Prior Authorization, Copayments, and Utilization of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Medicare and Commercial Plans in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Does Speckle Tracking Transthoracic Echocardiography Indicate Subtle Changes in Left Ventricular Function in Heart Failure Patients with Reduced Ejection Fraction Treated by Sacubitril-valsartan?

Background

In heart failure patients and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), assessing subtle changes in left ventricle (LV) function is crucial for monitoring treatment efficacy. This study aims to determine the effect of valsartan/sacubitril on LV ejection fraction (EF) assessed by two-dimensional (2D) transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in comparison to that assessed by 2D TTE speckle tracking in patients with HFrEF ≤35% after 6 months of treatment.

Patients and Methods

A prospective study will be conducted on 200 heart failure patients with reduced EF (HFrEF) undergoing sacubitril-valsartan treatment. Each participant underwent a comprehensive evaluation, including physical examination, history taking, serial 12-lead electrocardiogram, and 2D echo to evaluate cardiac parameters. In addition, 2D speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) assessments were conducted before and after 6 months of valsartan/sacubitril treatment.

Results

The enrolled patients had an average age of 48 years with 63% females. At the beginning of the study, 9 (4.5%) patients were classified as New York Heart Association (NYHA) FC I, 120 (60%) as NYHA FC II, 64 (32%) as NYHA FC III, and 7 (3.5%) as FC IV. Following treatment, 82 (41%) patients improved to NYHA FC I, and 118 (59%) were in NYHA FC II. Notably, 82 (41%) patients showed improved left ventricular EF (LVEF), detected either by traditional TTE or STE, whereas 118 (59%) showed no improvement in EF through traditional TTE. In addition, 74 (37%) patients demonstrated improvement detected by STE. In contrast, 44 (22%) patients demonstrated no improvement in EF detected by either TTE or STE.

Conclusion

STE was a more reliable diagnostic method for seeing early LVEF improvement in patients with HFrEF receiving valsartan/sacubitril treatment not seen by conventional TTE.

Eliminating Health Disparities in Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure, and Dyslipidemia: A Path Toward Achieving Pharmacoequity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pharmacoequity refers to the goal of ensuring that all patients have access to high-quality medications, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, or other characteristics. The goal of this article is to review current evidence on disparities in access to cardiovascular drug therapies across sociodemographic subgroups, with a focus on heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and dyslipidemia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Considerable and consistent disparities to life-prolonging heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and dyslipidemia medications exist in clinical trial representation, access to specialist care, prescription of guideline-based therapy, drug affordability, and pharmacy accessibility across racial, ethnic, gender, and other sociodemographic subgroups. Researchers, health systems, and policy makers can take steps to improve pharmacoequity by diversifying clinical trial enrollment, increasing access to inpatient and outpatient cardiology care, nudging clinicians to increase prescription of guideline-directed medical therapy, and pursuing system-level reforms to improve drug access and affordability.

Racial differences in setting of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement in older adults with heart failure and association with disparate post-implant outcomes

Background

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement in heart failure (HF) patients during or early after (≤90 days) unplanned cardiovascular hospitalizations has been associated with poor outcomes. Racial and ethnic differences in this "peri-hospitalization" ICD placement have not been well described.

Methods

Using a 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we identified older (≥66 years) patients with HF who underwent ICD placement for primary prevention from 2008 to 2018. We investigated racial and ethnic differences in frequency of peri-hospitalization ICD placement using modified Poisson regression. We utilized Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox regression to investigate the association of peri-hospitalization ICD placement with differences in all-cause mortality and hospitalization (HF, cardiovascular and all-cause) within and between race and ethnicity groups for up to 5-year follow-up.

Results

Among the 61,710 beneficiaries receiving ICDs (35% female, 82% White, 10% Black, 6% Hispanic), 44% were implanted peri-hospitalization. Black [adjusted rate ratio (RR) 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 1.16 (1.12, 1.20)] and Hispanic [RR (95% CI): 1.10 (1.06, 1.14)] beneficiaries were more likely than White beneficiaries to have ICD placement peri-hospitalization. Peri-hospitalization ICD placement was associated with an at least 1.5× increased risk of death, 1.5× increased risk of re-hospitalization and 1.7× increased risk of HF hospitalization during 3-year follow-up in fully adjusted models. Although beneficiaries with peri-hospitalization placement had the highest mortality and readmission rates 1- and 3-year post-implant (log-rank p < 0.0001), the magnitude of the associated risk did not differ significantly by race and ethnicity (p = NS for interaction).

