ◽

Derek Weycker ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Health Claims ◽

Transfusion Rate ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

The Us

Background: Until late 2019, few treatments had been approved by the FDA for treating sickle cell disease (SCD). Voxelotor (Oxbryta®) is a sickle hemoglobin-polymerization inhibitor approved by the FDA in November 2019 for treatment of SCD in adults and adolescents aged ≥12 years under an accelerated approval based on results of the pivotal HOPE study. In HOPE, voxelotor increased average hemoglobin (Hb) by 1.1 g/dL from baseline in patients with 1-10 vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs) in the previous year and a Hb level between 5.5 and 10.5 g/dL who were not transfusion dependent. Of the participants on voxelotor 1500 mg, 51% had a Hb response >1.0 g/dL at week 24 (Vichinsky et al, NEJM 2019). This study sought to assess the real-world effectiveness of voxelotor based on data during the first 6 months post FDA approval. Methods: Data on medical and pharmacy claims for patients who were aged ≥12 years and receiving voxelotor from December 2019 to May 2020 were obtained from the Symphony Health claims dataset. For each patient, the date of the first voxelotor claim was defined as the "index date." Patients with at least 1 year's data prior to the index date were included in the analyses. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were summarized descriptively. Standardized annualized rates of transfusions and VOCs per patient per year (PPPY) prior to and after voxelotor initiation were compared. A subset of patients in the Symphony Health claims dataset had Hb lab data available. Patients with at least 1 Hb result within 30 days prior to the index date and at least 1 Hb result after the index date were included for Hb analyses. For these patients, change in Hb and the percentage of patients achieving a >1 g/dL increase in Hb were summarized. Confidence intervals and P values for changes in outcomes were based on bootstrapping. Results: As of May 31, 2020, 1275 patients from the Symphony Health claims datasets were identified who received voxelotor (40% male, mean age 35.7 years). In the year prior to voxelotor initiation, 715 (56.1%) of these patients received hydroxyurea, 121 (9.5%) received L-glutamine, 166 (13.0%) received at least 1 transfusion, 17 (1.3%) were on chronic transfusion (≥8 transfusions per year), and 681 (53.4%) had 1 or more VOCs. Mean (SD) follow-up was 64.9 (40.7) days. Among 1275 patients, 175 and 52 patients had at least 1 Hb level measurement during the 1 year prior to and after voxelotor initiation, respectively. Among the subset of patients with their Hb level tested within 30 days prior to the index date and at least 1 Hb level after index date (n=22), the baseline average Hb level was 8.0 g/dL (SD 1.4, median 7.9 g/dL, range 5.0-11.8 g/dL). Mean increase in Hb from baseline was 1.1-1.3 g/dL (Table 1) depending on the approach used to calculate Hb levels after voxelotor initiation; 55% (95% CI 32%-77%) of patients achieved a Hb increase >1 g/dL after voxelotor initiation. Among all 1275 patients, mean (SD) overall transfusion rates declined from 0.45 (1.67) PPPY pre-index to 0.31 (1.88) post-index, a change of -0.14 PPPY (P=0.005). Among 169 patients who received at least 1 transfusion in the year prior to initiation of voxelotor, the transfusion rate dropped from 3.39 (3.34) to 1.75 (4.30) PPPY, a change of -1.64 PPPY (P<0.001). Among 17 patients receiving chronic transfusions, the transfusion rate dropped from 11.29 (3.12) to 6.74 (7.37) PPPY, a change of -4.56 PPPY (P=0.013) (Table 2). After voxelotor initiation, the annualized rates of VOC were numerically reduced from 3.86 (6.69) to 3.64 (8.54) (P=0.248). To address the potential bias from the relatively short follow-up duration, similar results of transfusion and VOC rates were observed among patients with at least 30 days of follow-up or when only events within 3 months prior to index date were considered. Conclusions: Based on the first 6 months' data after the approval of voxelotor in the US, in real-world practice, voxelotor increases Hb by at least 1 g/dL, consistent with the HOPE randomized controlled trial results. Evidence suggests that transfusion rates decreased after voxelotor initiation. A favorable downward trend in VOC rates was also observed. This real-world evidence provides additional support for the use of this novel therapy in the treatment of hemolytic anemia and its associated complications in the SCD population. Further evaluation with a larger sample size and longer follow-up will help to confirm these findings. Disclosures Zaidi: Global Blood Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cyclerion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Imara: Consultancy, Honoraria; bluebird bio: Consultancy, Honoraria; Emmaus Life Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria. Alvarez:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forma Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lonshteyn:Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment; Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Weycker:Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Research Funding; Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding. Pham:Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment; Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Delea:Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Agodoa:Global Blood Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Cong:Global Blood Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Global Blood Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Overall Survival, Adverse Events, and Economic Burden in Medicare-Insured Patients with Mantle Cell Lymphoma Receiving Cancer-Directed Therapy

