Effectiveness and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Diabetes Mellitus.

Objective: To address gaps in the data comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and diabetes.

Patients And Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients with NVAF and diabetes newly initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from January 1, 2013, through September 30, 2015, with Medicare data from the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and 4 other US commercial claims databases. One-to-one propensity score matching was completed between NOACs and warfarin and between NOACs in each database, and the results were pooled.

A Real-World Observational Study of Hospitalization and Health Care Costs Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Prescribed Oral Anticoagulants in the U.S. Medicare Population.

Unlabelled: This article has been corrected. Please see J Manag Care Spec Pharm, 2020;26(5):682 BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have shown that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-including dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban-are at least as effective and safe as warfarin for the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, few studies have compared oral anticoagulants (OACs) among elderly patients.

Effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in treatment naïve non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in the US Department of defense population.

Background: Clinical trials have demonstrated that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least non-inferior to warfarin in reducing the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), but the comparative risk of major bleeding varies between DOACs and warfarin. Using US Department of Defense (DOD) data, this study compared the risk of stroke/SE and major bleeding for DOACs relative to warfarin.

Methods: Adult patients with ≥1 pharmacy claim for apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from 01 Jan 2013-30 Sep 2015 were selected.

Comparisons between Oral Anticoagulants among Older Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients.

Objectives: Older adult patients are underrepresented in clinical trials comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin. This subgroup analysis of the ARISTOPHANES study used multiple data sources to compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among very old patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) prescribed NOACs or warfarin.

Design: Retrospective observational study.

Comparative clinical outcomes between direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin among elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the CMS medicare population.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) prevalence increases with age; > 80% of US adults with AF are aged ≥ 65 years. Compare the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), net clinical outcome (NCO), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) among elderly non-valvular AF (NVAF) Medicare patients prescribed direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) VS warfarin. NVAF patients aged ≥ 65 years who initiated DOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban) or warfarin were selected from 01JAN2013-31DEC2015 in CMS Medicare data.

Effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants in older adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and heart failure.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least as efficacious and safe as warfarin among non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients; limited evidence is available regarding NVAF patients with heart failure (HF). US Medicare enrollees with NVAF and HF initiating DOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) or warfarin were selected. Propensity score matching and Cox models were used to estimate the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) comparing DOACs versus warfarin and DOACs versus DOACs.

Effectiveness and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients.

Background and Purpose- This ARISTOPHANES study (Anticoagulants for Reduction in Stroke: Observational Pooled Analysis on Health Outcomes and Experience of Patients) used multiple data sources to compare stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among a large number of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients on non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or warfarin. Methods- A retrospective observational study of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2015, was conducted pooling Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare data and 4 US commercial claims databases. After 1:1 NOAC-warfarin and NOAC-NOAC propensity score matching in each database, the resulting patient records were pooled.

Comparison of Drug Switching and Discontinuation Rates in Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Treated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the United States.

Introduction: Continuous usage of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients is essential to maintain stroke prevention. We examined switching and discontinuation rates for the three most frequently initiated DOACs in NVAF patients in the USA.

Methods: Patients who initiated apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran (index event/date) were identified from the Pharmetrics Plus claims database (Jan 1, 2013-Sep 30, 2016, includes patients with commercial and Medicare coverage) and grouped into cohorts by index DOAC.

Hospital Resource Utilization and Costs Associated With Warfarin Versus Apixaban Treatment Among Patients Hospitalized for Venous Thromboembolism in the United States.

A real-world US database analysis was conducted to evaluate the hospital resource utilization and costs of patients hospitalized for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treated with warfarin versus apixaban. Additionally, 1-month readmissions were evaluated. Of 28 612 patients with VTE identified from the Premier Hospital database (August 2014-May 2016), 91% (N = 26 088) received warfarin and 9% (N = 2524) received apixaban.

Real-World Comparative Effectiveness, Safety, and Health Care Costs of Oral Anticoagulants in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients in the U.S. Department of Defense Population.

Background: The ARISTOTLE trial demonstrated that apixaban had significantly lower rates of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding than warfarin; however, no direct clinical trials between apixaban and other direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are available. Few real-world studies comparing the effectiveness and safety between DOACs have been conducted.

Objective: To compare effectiveness, safety, and health care costs among oral anticoagulants (OACs) for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients in the U.

A Real-World Observational Study of Hospitalization and Health Care Costs Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients Prescribed Oral Anticoagulants in the U.S. Medicare Population.

Background: Clinical trials have shown that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-including dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban-are at least as effective and safe as warfarin for the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, few studies have compared oral anticoagulants (OACs) among elderly patients.

Objective: To compare hospitalization risks (all-cause, stroke/SE-related, and MB-related) and associated health care costs among elderly nonvalvular AF (NVAF) patients in the Medicare population who initiated warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban.

Apixaban 5 and 2.5 mg twice-daily versus warfarin for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients: Comparative effectiveness and safety evaluated using a propensity-score-matched approach.

Unlabelled: Prior real-world studies have shown that apixaban is associated with a reduced risk of stroke/systemic embolism (stroke/SE) and major bleeding versus warfarin. However, few studies evaluated the effectiveness and safety of apixaban according to its dosage, and most studies contained limited numbers of patients prescribed 2.5 mg twice-daily (BID) apixaban.

Incidence of dose escalation and impact on biologic costs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with three intravenous agents.

Aim: Evaluation of dose escalation and costs among rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with intravenous abatacept, intravenous infliximab or intravenous tocilizumab.

Materials & Methods: Adults with rheumatoid arthritis and biologic treatment were identified from the MarketScan Research databases. Study outcomes included dose escalation, per-patient per-month (PPPM) biologic costs and PPPM all-cause total healthcare costs.

