Citations

Abstract Background: SPPADE symptoms (Sleep disturbance, Pain, Physical function impairment, Anxiety, Depression/distress, and Energy deficits/fatigue) may result from cancer and its treatment. The aim of this analysis was to characterize SPPADE symptoms in patients with breast cancer. Methods. SPPADE data were drawn from the Enhanced, EHR-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) study, a stepped-wedge pragmatic cluster-randomized trial designed to evaluate a symptom management intervention in routine practice (NCT03892967). Symptom severity was measured on a 0-10 scale via a survey administered by patient portal, in-clinic tablet, or interactive voice response system (by phone) prior to, during, or soon after an outpatient oncology encounter. Scores of 4-6 were categorized as “moderate” and ≥7 as “severe.” In this analysis, only the data from each patient’s initial survey were included. Results. A total of 9,651 patients with breast cancer completed an initial E2C2 survey between March 2019 and January 2023. The proportion of patients with moderate or severe SPPADE symptoms were as follows: 22% moderate and 10% severe for insomnia; 18% moderate and 7% severe for pain; 17% moderate and 7% severe for anxiety; 15% moderate and 5% severe for emotional distress; 25% moderate and 12% severe for fatigue; and 22% moderate and 8% severe for impaired physical function. Table 1 presents score means and standard deviations by demographic subgroup. Conclusions. SPPADE symptoms are common in patients with breast cancer. These observations warrant routine implementation of symptom surveillance and management in breast oncology. Funding acknowledgement: The Improving the Management of symPtoms during And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium is a Cancer Moonshot Research Initiative under the authorization of the 2016 United States 21st Century Cures Act. This research was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the NIH, UM1CA233033 (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN). Insomnia, Pain, Anxiety, Distress, Fatigue, and Functional Impairment in Patients with Breast Cancer Citation Format: Kathryn Ruddy, Veronica Grzegorczyk, Deirdre Pachman, Sandra Mitchell, Bolun Liu, Deanne Smith, Ciara O'Sullivan, Shawna Ehlers, Jeph Herrin, Parvez Rahman, Andrea Cheville. Insomnia, Pain, Anxiety, Distress, Fatigue, and Functional Impairment in Patients with Breast Cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO2-12-09.

ImportancePreventing diabetes complications requires monitoring and control of hyperglycemia and cardiovascular risk factors. Switching to high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) has been shown to hinder aspects of diabetes care; however, the association of HDHP enrollment with microvascular and macrovascular diabetes complications is unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the association between an employer-required switch to an HDHP and incident complications of diabetes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study used deidentified administrative claims data for US adults with diabetes enrolled in employer-sponsored health plans between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019. Data analysis was performed from May 26, 2022, to January 2, 2024.ExposuresAdults with a baseline year of non-HDHP enrollment who had to switch to an HDHP because their employer offered no non-HDHP alternative in that year were compared with adults who were continuously enrolled in a non-HDHP.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMixed-effects logistic regression models examined the association between switching to an HDHP and, individually, the odds of myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, lower-extremity complication, end-stage kidney disease, proliferative retinopathy, treatment for retinopathy, and blindness. Models were adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and medications, with inverse propensity score weighting used to account for potential selection bias.ResultsThe study included 42 326 adults who switched to an HDHP (mean [SD] age, 52 [10] years; 19 752 [46.7%] female) and 202 729 adults who did not switch (mean [SD] age, 53 [10] years; 89 828 [44.3%] female). Those who switched to an HDHP had greater odds of experiencing all diabetes complications (odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.16 for myocardial infarction; OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.21 for stroke; OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.30-1.41 for hospitalization for heart failure; OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 2.38-2.70 for end-stage kidney disease; OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.17-2.29 for lower-extremity complication; OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.13-1.21 for proliferative retinopathy; OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.18-2.54 for blindness; and OR, 2.28; 95% CI, 2.15-2.41 for retinopathy treatment).Conclusions and RelevanceThis study found that an employer-driven switch to an HDHP was associated with increased odds of experiencing all diabetes complications. These findings reinforce the potential harm associated with HDHPs for people with diabetes and the importance of affordable and accessible chronic disease management, which is hindered by high out-of-pocket costs incurred by HDHPs.