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-122841 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 63-63

Author(s):

Shaum M Kabadi ◽

Ravi K Goyal ◽

Saurabh P Nagar ◽

Keith L Davis ◽

Hannah Le ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Economic Burden ◽

Systemic Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Treatment Initiation ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Baseline Period ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Line Of Therapy

Background: Most data on overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs) in patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are from controlled trials in academic centers; data from real world management and outcomes in patients with MCL are sparse. We therefore conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of patients with MCL in the Medicare database to assess treatment patterns, OS, AEs, and economic burden. Methods: Patients with MCL who received any systemic cancer-directed treatment from 2013 to 2015 were selected from the nationwide Medicare claims database and followed through 2016. The date of the first observed systemic therapy defined each patient's index date. Patients were included if they (a) were ≥ 18 years of age at the index date; (b) had ≥ 12 months of continuous Medicare enrollment before the index date (baseline period); and (c) had no evidence of prior MCL-directed treatment (systemic therapy and/or SCT) at any time before the index date (i.e., during at least the previous 12 months). An observed line of therapy was defined as all agents received on or within 35 days after the first claim for a systemic therapy drug; the observed therapy line was considered ended upon switch to another regimen or a gap ≥ 90 days after the last treatment. OS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method from the index date (start of first observed line of therapy) until the last follow-up or death. We also calculated rates of occurrence for hematologic and nonhematologic AEs often associated with the most commonly observed regimens (irrespective of observed line of therapy). The occurrence of AEs was defined based on the presence of at least one claim containing an AE-specific diagnosis code during the treatment, regardless of any history of the AE before treatment initiation. All-cause health care costs were assessed from Medicare's perspective. Multivariable models were fitted to assess the association between number of AEs and average costs during the first observed therapy. Results: We analyzed 1,465 patients who met the inclusion criteria (median age=74 years; 68% male; 93% white). Across all observed lines of therapy, ibrutinib monotherapy (Ibr) (n=588 [40%]) was the most frequently used regimen, followed by bendamustine/rituximab (BR) (n=527 [36%]). Ibr recipients had a median age of 75 years, median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score of 4.0, and were followed for a median duration of 15 months; 52% died during the study period. BR recipients had a median age of 75 years, median CCI score of 3.0, and were followed for a median duration of 21 months; 28% died during the study period. In Ibr recipients, median OS was 22 months (95% CI = 16.9-28.6) and 24-month OS was 47% (95% CI = 42.9%-50.5%). In BR recipients, median OS was not reached while OS at 24 months was 73% (95% CI = 69.4%-76.0%). The occurrence of common AEs during Ibr and BR therapies are presented in Tables 1 and 2. The average per patient per month costs, among all patients, were $2,501 (SD = $2,818) during the baseline period and $12,604 (SD = $14,437) during the period after initiation of the first observed MCL-directed systemic therapy. Multivariable analysis showed that the patients with 3 or more AEs had nearly 4 times higher monthly per patient costs (cost ratio = 4.12, 95% CI = 3.53-4.82) compared with those with 0-2 AEs. Conclusions: Two-year survival rates observed in this study are comparable to those reported in clinical trials (47% for Ibr in the relapsed disease setting [Wang, 2015, Blood]) and nearly 75% for BR in patients with relapsed indolent disease and MCL [Rummel, 2016, Lancet]). Rates of AE occurrence in Ibr- and BR-treated patients in this study highlight the substantial burden and susceptibility to AEs among Medicare patients in the real-world setting. These findings also demonstrate a substantial increase in the economic burden from the baseline period to the period after MCL treatment initiation and as the number of AEs increased. Disclosures Kabadi: AstraZeneca: Employment, Equity Ownership. Goyal:RTI Health Solutions: Employment. Nagar:RTI Health Solutions: Employment. Davis:RTI Health Solutions: Employment. Le:AstraZeneca: Employment, Other: Stocks. Wang:Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; BioInvent: Consultancy, Research Funding; VelosBio: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aviara: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MoreHealth: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kaye:RTI Health Solutions: Employment.