Comparing biologic persistence and healthcare costs in rheumatoid arthritis patients initiating subcutaneous biologics.

Aim: Comparing biologic persistence and healthcare costs between rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients initiating first- or second-line subcutaneous abatacept, adalimumab, or etanercept.

Materials & Methods: Retrospective, observational cohort study, which included adults with RA who initiated either of the three treatments between 29 July 2011 and 1 July 2015. Total healthcare costs were measured during baseline and follow-up.

Major bleeding risk and healthcare economic outcomes of non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients newly-initiated with oral anticoagulant therapy in the real-world setting.

Aims: This study compared the risk for major bleeding (MB) and healthcare economic outcomes of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) after initiating treatment with apixaban vs rivaroxaban, dabigatran, or warfarin.

Methods: NVAF patients who initiated apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, or warfarin were identified from the IMS Pharmetrics Plus database (January 1, 2013-September 30, 2015). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance differences in patient characteristics between study cohorts: patients treated with apixaban vs rivaroxaban, apixaban vs dabigatran, and apixaban vs warfarin.

Effectiveness and safety of apixaban versus warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in "real-world" clinical practice. A propensity-matched analysis of 76,940 patients.

The ARISTOTLE trial showed a risk reduction of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients treated with apixaban compared to warfarin. This retrospective study used four large US claims databases (MarketScan, PharMetrics, Optum, and Humana) of NVAF patients newly initiating apixaban or warfarin from January 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015. After 1:1 warfarin-apixaban propensity score matching (PSM) within each database, the resulting patient records were pooled.

The Risk for Cardiovascular Events Associated with Hyperlipdemia among Patients with and Without Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Objectives: To determine, using data from a real-world setting, the overall and sex-specific risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with or without comorbid hyperlipidemia, relative to those in a non-RA cohort.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study using claims data from a US commercial health plan (2005-2011) included patients with RA and a matched non-RA cohort. Cox proportional hazards regression model determined the hazard ratio (HR) for CV events (myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization procedures), using the presence of RA and hyperlipidemia as the independent variables, controlling for other covariates (age, sex, diabetes, and hypertension).

Rates, factors, reasons, and economic impact associated with switching in rheumatoid arthritis patients newly initiated on biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in an integrated healthcare system.

Objectives To identify how many RA patients newly-initiated on bDMARD therapy switch to another bDMARD during the first year of treatment; to evaluate the factors and reasons associated with bDMARD switching; and to compare the RA-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs between switchers vs non-switchers during the post-index period. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted in RA patients using the Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) database with the study time period of January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2012. The index date was defined as the date of the first bDMARD prescription.

Patient-Reported Outcomes From a Two-Year Head-to-Head Comparison of Subcutaneous Abatacept and Adalimumab for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Objective: To report 2-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the head-to-head Abatacept versus Adalimumab Comparison in Biologic-Naive RA Subjects with Background Methotrexate (MTX) (AMPLE) trial.

Methods: AMPLE was a phase IIIb, randomized, investigator-blinded trial. Biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to MTX were randomized to subcutaneous (SC) abatacept (125 mg/week) or adalimumab (40 mg every 2 weeks) with background MTX.

Prevalence of pre-existing risk factors for adverse events associated with atypical antipsychotics among commercially insured and medicaid insured patients newly initiating atypical antipsychotics.

Background: Atypical antipsychotics (AA) differ from one another in their adverse event (AE) profiles. Patient-specific pre-existing risk factors for AEs, including comorbidities and concomitant medications, may render the use of certain AAs potentially inappropriate, and others relatively safer or more tolerable.

Objective: To quantify the prevalence of pre-existing risk factors for AEs and potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) associated with AA treatment among patients with schizophrenia (SCZ), bipolar disorder (BD), or major depressive disorder (MDD) newly-initiating AA treatment.

Incidence of cardiovascular outcomes and diabetes mellitus among users of second-generation antipsychotics.

Objective: To examine the risk of cardiovascular outcomes and diabetes mellitus in patients prescribed second-generation antipsychotics.

Method: From the MarketScan claims database, nondiabetic adults prescribed aripiprazole between July 2003 and March 2010 were propensity score-matched with patients prescribed olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone. Patients were followed through the claims for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes indicating myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, coronary bypass/angioplasty procedures, and incident diabetes.

Mixed treatment comparison of efficacy and tolerability of biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Objective: To determine the comparative efficacy and tolerability of abatacept and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

Research Design And Methods: A systematic review identified RCTs in RA patients who responded inadequately to conventional DMARDs and were treated with one of the following biologic agents: abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, certolizumab pegol, or golimumab. Bayesian hierarchical models were used to compare efficacy and tolerability outcomes of abatacept and combined TNFi at 6 months and 1 year.

Medical costs and hospitalizations among patients with depression treated with adjunctive atypical antipsychotic therapy: an analysis of health insurance claims data.

Background: Depression is frequently debilitating. The American Psychiatric Association recommends adjunctive atypical antipsychotics as a treatment option when response to antidepressants is inadequate.

Objective: To compare medical costs and hospitalizations among patients with depression treated with adjunctive aripiprazole, olanzapine, or quetiapine.

Medical costs and utilization in patients with depression treated with adjunctive atypical antipsychotic therapy.

Objective: To compare total medical costs and utilization over a 12-month period in commercially insured patients receiving FDA-approved adjunctive atypical antipsychotics (aripiprazole, olanzapine, or quetiapine) for depression.

Methods: A retrospective claims analysis was conducted from 2005-2010 using the PharMetrics database. Subjects were adult commercial health-plan members with depression, identified using International Classification of Diseases codes and followed for 12 months after augmentation with an atypical antipsychotic.