OBJECTIVE To determine the relative hazards of acute and chronic diabetes complications among people with diabetes across the U.S. rural-urban continuum. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This retrospective cohort study used the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, a deidentified data set of U.S. commercial and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, to follow 2,901,563 adults (age ≥18 years) with diabetes between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2021. We compared adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of diabetes complications in remote areas (population <2,500), small towns (population 2,500–50,000), and cities (population >50,000). RESULTS Compared with residents of cities, residents of remote areas had greater hazards of myocardial infarction (HR 1.06 [95% CI 1.02–1.10]) and revascularization (HR 1.04 [1.02–1.06]) but lower hazards of hyperglycemia (HR 0.90 [0.83–0.98]) and stroke (HR 0.91 [0.88–0.95]). Compared with cities, residents of small towns had greater hazards of hyperglycemia (HR 1.06 [1.02–1.10]), hypoglycemia (HR 1.15 [1.12–1.18]), end-stage kidney disease (HR 1.04 [1.03–1.06]), myocardial infarction (HR 1.10 [1.08–1.12]), heart failure (HR 1.05 [1.03–1.06]), amputation (HR 1.05 [1.02–1.09]), other lower-extremity complications (HR 1.02 [1.01–1.03]), and revascularization (HR 1.05 [1.04–1.06]) but a smaller hazard of stroke (HR 0.95 [0.94–0.97]). Compared with small towns, residents of remote areas had lower hazards of hyperglycemia (HR 0.85 [0.78–0.93]), hypoglycemia (HR 0.92 [0.87–0.97]), and heart failure (HR 0.94 [0.91–0.97]). Hazards of retinopathy and atrial fibrillation/flutter did not vary geographically. CONCLUSIONS Adults in small towns are disproportionately impacted by complications of diabetes. Future studies should probe for the reasons underlying these disparities.

Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03501992

AbstractCancer and its treatment produce deleterious symptoms across the phases of care. Poorly controlled symptoms negatively affect quality of life and result in increased health-care needs and hospitalization. The Improving the Management of symPtoms during And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium was created to develop 3 large-scale, systematic symptom management systems, deployed through electronic health record platforms, and to test them in pragmatic, randomized, hybrid effectiveness and implementation trials. Here, we describe the IMPACT Consortium’s conceptual framework, its organizational components, and plans for evaluation. The study designs and lessons learned are highlighted in the context of disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective To build on the recently completed GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study) randomised trial examining the comparative effectiveness of second line glucose lowering drugs in achieving and maintaining glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. Design Emulation of a target trial. Setting Medical and pharmacy claims data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, a de-identified US national dataset of beneficiaries of commercially insured and Medicare Advantage plans, 29 March 2013 to 30 June 2021. Participants Adults (≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes who first started taking glimepiride, sitagliptin, liraglutide, insulin glargine, or canagliflozin between 29 March 2013 and 30 June 2021. Participants were treatment naive or were receiving metformin monotherapy at the time of starting the study drug. Main outcome measures The main outcomes were time to primary and secondary metabolic failure of the assigned treatment, calculated as days to haemoglobin A1c levels of ≥7.0% and >7.5%, respectively. Secondary metabolic, cardiovascular, and microvascular outcomes were analysed as specified in the GRADE statistical analysis plan. Propensity scores were estimated with the gradient boosting method, and inverse propensity score weighting was used to emulate randomisation to the treatment groups, which were then compared with Cox proportional hazards regression. (Results The study cohort included participants starting treatment with glimepiride (n=20 511), liraglutide (n=5569), sitagliptin (n=13 039), insulin glargine (n=7262), and canagliflozin (n=5290). The insulin glargine arm was excluded because of insufficient control of confounding. Median times to primary metabolic failure were 439 (95% confidence interval 400 to 489) days in the canagliflozin arm, 439 (426 to 453) days in the glimepiride arm, 624 (567 to 731) days in the liraglutide arm, and 461 (442 to 482) days in the sitagliptin arm. Median time to secondary metabolic failure was also longest in the liraglutide arm. Adults receiving liraglutide had the lowest one year cumulative incidence rate of primary metabolic failure (0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.40) followed by sitagliptin (0.44, 0.43 to 0.45), glimepiride (0.45, 0.44 to 0.45), and canagliflozin (0.46, 0.44 to 0.48). Similarly, the one year cumulative incidence rate of secondary metabolic failure was 0.27 (0.25 to 0.29) in the canagliflozin arm, 0.28 (0.27 to 0.29) in the glimepiride arm, 0.23 (0.21 to 0.26) in the liraglutide arm, and 0.28 (0.27 to 0.29) in the sitagliptin arm. No differences were observed between the study arms in the rates of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Conclusions In this target trial emulation of an expanded GRADE study framework, liraglutide was more effective in achieving and maintaining glycaemic control as a second line glucose lowering drug than canagliflozin, sitagliptin, or glimepiride.

