Everhart, Alexander

Abstract Context Osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis should be followed by antiresorptive treatment (“consolidation”) to preserve bone mass. Although osteoanabolic therapy is increasingly endorsed for primary fracture prevention, real-world implementation of consolidation remains unknown. Objective To assess patterns and predictors of timely consolidation after osteoanabolic therapy for primary fracture prevention. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using US commercial, Medicare Advantage, and traditional Medicare claims data. Adults aged ≥50 years who initiated romosozumab, teriparatide, or abaloparatide between 2011 and 2022 were included. The primary outcome was timely consolidation, defined as initiation of an antiresorptive medication within 3 months after osteoanabolic therapy. Secondary outcomes included delayed consolidation (initiation >3 months after completion), osteoanabolic restart following a treatment gap, and no consolidation therapy. We further distinguished participants who completed the full osteoanabolic course, defined as ≥12 months for romosozumab and ≥18 months for teriparatide or abaloparatide. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of consolidation patterns. Results Among 15 389 patients (mean age 70.6 years; 89% women; 85% White), 30% completed osteoanabolic therapy (median, 12.9 months for romosozumab; 23.4 months for teriparatide/abaloparatide). Overall, 25% had timely consolidation, 24% delayed consolidation, 12% restarted osteoanabolics, and 40% had no consolidation; only 12% completed therapy with timely consolidation. Timely consolidation was more likely with endocrinology (OR 1.31; 95% CI, 1.17-1.48) or rheumatology (OR 1.45; 1.30-1.62) vs primary care, and less likely among patients aged 50-64 years (OR 0.67; 0.58-0.77) vs 65-74, those enrolled in Medicare Advantage (OR 0.85; 0.74-0.98) vs traditional Medicare, or those recently hospitalized (OR 0.88; 0.80-0.97). Odds increased over time (OR 4.27; 3.63-5.05 for 2021 vs 2011 starts). Conclusion Only 1 in 4 patients received timely consolidation therapy after osteoanabolic treatment, and 1 in 8 completed the full sequence. Strategies to improve consolidation in primary fracture prevention are needed.

This cohort study examines the clinical implementation of timely consolidation with antiresorptive therapy to preserve bone mineral density gains and reduce fracture risk.

Abstract Context A national assessment of osteoporosis drug therapy (ODT) use can inform the extent of underdiagnosis and undertreatment of osteoporosis. Objective The aim was to describe trends in ODT use by age, sex, fragility fracture, and documented osteoporosis. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of patient-quarter observations for adults aged ≥50 years with commercial or Medicare Advantage health insurance in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse between 2011 and 2022. The primary outcome was the proportion of patient-quarter observations with ODT use stratified by age, sex, fragility fracture, and documented osteoporosis. Cuzick tests were performed to assess trends ODT use. Results Analysis of 166 673 420 patient-quarter observations revealed that over 70% of patients with fragility fractures did not have documented osteoporosis. Among women aged ≥65 years with documented osteoporosis, ODT fill rates increased between 2011 and 2022 from 36.3% to 50.1% for women without fragility fractures (P < .001) and from 30.8% to 43.7% for women with fragility fractures (P < .001). However, ODT fill rates declined (9.2% to 7.4% between 2011 and 2022) for women with fragility fractures and no documented osteoporosis (P = .015). Similar trends were observed among women aged 50-64 years and men. Conclusion ODT use for patients with documented osteoporosis has increased but remains low. Low rates of ODT use for patients with fragility fractures in the absence of documented osteoporosis suggests that underdiagnosis of osteoporosis contributes to underuse of ODTs.