Download Full-text

Annual Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs in US Patients Diagnosed with Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-136762 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 13-14

Author(s):

Ashley Tabah ◽

Russell L. Knoth ◽

David Huggar ◽

Ronda Copher ◽

Zhun Cao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Outpatient Treatment ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Healthcare Resource ◽

Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽

Hospital Treatment ◽

Median Cost ◽

Publicly Traded

Introduction: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a malignant form of bone marrow cancer commonly diagnosed in older adults. The age-adjusted incidence of AML in the USA is 4.3 per 100,000, with a median age of 68 years at diagnosis. Once diagnosed, treatment options include intensive chemotherapy to induce remission followed by post-remission therapies, including stem cell transplantation, repeated rounds of intensive chemotherapy to achieve durable disease control, or supportive care. Prognosis following relapse is poor with a median survival of 8-10 months. While previous studies have shown that much of this time following relapse is spent in an inpatient or outpatient setting, few studies have looked at the frequency and costs of this healthcare utilization. This study examined annual healthcare resource utilization and associated costs incurred in patients diagnosed with relapsed AML. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted in the Premier Healthcare Database, a nationally representative, all-payer hospital administrative database containing more than 1 billion inpatient and hospital-based outpatient encounters. Using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes for AML in relapse, the study identified adult patients during the period from January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2019. The date of the first encounter with a relapse diagnosis served as the index date. Patients were followed from index date to inpatient death, one year post-relapse, or end of study period (September 30, 2019). Unadjusted descriptive analyses were performed to describe patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and comorbid conditions, as well as outcomes of interest, including outpatient treatment days, inpatient and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and associated costs. Results: A total of 2,290 patients were identified for inclusion in the study. Mean age was 61.2 years (median 65.0 years) and 46.9% were female. Healthcare coverage was Medicare (51.2%), commercial insurance (29.1%), Medicaid (13.8%), or other (5.9%). Mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 4.02 (SD 2.66) and common comorbidities were diabetes (31.0%), congestive heart failure (19.5%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (19.0%). Patients' length of follow-up varied: < 90 days (49.4%), ≥ 180 days (32.8%), and ≥ 360 days (16.8%). During the 1-year follow-up period, patients were seen in the outpatient hospital treatment setting for a median of 7.0 (IQR 2-19) days. In addition to outpatient treatment, patients incurred a total of 1,798 inpatient hospitalizations (median 2.0 per patient, IQR 1-3), with a median length of stay (LOS) of 10.0 (IQR 6-19) days. Among hospitalized patients, 554 (30.8%) included an ICU admission with a median LOS of 3.0 (IQR 1-5) days per admission. Median cost per day for outpatient treatment was $1,039 (IQR $487-2,305) and patients incurred a median cost of $6,569 (IQR $1,872-23,542) in this setting. For hospitalizations, median cost of an inpatient stay was $21,592 (IQR $9,852-45,000). Cost of an ICU admission during a hospital stay was $13,348 (IQR $6,115-28,266). Hospital treatment costs incurred by this cohort of patients in the year following relapse totaled $169 million, of which 82% ($139 million) was attributable to the inpatient setting. Conclusions: After a relapse of AML, patients are commonly admitted to the hospital, oftentimes to the ICU, and incur substantial costs associated with treatment. These results suggest that cost savings could be realized with therapies that would forestall relapse and improve survival in patients with AML. Disclosures Tabah: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Knoth:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Huggar:FibroGen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Copher:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Cao:Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Precision Xtract: Current Employment. Lipkin:Premier Inc.: Current Employment; Bristol Myers Squibb: Other: Premier Inc. received funding from BMS to conduct this research. Leblanc:UpToDate: Patents & Royalties: Royalties; Agios, AbbVie, and Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Speakers Bureau; American Cancer Society, BMS, Duke University, NINR/NIH, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; AbbVie, Agios, Amgen, AstraZeneca, CareVive, BMS/Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Flatiron, Helsinn, Heron, Otsuka, Medtronic, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Welvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Research Funding.

Download Full-text