Citations

Abstract Introduction High medication costs for vaginal estrogen may create a barrier for patients seeking treatment for numerous urinary and vaginal symptoms and lead to poor medication adherence. The Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (CPD) and GoodRx tools offer patients a method to purchase prescription medications at a discount, which may lead to improved medication adherence and decreased national expenditures on such medications. Objective To compare the pricing of vaginal estrogen as advertised by retail pharmacies, Medicare, and discount listings through CPD and GoodRx. Methods A review of publicly available data from CPD and GoodRx was performed to obtain listed retail and discounted prices for Estrace (topical), Vagifem (tablet), and Premarin (topical). GoodRx prices were obtained using prices from Costco, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart pharmacies in the most from populous zip code from each of the 3 most populous U.S. states: California, New York, and Texas. Prices were adjusted to account for dosage and prescribed quantity to estimate an average cost per dosage unit ($/adu). The Medicare Part D Drug Spending and Utilization data from 2021 were used to report the average spending per dosage unit and total expenditure for each of the listed medications. These data were compared to create an estimate of average national savings after use of CPD and/or GoodRx. Results Average spending per dosage unit for Estrace, Vagifem, and Premarin was lesser when discount tools were used (0.50 $/adu, 3.75 $/adu, and 4.30 $/adu respectively), compared to Medicare pricing (6.14 $/adu, 20.95 $/adu, and 10.10 $/adu respectively) or retail pricing (3.14 $/adu, 10.19 $/adu, and 5.43 $/adu respectively). When adjusted for total dosage units, use of CPD over Medicare pricing for the three medications would result in a combined annual national saving of $64.2M. Use of either CPD or GoodRx compared to retail pricing would similarly result in a combined annual national saving of $39.2M. Conclusions The utilization of CPD and GoodRx in the prescription of vaginal estrogen led to a substantial national average cost savings when compared to retail and Medicare pricing. CPD and GoodRx may offer a way to decrease the cost burden for patients seeking treatment for urinary and vaginal symptoms and significantly reduce national expenditures on medications. Disclosure Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: The utilization of CPD and GoodRx in the prescription of vaginal estrogen led to a substantial national average cost savings when compared to retail and Medicare pricing. CPD and GoodRx may offer a way to decrease the cost burden for patients seeking treatment for urinary and vaginal symptoms and significantly reduce national expenditures on medications.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONLittle is known regarding quality of life (QoL) in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), particularly in advanced stages.METHODSDyads of individuals with moderate–advanced DLB and their primary caregivers were recruited from specialty clinics, advocacy organizations, and research registries. The study collected demographics, disease‐related measures, and measures of patient/caregiver experiences.RESULTSThe Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease (QoL‐AD) was completed by the person with DLB and the caregiver (proxy) in 61 dyads; 85 dyads had only a proxy‐completed QoL‐AD. Patient‐ and proxy‐reported scores were moderately correlated (r = 0.57, P < 0.0001). Worse patient‐reported QoL correlated with daytime sleepiness, autonomic symptom burden, and behavioral symptoms. Proxy ratings correlated with dementia severity, daytime sleepiness, behavioral symptoms, dependence in activities of daily living, and caregiver experience measures.DISCUSSIONPatient‐ and proxy‐reported quality of life (QoL) should be assessed separately in advanced DLB. Some symptoms associated with QoL have available therapeutic options. Research is needed regarding strategies to optimally improve QoL in DLB.Highlights Patient and proxy quality of life (QoL) ratings had moderate correlation in advanced dementia with Lewy bodies. Daytime sleepiness affected patient‐ and proxy‐reported QoL. Behavioral symptoms affected patient‐ and proxy‐reported QoL. Autonomic symptom burden affected patient‐reported QoL. Dementia severity, dependence, and caregiver experiences affected proxy ratings.