Background/aims There has been growing interest in better understanding the potential of observational research methods in medical product evaluation and regulatory decision-making. Previously, we used linked claims and electronic health record data to emulate two ongoing randomized controlled trials, characterizing the populations and results of each randomized controlled trial prior to publication of its results. Here, our objective was to compare the populations and results from the emulated trials with those of the now-published randomized controlled trials. Methods This study compared participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics and study results between the emulated trials, which used structured data from OptumLabs Data Warehouse, and the published PRONOUNCE and GRADE trials. First, we examined the feasibility of implementing the baseline participant characteristics included in the published PRONOUNCE and GRADE trials’ using real-world data and classified each variable as ascertainable, partially ascertainable, or not ascertainable. Second, we compared the emulated trials and published randomized controlled trials for baseline patient characteristics (concordance determined using standardized mean differences <0.20) and results of the primary and secondary endpoints (concordance determined by direction of effect estimates and statistical significance). Results The PRONOUNCE trial enrolled 544 participants, and the emulated trial included 2226 propensity score-matched participants. In the PRONOUNCE trial publication, one of the 32 baseline participant characteristics was listed as an exclusion criterion on ClinicalTrials.gov but was ultimately not used. Among the remaining 31 characteristics, 9 (29.0%) were ascertainable, 11 (35.5%) were partially ascertainable, and 10 (32.2%) were not ascertainable using structured data from OptumLabs. For one additional variable, the PRONOUNCE trial did not provide sufficient detail to allow its ascertainment. Of the nine variables that were ascertainable, values in the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial were discordant for 6 (66.7%). The primary endpoint of time from randomization to the first major adverse cardiovascular event and secondary endpoints of nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke were concordant between the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial. The GRADE trial enrolled 5047 participants, and the emulated trial included 7540 participants. In the GRADE trial publication, 8 of 34 (23.5%) baseline participant characteristics were ascertainable, 14 (41.2%) were partially ascertainable, and 11 (32.4%) were not ascertainable using structured data from OptumLabs. For one variable, the GRADE trial did not provide sufficient detail to allow for ascertainment. Of the eight variables that were ascertainable, values in the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial were discordant for 4 (50.0%). The primary endpoint of time to hemoglobin A1c ≥7.0% was mostly concordant between the emulated trial and the published randomized controlled trial. Conclusion Despite challenges, observational methods and real-world data can be leveraged in certain important situations for a more timely evaluation of drug effectiveness and safety in more diverse and representative patient populations.

ImportanceOptimal diabetes care requires regular monitoring and care to maintain glycemic control. How high-deductible health plans (HDHPs), which reduce overall spending but may impede care by increasing out-of-pocket expenses, are associated with risks of severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia is unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the association between an employer-forced switch to HDHP and severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study used deidentified administrative claims data for privately insured adults with diabetes from a single insurance carrier with multiple plans across the US between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018. Analyses were conducted between May 15, 2020, and November 3, 2022.ExposuresPatients with 1 baseline year of enrollment in a non-HDHP whose employers subsequently forced a switch to an HDHP were compared with patients who did not switch.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMixed-effects logistic regression models were used to examine the association between switching to an HDHP and the odds of severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia (ascertained using diagnosis codes in emergency department [ED] visits and hospitalizations), adjusting for patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, region, income, comorbidities, glucose-lowering medications, baseline ED and hospital visits for hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, and baseline deductible amount, and applying inverse propensity score weighting to account for potential treatment selection bias.ResultsThe study population was composed of 42 326 patients who switched to an HDHP (mean [SD] age: 52 [10] years, 19 752 [46.7%] women, 7375 [17.4%] Black, 5740 [13.6%] Hispanic, 26 572 [62.8%] non-Hispanic White) and 202 729 patients who did not switch (mean [SD] age, 53 [10] years, 89 828 [44.3%] women, 29 551 [14.6%] Black, 26 689 [13.2%] Hispanic, 130 843 [64.5%] non-Hispanic White). When comparing all study years, switching to an HDHP was not associated with increased odds of experiencing at least 1 hypoglycemia-related ED visit or hospitalization (OR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.95-1.06]; P = .85), but each year of HDHP enrollment did increase these odds by 2% (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.00-1.04]; P = .04). In contrast, switching to an HDHP did significantly increase the odds of experiencing at least 1 hyperglycemia-related ED visit or hospitalization (OR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.11-1.42]; P &amp;lt; .001), with each year of HDHP enrollment increasing the odds by 5% (OR, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.01-1.09]; P = .02).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, employer-forced switching to an HDHP was associated with increased odds of potentially preventable acute diabetes complications, potentially because of delayed or deferred care. These findings suggest that employers should be more judicious in their health plan offerings, and health plans and policy makers should consider allowing preventive and high-value services to be exempt from deductible requirements.

Abstract We previously described the hypotheses, outcomes, design, and analysis for E2C2, a pragmatic stepped-wedge trial to assess an intervention to improve symptom control in patients with cancer. Subsequent consideration of the design and cohort led to the addition of a second primary hypothesis. This article describes and presents the rationale for this second hypothesis. This addendum also details a revised analytic approach, necessitated by inconsistencies in the original analytic plan. The design, outcomes, and other aspects of the protocol remain unchanged.