novel agent
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

562
(FIVE YEARS 111)

H-INDEX

39
(FIVE YEARS 5)

Author(s):  
Cong Hua ◽  
Xuanzhong Wang ◽  
Shipeng Liang ◽  
Chen Li ◽  
Xi Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. e002135
Author(s):  
Jordan Gemelas ◽  
Miguel Marino ◽  
Steele Valenzuela ◽  
Teresa Schmidt ◽  
Andrew Suchocki ◽  
...  

IntroductionMost patients with diabetes mellitus are prescribed medications to control their blood glucose. The implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) led to improved access to healthcare for patients with diabetes. However, impact of the ACA on prescribing trends by diabetes drug category is less clear. This study aims to assess if long-acting insulin and novel agents were prescribed more frequently following the ACA in states that expanded Medicaid compared with non-expansion states.Research design and methodsIn this analysis of a natural experiment, prescriptions reimbursed by Medicaid (US public insurance) for long-acting insulins, metformin, and novel agent medications (DPP4 inhibitors, sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor antagonists, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists) from 2012 to 2017 were obtained from public records. For each medication category, we performed difference-in-differences (DID) analysis modeling change in rate level from pre-ACA to post-ACA in Medicaid expansion states relative to Medicaid non-expansion states.ResultsExpansion and non-expansion states saw a decline in both metformin and long-acting insulin prescriptions per 100 enrollees from pre-ACA to post-ACA. These decreases were larger in non-expansion states relative to expansion states (metformin: absolute DID = +0.33, 95% CI=0.323 to 0.344) and long-acting insulin (absolute DID: +0.11; 95% CI=0.098 to 0.113). Novel agent prescriptions in expansion states (+0.08 per 100 enrollees) saw a higher absolute increase per 100 Medicaid enrollees than in non-expansion states (absolute DID= +0.08, 95% CI=0.079 to 0.086).ConclusionsThere was a greater absolute increase for prescriptions of novel agents in expansion states relative to non-expansion states after accounting for number of enrollees. Reducing administrative barriers and improving the ability of providers to prescribe such newer therapies will be critical for caring for patients with diabetes—particularly in Medicaid non-expansion states.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2999-2999
Author(s):  
Hetalkumari Patel ◽  
Svea K. Wahlstrom ◽  
Maral DerSarkissian ◽  
Colin Kunzweiler ◽  
Felicia Castriota ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Guidelines recommend chemoimmunotherapy and novel agents such as Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors and B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitors for the treatment of CLL. AE profiles differ across therapies, and management of AEs in patients with CLL treated with novel agents incurs burden on healthcare professionals (HCPs) and oncology practices. Time and personnel costs associated with AE management are not well understood for patients with CLL and are overlooked while assessing the value of oncology drugs. To assess practice burden, this study quantified HCP time and personnel costs related to AE management for patients with CLL who received a novel agent, either acalabrutinib, ibrutinib, or venetoclax. Methods HCPs (i.e., oncologists, pharmacists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and registered nurses) who actively treated ≥5 patients with CLL during the past year with >1 patient receiving acalabrutinib, ibrutinib, or venetoclax in the past month were recruited through a physician panel vendor to participate in a longitudinal, observational, prospective survey. This study was conducted in two phases (November 2020-January 2021; April-June 2021). Over the 2-month data collection period, HCPs reported on a daily basis the time spent performing AE management activities for CLL patients receiving a novel agent, which included 1) interactions with patients in-person or via remote consultation (telephone, video, or email), 2) interactions with other HCPs, and 3) other management activities that did not include interactions with patients or other HCPs (e.g., recording notes in patient's charts, ordering lab tests). Mean time and personnel costs per AE management activity were summarized using descriptive statistics. Personnel costs (USD) were calculated by multiplying median wage information reported by the ureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment Statistics survey by HCP-reported time spent managing AEs. Results Among 49 HCPs enrolled in the survey, 36 (73%; Table 1) reported managing ≥1 AE during a total of 1,106 AE management activities (229 for acalabrutinib; 500 for ibrutinib; 377 for venetoclax) for 421 patients with CLL during the 2-month study period. Among all patients, 108 (26%), 186 (44%), and 129 (31%) received acalabrutinib, ibrutinib, or venetoclax in any line, respectively (Table 2). Anemia was the most frequently managed AE reported among all patients (19%), but differed by treatment: 11%, 19%, and 26% for patients treated with acalabrutinib, ibrutinib, and venetoclax, respectively (Table 2). Other AEs reported among ≥10% of patients with a reported AE management activity also differed by treatment. For acalabrutinib, this included only headache. For both ibrutinib and venetoclax patients, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, and myalgia were managed in ≥10% of patients. For venetoclax patients, back pain and arthralgia were also managed in ≥10% of patients. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) time spent managing AEs per activity was 11.8 (7.7) minutes (min) overall, 12.1 (7.4) min for acalabrutinib, 11.6 (6.9) min for ibrutinib, and 11.8 (8.9) min for venetoclax (Table 3). Mean time per AE management activity was numerically similar across the three treatments overall and stratified by type of HCP, treatment duration, and line of therapy. We noted differences in the type of HCP managing AEs by treatment, with a lower proportion of oncologists managing acalabrutinib AEs compared to the other two therapies. Corresponding mean (SD) personnel costs per AE management activity were $16.0 ($10.6) overall, and $14.4 ($9.8) for acalabrutinib, $16.3 ($9.8) for ibrutinib, and $16.7 ($11.9) for venetoclax. Conclusions This study demonstrates the importance of accounting for time and labor costs related to AE management, as results suggest that the burden to HCPs related to AE management for patients with CLL treated with acalabrutinib, ibrutinib, and venetoclax is substantial. During the 2-month study period, almost three-quarters of HCPs reported managing ≥1 AEs and an average of 12 AE management days was observed across these HCPs. While mean time and personnel costs were similar, differences in types of AE and types of HCPs managing AEs were observed across treatments. Future research should confirm our observed differences in types of AE and types of HCPs managing AEs by treatment to comprehensively assess the burden of managing AEs for patients with CLL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wahlstrom: AstraZeneca: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. DerSarkissian: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment. Kunzweiler: Apellis: Other: Employee of Analysis Group, Inc., Research Funding. Castriota: Analysis Group, Inc.: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Chang: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment. Cheung: Analysis Group, Inc.: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Gu: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment. Guo: Analysis Group, Inc.: Current Employment. Duh: Novartis: Other: I am an employee of Analysis Group, a consulting company that received funding from Novartis for this research study.. Ryan: AstraZeneca: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4685-4685
Author(s):  
Drew G Gerber ◽  
Yichun Cao ◽  
Jeffrey M. Switchenko ◽  
Kelly Valla ◽  
Jonathon B. Cohen