Background: Physicians’ professional networks are an important source of new medical information and have been shown to influence the adoption of new treatments, but it is unknown how physician networks impact the de-adoption of harmful practices. Methods: We analyzed changes in physicians’ use of dronedarone after the PALLAS trial (Palbociclib Collaborative Adjuvant Study; November 2011) showed that dronedarone increased the risk of death from cardiovascular events among patients with permanent atrial fibrillation. Deidentified administrative claims from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse were combined with physicians’ demographic information from the Doximity database and publicly available data on physicians’ patient-sharing relationships compiled by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We used a linear probability model with an interrupted linear time trend specification to model the impact of the PALLAS trial on physicians’ dronedarone usage between 2009 and 2014. Results: Before the PALLAS trial, the use of dronedarone was increasing by 0.22 percentage points per quarter (95% CI, 0.19–0.25) in our Medicare Advantage sample (N=343 429 patient-quarter observations) and 0.63 percentage points per quarter (95% CI, 0.52–0.75) in our commercially insured sample (N=44 402 patient-quarter observations). After the PALLAS trial and subsequent United States Food and Drug Administration black box warning, physicians in the Medicare Advantage sample with an above-median number of network connections to other physicians decreased their quarterly usage of dronedarone by 0.12 percentage points more per quarter (95% CI, −0.20 to −0.04; P =0.031) than physicians with equal to or below the median number of network connections. Similar patterns existed in the commercially insured sample ( P =0.0318). Conclusions: After controlling for a wide range of patient, physician, and geographic characteristics, physicians with a greater number of network connections were faster de-adopters of dronedarone for patients with permanent atrial fibrillation after the PALLAS trial and subsequent United States Food and Drug Administration black box warning detailed the harmfulness of dronedarone for these patients. Policies for improving physicians’ responsiveness to new medical information should consider utilizing the influence of these important professional network relationships.

Abstract Variation in de-adoption of ineffective or unsafe treatments is not well-understood. We examined de-adoption of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) in anemia treatment among patients with chronic kidney diseases (CKD) following new clinical evidence of harm and ineffectiveness (the TREAT trial) and the FDA's revision of its safety warning. We used an interrupted time series approach to estimate changes in use of epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DPO) in the commercial and Medicare Advantage (MA) and Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) populations. We also examined how changes in both trends and levels of use were associated with physicians’ characteristics. Study cohort included patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 during 2007-2015. Use of DPO and EPO declined over the study period. There were no consistent changes in DPO trend across insurance groups, but the level of DPO use decreased right after the FDA revision in all groups. The decline in EPO use trend was faster after the TREAT trial for all groups. Nephrologists were largely more responsive to evidence than primary care physicians. Differences by physician's gender, and age were not consistent across insurance populations and types of ESA.

AbstractObjectiveTo describe physicians’ variation in de‐adopting concurrent statin and fibrate therapy for type 2 diabetic patients following a reversal in clinical evidence.Data SourcesWe analyzed 2007‐2015 claims data from OptumLabs® Data Warehouse, a longitudinal, real‐world data asset with de‐identified administrative claims and electronic health record data.Study DesignWe modeled fibrate use among Medicare Advantage and commercially insured type 2 diabetic statin users before and after the publication of the ACCORD lipid trial, which found statins and fibrates were no more effective than statins alone in reducing cardiovascular events among type 2 diabetic patients. We modeled fibrate use trends with physician random effects and physician characteristics such as age and specialty.Data ExtractionWe identified patient‐year‐quarters with one year of continuous insurance enrollment, type 2 diabetes diagnoses, and fibrate use. We designated the physician most responsible for patients’ diabetes care based on evaluation and management visits and prescriptions of glucose‐lowering drugs.Principal FindingsFibrate use increased by 0.12 percentage points per quarter among commercial patients (95% CI, 0.10 to 0.14) and 0.17 percentage points per quarter among Medicare Advantage patients (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.20) before the trial and then decreased by 0.16 percentage points per quarter among commercial patients (95% CI, −0.18 to −0.15) and 0.05 percentage points per quarter among Medicare Advantage patients (95% CI, −0.06 to −0.03) after the trial. However, 45% of physicians treating commercial patients and 48% of physicians treating Medicare Advantage patients had positive trends in prescribing following the trial. Physicians’ characteristics did not explain their variation (pseudo R2 = 0.000).ConclusionOn average, physicians decreased fibrate prescribing following the ACCORD lipid trial. However, many physicians increased prescribing following the trial. Observable physician characteristics did not explain variations in prescribing. Future research should examine whether physicians vary similarly in other de‐adoption settings.