BACKGROUND: The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry (LAAO) includes the vast majority of transcatheter LAAO procedures performed in the United States. The objective of this study was to develop a model predicting adverse events among patients undergoing LAAO with Watchman FLX. METHODS: Data from 41 001 LAAO procedures with Watchman FLX from July 2020 to September 2021 were used to develop and validate a model predicting in-hospital major adverse events. Randomly selected development (70%, n=28 530) and validation (30%, n=12 471) cohorts were analyzed with 1000 bootstrapped samples, using forward stepwise logistic regression to create the final model. A simplified bedside risk score was also developed using this model. RESULTS: Increased age, female sex, low preprocedure hemoglobin, no prior attempt at atrial fibrillation termination, and increased fall risk most strongly predicted in-hospital major adverse events and were included in the final model along with other clinically relevant variables. The median in-hospital risk-standardized adverse event rate was 1.50% (range, 1.03%–2.84%; interquartile range, 1.42%–1.64%). The model demonstrated moderate discrimination (development C-index, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.65–0.70] and validation C-index, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.62–0.70]) with good calibration. The simplified risk score was well calibrated with risk of in-hospital major adverse events ranging from 0.26% to 3.90% for a score of 0 to 8, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A transcatheter LAAO risk model using National Cardiovascular Data Registry and LAAO Registry data can predict in-hospital major adverse events, demonstrated consistency across hospitals and can be used for quality improvement efforts. A simple bedside risk score was similarly predictive and may inform shared decision-making.

Objective: To determine the prevalence of clinical significance reporting in contemporary comparative effectiveness research (CER). Background: In CER, a statistically significant difference between study groups may or may not be clinically significant. Misinterpreting statistically significant results could lead to inappropriate recommendations that increase health care costs and treatment toxicity. Methods: CER studies from 2022 issues of the Annals of Surgery , Journal of the American Medical Association , Journal of Clinical Oncology , Journal of Surgical Research , and Journal of the American College of Surgeons were systematically reviewed by 2 different investigators. The primary outcome of interest was whether the authors specified what they considered to be a clinically significant difference in the “Methods.” Results: Of 307 reviewed studies, 162 were clinical trials and 145 were observational studies. Authors specified what they considered to be a clinically significant difference in 26 studies (8.5%). Clinical significance was defined using clinically validated standards in 25 studies and subjectively in 1 study. Seven studies (2.3%) recommended a change in clinical decision-making, all with primary outcomes achieving statistical significance. Five (71.4%) of these studies did not have clinical significance defined in their methods. In randomized controlled trials with statistically significant results, sample size was inversely correlated with effect size ( r = −0.30, P = 0.038). Conclusions: In contemporary CER, most authors do not specify what they consider to be a clinically significant difference in study outcome. Most studies recommending a change in clinical decision-making did so based on statistical significance alone, and clinical significance was usually defined with clinically validated standards.

BACKGROUND: Predictive performance of polygenic risk scores (PRS) varies across populations. To facilitate equitable clinical use, we developed PRS for coronary heart disease (CHD; PRS CHD ) for 5 genetic ancestry groups. METHODS: We derived ancestry-specific and multi-ancestry PRS CHD based on pruning and thresholding (PRS PT ) and ancestry-based continuous shrinkage priors (PRS CSx ) applied to summary statistics from the largest multi-ancestry genome-wide association study meta-analysis for CHD to date, including 1.1 million participants from 5 major genetic ancestry groups. Following training and optimization in the Million Veteran Program, we evaluated the best-performing PRS CHD in 176,988 individuals across 9 diverse cohorts. RESULTS: Multi-ancestry PRS PT and PRS CSx outperformed ancestry-specific PRS PT and PRS CSx across a range of tuning values. Two best-performing multi-ancestry PRS CHD (ie, PRS PTmult and PRS CSxmult ) and 1 ancestry-specific (PRS CSxEUR ) were taken forward for validation. PRS PTmult demonstrated the strongest association with CHD in individuals of South Asian ancestry and European ancestry (odds ratio per 1 SD [95% CI, 2.75 [2.41–3.14], 1.65 [1.59–1.72]), followed by East Asian ancestry (1.56 [1.50–1.61]), Hispanic/Latino ancestry (1.38 [1.24–1.54]), and African ancestry (1.16 [1.11–1.21]). PRS CSxmult showed the strongest associations in South Asian ancestry (2.67 [2.38–3.00]) and European ancestry (1.65 [1.59–1.71]), lower in East Asian ancestry (1.59 [1.54–1.64]), Hispanic/Latino ancestry (1.51 [1.35–1.69]), and the lowest in African ancestry (1.20 [1.15–1.26]). CONCLUSIONS: The use of summary statistics from a large multi-ancestry genome-wide meta-analysis improved the performance of PRS CHD in most ancestry groups compared with single-ancestry methods. Despite the use of one of the largest and most diverse sets of training and validation cohorts to date, improvement of predictive performance was limited in African ancestry. This highlights the need for larger genome-wide association study datasets of underrepresented populations to enhance the performance of PRS CHD .