Abstract Background: Although clinical trial data exist describing the adverse effects of Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi)s, the patient experience outside clinical trials, including differences among agents is less well-described. We evaluated the selection criteria, efficacy and toxicities related to the use of BTKi at our site. Methods: A retrospective patient chart review was used to collect data from patients treated with one or more BTKi. Demographics, prior therapies, duration of treatment, response to treatment, and incidence and severity of pre-determined toxicities of interest were collected for each patient. Descriptive statistics for each variable were reported. Association between variables of interest and the study cohort were examined using ANOVA for categorical variables and Pearson correlation coefficient for continuous variables. Survival and duration of treatment were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method according to first novel agent. Survival analysis for each novel agent was conducted using Cox proportional hazards models and log-rank tests. Results: One hundred forty patients were included in this study, including 94 patients with CLL, 24 with MCL, and 22 with other NHL subtypes. One hundred thirteen patients received ibrutinib, while 17 patients received acalabrutinib (n=16) or zanubrutinib (n=1), which were combined in the statistical analysis. Of patients receiving ibrutinib, 69% reported at least one toxicity event during the duration of their treatment. Across all patients who received ibrutinib, 35 individuals did not report a toxicity, 48 individuals reported one toxicity, and 30 individuals reported two or more toxicities. Among the 78 patients who experienced at least one toxicity, 41 (52.5%) discontinued the medication due to these adverse effects, most commonly cytopenias (n=9), diarrhea (n=8), and fatigue (n=9). 57% of patients who reported diarrhea, 36% of patients who reported cytopenias, and 33% of patients who reported fatigue discontinued therapy due to that reported AE. In total, 60/113 patients receiving ibrutinib discontinued therapy, including 40 (66%) due to toxicity and 14 (23.3%) due to disease progression. The remaining patients discontinued therapy due to voluntary choice of new therapy or due to personal decision to stop treatment. Patients remained on ibrutinib therapy for a median duration of 40 months. 53% of patients taking zanabrutinib or acalabrutinib reported at least 1 toxicity, but only 11.7% of patients discontinued therapy for any reason. All patients who discontinued zanubrutinib/acalabrutinib therapy did so due to toxicity, with no patients ceasing therapy due to disease progression. Because only 2 of 17 patients discontinued zanubrutinib/acalabrutinib treatment, a raw median duration of treatment was calculated to be 5 months. 12.4% of patients taking ibrutinib experienced a gastrointestinal toxicity, whereas 5.9% of patients taking acalabrutinib/zanubrutinib experienced a gastrointestinal toxicity (Table 1). Additionally, 8% of individuals taking ibrutinib reported a musculoskeletal toxicity, while no acalabrutinib/zanubrutinib patients reported a musculoskeletal toxicity. There were no statistically significant differences in frequency of toxicities encountered, possibly due to study size. Other toxicities common to all analyzed BTK inhibitors included hematological, cardiovascular, and constitutional adverse effects with no significant difference between agents. Conclusions: We identified that >1/3 of individuals taking BTK inhibitors are stopping therapy prematurely due to toxicity related outcomes rather than due to disease progression. Our findings suggest that proactive identification and management of adverse effects could prolong therapy duration and provide better outcomes for patients. Strategies to personalize therapy selection to limit therapy discontinuation due to toxicity are needed as additional targeted agents are developed. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Valla: BeiGene: Speakers Bureau. Cohen: Janssen, Adaptive, Aptitude Health, BeiGene, Cellectar, Adicet, Loxo/Lilly, AStra ZenecaKite/Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech, Takeda, BMS/Celgene, BioInvent, LAM, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Loxo/Lilly: Research Funding.


mBio ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhizhen Li ◽  
Jianping Wu ◽  
Ji Zhou ◽  
Baoshi Yuan ◽  
Jiqiao Chen ◽  
...  

With the Delta variant currently fueling a resurgence of new infections in the fully vaccinated population, developing an effective therapeutic drug is especially critical and urgent in fighting COVID-19. In contrast to the many efforts to repurpose existing drugs or address only one aspect of COVID-19, we are developing a novel agent with first-in-class mechanisms of action that address both the viral infection and the overactive immune system in the pathogenesis of the disease.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document