Projected 30- day out-of-pocket costs and total spending on pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy under Medicare Part D

Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency and pancreatic exocrine replacement therapy in clinical practice

Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) is a complex condition that disrupts normal digestion and absorption. Patients with EPI may suffer from mild to debilitating malabsorption with a constellation of symptoms that can have a significant effect on quality of life and nutrition status. Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is effective and safe to treat EPI and is the standard of care for this condition. A wide variety and various forms of these products exist, as well as numerous guidelines and recommendations. Obtaining PERT for patients can oftentimes be cost prohibitive. Determining the presence and extent of EPI can be challenging and patient specific, making it difficult for practitioners. This narrative review will explore these issues, as well as several disease states potentially affected by EPI, and review current management strategies.

Evaluation and management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency: pearls and pitfalls

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The diagnosis and management of exocrine pancreatic dysfunction (EPD) can be challenging. EPD classically results from conditions that cause loss of pancreatic acinar cell function and decreased digestive enzyme production. However, several conditions may contribute to signs or symptoms of EPD with otherwise normal pancreatic exocrine function. A thoughtful approach to considering these conditions, along with their specific therapies, can guide a tailored management approach.

RECENT FINDINGS

An EPD severity classification schema has been proposed, which emphasizes a shift towards a more restrictive prescription of pancreas enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) for patients with milder EPD. In contrast, PERT use has been associated with a measurable survival benefit among individuals with EPD and pancreatic cancer, so the prescription of PERT may be more liberal in this population. Recent publications in the cystic fibrosis population offer pearls guiding the titration and optimization of PERT.

SUMMARY

Among individuals with severe EPD, PERT is an effective therapy. Among individuals with milder EPD, although PERT is effective, there may be opportunities to provide additional and potentially more effective therapies.

Pancreatic enzyme treatment in chronic pancreatitis: Quality of management and adherence to guidelines-A cross-sectional observational study

Objectives

Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) is a common complication in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP), leading to increased morbidity and mortality if not treated adequately. Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy|pancreas enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is the cornerstone in treatment of patients with PEI. In the present study, we use data from the Scandinavian Baltic Pancreatic Club database to examine adherence of PERT according to United European Gastroenterology evidence‐based guidelines treatment of CP.

Patients and methods

Patients with definitive or probable CP according to M‐ANNHEIM diagnostic criteria were included. We collected information on exposures, exocrine function, intake of pancreatic enzymes, and markers of nutrition. Fecal elastase <200 μg/g was defined as a marker for PEI. Enzyme replacement therapy of 100,000 lipase units or more was defined as adequate treatment.

Results

We included 1006 patients from 8 centers in five countries. Sixty‐four percent of the patients were correctly treated. Twenty‐five per cent of PEI patients were not taking enzymes at all, and 20% of PEI patients were undertreated with insufficient PERT doses according to the guidelines. Fourteen percent of patients with sufficient pancreatic function were receiving enzymes despite normal exocrine pancreatic function. There were center differences. Current smoking was associated with lack of treatment and alcohol abuse was associated with under‐treatment. There were no associations between “no treatment” or “under‐treatment” for underweight or vitamin D deficiency.

Conclusion

In our CP expert centers, the adherence to guidelines for enzyme treatment is insufficient. Both patient factors and center differences have influence on treatment adherence.

Diagnosis and treatment of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency in chronic pancreatitis: An international expert survey and case vignette study

INTRODUCTION

Despite evidence-based guidelines, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency is frequently underdiagnosed and undertreated in patients with chronic pancreatitis. Therefore, the aim of this study is to provide insight into the current opinion and clinical decision-making of international pancreatologists regarding the management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency.

METHODS

An online survey and case vignette study was sent to experts in chronic pancreatitis and members of various pancreatic associations: EPC, E-AHPBA and DPSG. Experts were selected based on publication record from the past 5 years.

RESULTS

Overall, 252 pancreatologists participated of whom 44% had ≥ 15 years of experience and 35% treated ≥ 50 patients with chronic pancreatitis per year. Screening for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency as part of the diagnostic work-up for chronic pancreatitis is performed by 69% and repeated annually by 21%. About 74% considers nutritional assessment to be part of the standard work-up. Patients are most frequently screened for deficiencies of calcium (47%), iron (42%), vitamin D (61%) and albumin (59%). In case of clinically steatorrhea, 71% prescribes enzyme supplementation. Of all pancreatologists, 40% refers more than half of their patients to a dietician. Despite existing guidelines, 97% supports the need for more specific and tailored instructions regarding the management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency.

CONCLUSION

This survey identified a lack of consensus and substantial practice variation among international pancreatologists regarding guidelines pertaining the management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. These results highlight the need for further adaptation of these guidelines according to current expert opinion and the level of available scientific evidence.

Financial Burden of Drugs Prescribed for Cancer-Associated Symptoms

PURPOSE

The financial toxicity of anticancer drugs is well-documented, but little is known about the costs of drugs used to manage cancer-associated symptoms.

METHODS

We reviewed relevant guidelines and compiled drugs used to manage seven cancer-associated symptoms (anorexia and cachexia, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, constipation, diarrhea, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, cancer-associated fatigue, and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting). Using GoodRx website, we identified the retail price (cash price at retail pharmacies) and lowest price (discounted, best-case scenario of out-of-pocket costs) for patients without insurance for each drug or formulation for a typical fill. We describe lowest prices here.

RESULTS

For anorexia and cachexia, costs ranged from $5 US dollars (USD; generic olanzapine or mirtazapine tablets) to $1,156 USD (brand-name dronabinol solution) and varied widely by formulation of the same drug or dosage: for olanzapine 5 mg, $5 USD (generic tablet) to $239 USD (brand-name orally disintegrating tablet). For chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, costs of duloxetine varied from $12 USD (generic) to $529 USD (brand-name). For constipation, the cost of sennosides or polyethylene glycol was <$15 USD, whereas newer agents such as methylnaltrexone were expensive ($1,001 USD). For diarrhea, the cost of generic loperamide or diphenoxylate-atropine tablets was <$15 USD. For exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, only brand-name formulations were available, range of cost, $1,072 USD-$1,514 USD. For cancer-associated fatigue, the cost of generic dexamethasone or dexmethylphenidate was <$15 USD, whereas brand-name modafinil was more costly ($1,284 USD). For a 4-drug nausea and vomiting prophylaxis regimen, costs ranged from $181 USD to $1,430 USD.

CONCLUSION

We highlight the high costs of many symptom control drugs and the wide variation in the costs of these drugs. These findings can guide patient-clinician discussions about cost-effectively managing symptoms, while promoting the use of less expensive formulations when possible.