Saver, Jeffrey

Background New antiamyloid therapies (AAT) for treating patients with early Alzheimer disease (AD) have become available in the past 3 years. Although AAT can be beneficial in slowing progression of AD, they also come with potentially serious side effects, particularly for patients requiring anticoagulation or thrombolysis for cardiovascular conditions. Given that most patients with AD are older and likely to have cardiovascular risk factors, there is urgent need for additional guidance for clinicians about potential risks and benefits associated with AAT for patients with cardiovascular comorbidities, best practices for management of these patients, and special considerations with respect to emergency evaluation and treatment of patients on AAT who develop acute neurological symptoms. Methods The American Heart Association convened 75 multidisciplinary experts for the Amyloid‐Related Imaging Abnormalities Summit: Cardiovascular and Stroke Considerations for β‐Amyloid Immunotherapy in AD in July 2025. These experts were divided into 8 work groups to evaluate the current evidence related to AAT usage in patients with cardiovascular risk factors and conditions and develop consensus‐based guidance for clinicians. Results This statement outlines the outcomes of the Summit, including considerations for prescribers, primary care professionals, emergency personnel, and health care system stakeholders. These considerations are intended to improve identification of patients as appropriate candidates for AAT, management of patients with co‐occurring AD and cardiovascular conditions, and their emergency evaluation and treatment. The statement also includes guidance for shared decision‐making, implementation of system changes for improving dementia care, and recommendations for future research and data collection to add to the body of evidence for treating patients with concomitant AD and cardiovascular conditions. Conclusions Building on lessons learned from the establishment of stroke systems of care, the consensus‐based considerations outlined in this document can serve as a foundation for AD systems of care aimed at ensuring optimal use of these ground‐breaking therapies.

Background and Purpose— Intravenous alteplase (tissue-type plasminogen activator) has been shown to be cost-effective because of savings in long-term disability. In October of 2005, an increased DRG payment to hospitals for alteplase-treated stroke patients was introduced. We sought to describe the trends in the cost of alteplase over time, in comparison to trends in hospital reimbursement in the United States. Methods— Using publicly available information on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) website ( www.cms.gov ), we obtained CMS quarterly payment amounts between January 1, 2005, and October 1, 2014, for alteplase, listed as alteplase recombinant, per mg. CMS payment amounts are the manufacturer’s average sales price+6% until April 2014, when it was lowered to +4.3%. Estimates for DRG base payments were calculated within the Medicare Provider and Analysis Review (MEDPAR) for fiscal years 2006 (DRG 559) and 2013 (MS DRGs 61, 62, and 63) as (DRG relative weights)×(standardized operating and capital amount). The consumer price index was also queried for all prescription drugs, urban areas, during the same study period as reference. Results— The CMS payment amount for alteplase per milligram was $30.50 in January 2005 and $64.30 in October 2014. Trends in the CMS payment amounts for alteplase increased by 111% between 2005 and 2014. The consumer price index for all prescription drugs increased by 30.2% in the same time frame. The base payment for alteplase-treated stroke admissions was $11 173 in 2006 and $12 064 in 2013, an 8% increase. Conclusions— We found a striking increase in the cost of alteplase over the last decade, with a 100 mg vial now with a CMS payment of ≈$6400, a >100% increase over 10 years. During the same time frame, the DRG base payment to hospitals increased by only 8%, and alteplase cost increased from 27% of the payment in 2006 to 53% in 2013. Researchers and stroke physicians should be aware of these changes in drug costs and their impact on cost-effectiveness analyses.