AbstractINTRODUCTIONPatients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) may have Alzheimers disease (AD) pathology that can be detected by plasma biomarkers. Our objective was to evaluate plasma biomarkers of AD and their association with positron emission tomography (PET) biomarkers of amyloid and tau deposition in the continuum of DLB, starting from prodromal stages of the disease.METHODSThe cohort included patients with isolated rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (iRBD), mild cognitive impairment with Lewy bodies (MCI‐LB), or DLB, with a concurrent blood draw and PET scans.RESULTSAbnormal levels of plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) were found at the prodromal stage of MCI‐LB in association with increased amyloid PET. Abnormal levels of plasma phosphorylated tau (p‐tau)‐181 and neurofilament light (NfL) were found at the DLB stage. Plasma p‐tau‐181 showed the highest accuracy in detecting abnormal amyloid and tau PET in patients with DLB.DISCUSSIONThe range of AD co‐pathology can be detected with plasma biomarkers in the DLB continuum, particularly with plasma p‐tau‐181 and GFAP.

Abstract Background: Women with an inherited pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2 have a greatly increased risk of developing ovarian cancer, but the importance of behavioral factors is less clear. We used a case-only design to compare the magnitude of associations with established reproductive, hormonal, and lifestyle risk factors between BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers. Methods: We pooled data from five studies from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium including 637 BRCA carriers and 4,289 noncarriers. Covariate-adjusted generalized linear mixed models were used to estimate interaction risk ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), with BRCA (carrier vs. noncarrier) as the response variable. Results: IRRs were above 1.0 for known protective factors including ever being pregnant (IRR = 1.29, 95% CI; 1.00–1.67) and ever using the oral contraceptive pill (1.30, 95% CI; 1.07–1.60), suggesting the protective effects of these factors may be reduced in carriers compared with noncarriers. Conversely, the IRRs for risk factors including endometriosis and menopausal hormone therapy were below 1.0, suggesting weaker positive associations among BRCA carriers. In contrast, associations with lifestyle factors including smoking, physical inactivity, body mass index, and aspirin use did not appear to differ by BRCA status. Conclusions: Our results suggest that associations with hormonal and reproductive factors are generally weaker for those with a pathogenic BRCA variant than those without, while associations with modifiable lifestyle factors are similar for carriers and noncarriers. Impact: Advice to maintain a healthy weight, be physically active, and refrain from smoking will therefore benefit BRCA carriers as well as noncarriers.

Abstract Rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is considered the standard-of-care for patients with advanced-stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), despite findings that patients with nongerminal center B-cell like (non-GCB) have significantly worse outcome with this regimen. We evaluated the prognostic significance of baseline risk factors, including cell of origin (COO) classified by the Hans algorithm, within an alternative chemoimmunotherapy program. At Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), 151 patients with DLBCL received sequential R-CHOP induction and (R)-ICE (rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide) consolidation. Outcome analysis based on COO was validated with a propensity score–matched cohort treated with R-CHOP from the Mayo Clinic component of the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER). Among the patients with GCB (n = 69) and non-GCB (n = 69) at MSK, event-free survival (EFS) of non-GCB was superior to that of GCB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.98). Overall survival (OS) demonstrated an association in the same direction but was not statistically significant (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.33-1.42). Propensity score–matched patients from MSK (n = 108) demonstrated a small attenuation in the HRs for EFS (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.27-1.18) and OS (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.33-1.79) and were no longer statistically significant. In contrast, the matched MER cohort (n = 108) demonstrated an EFS association (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.70-1.95) and OS association (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.64-2.00) in the opposite direction, but were also not statistically significant. R-CHOP induction and (R)-ICE consolidation may overcome the negative prognostic impact of the non-GCB phenotype, per the Hans algorithm, and can be preferentially selected for this population. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT00039195 and #NCT00712582.