Conclusions

ICD implantation occurring during the peri-hospitalization period was associated with worse prognosis and occurred at higher rates among Black and Hispanic compared to White Medicare beneficiaries with HF during the period under study. The risk associated with peri-hospitalization ICD placement did not differ by race and ethnicity. Future paradigms aimed at enhancing real-world effectiveness of ICD therapy and addressing disparate outcomes should consider timing and setting of ICD placement in HFrEF patients who otherwise meet guideline eligibility.

Financial Toxicity of Medical Management of Heart Failure: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Optimal medical management of heart failure (HF) improves quality of life, decreases mortality, and decreases hospitalizations. Cost may contribute to suboptimal adherence to HF medications, especially angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Patients' experiences with HF medication cost include financial burden, financial strain, and financial toxicity. Although there has been research studying financial toxicity in patients with some chronic diseases, there are no validated tools for measuring financial toxicity of HF, and very few data on the subjective experiences of patients with HF and financial toxicity. Strategies to decrease HF-associated financial toxicity include making systemic changes to minimize cost sharing, optimizing shared decision-making, implementing policies to lower drug costs, broadening insurance coverage, and using financial navigation services and discount programs. Clinicians may also improve patient financial wellness through various strategies in routine clinical care. Future research is needed to study financial toxicity and associated patient experiences for HF.

Optimizing outcomes in heart failure: 2022 and beyond

Although the development of therapies and tools for the improved management of heart failure (HF) continues apace, day-to-day management in clinical practice is often far from ideal. A Cardiovascular Round Table workshop was convened by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) to identify barriers to the optimal implementation of therapies and guidelines and to consider mitigation strategies to improve patient outcomes in the future. Key challenges identified included the complexity of HF itself and its treatment, financial constraints and the perception of HF treatments as costly, failure to meet the needs of patients, suboptimal outpatient management, and the fragmented nature of healthcare systems. It was discussed that ongoing initiatives may help to address some of these barriers, such as changes incorporated into the 2021 ESC HF guideline, ESC Heart Failure Association quality indicators, quality improvement registries (e.g. EuroHeart), new ESC guidelines for patients, and the universal definition of HF. Additional priority action points discussed to promote further improvements included revised definitions of HF 'phenotypes' based on trial data, the development of implementation strategies, improved affordability, greater regulator/payer involvement, increased patient education, further development of patient-reported outcomes, better incorporation of guidelines into primary care systems, and targeted education for primary care practitioners. Finally, it was concluded that overarching changes are needed to improve current HF care models, such as the development of a standardized pathway, with a common adaptable digital backbone, decision-making support, and data integration, to ensure that the model 'learns' as the management of HF continues to evolve.

Sacubitril/Valsartan Improves Left Atrial and Ventricular Strain and Strain Rate in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Data on the impact of sacubitril/valsartan (SV) therapy on phasic left atrial (LA) and left ventricular (LV) strain in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in two-dimensional speckle tracking (2D-STE) parameters with SV therapy in HFrEF patients.

METHODS

Prospective evaluation of HFrEF patients receiving optimized medical therapy. Two-dimensional speckle tracking (2D-STE) parameters were assessed at baseline and after 6 months of SV therapy. LA strain and strain rate (SR) in reservoir, conduit, and contraction phases were compared with LV longitudinal, radial, and circumferential strain and SR and stratified according to heart rhythm and HFrEF etiology.

RESULTS

A total of 35 patients completed the 6-month follow-up, with a mean age of 59 ± 11 years, 40% in atrial fibrillation, 43% with ischemic etiology, and LVEF of 29 ± 6%. There were significant improvements in LA reservoir, conduit, and contractile strain and SR following SV therapy, particularly among patients in sinus rhythm. There were significant improvements in longitudinal, radial, and circumferential LV function indices.

CONCLUSION

SV therapy in HFrEF was associated with improved longitudinal, radial, and circumferential function, particularly among patients in sinus rhythm. These findings can provide insights into the mechanisms underlying the improvement of cardiac function and help assess subclinical responses to the treatment.

Association Between Copayment Amount and Filling of Medications for Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitors in Patients With Heart Failure

Background Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) reduce mortality and hospitalization for patients with heart failure. However, relatively high copayments for ARNI may contribute to suboptimal adherence, thus potentially limiting their benefits. Methods and Results We conducted a retrospective cohort study within a large, multi-site health system. We included patients with: ARNI prescription between November 20, 2020 and June 30, 2021; diagnosis of heart failure or left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%; and available pharmacy or pharmacy benefit manager copayment data. The primary exposure was copayment, categorized as $0, $0.01 to $10, $10.01 to $100, and >$100. The primary outcome was prescription fill nonadherence, defined as the proportion of days covered <80% over 6 months. We assessed the association between copayment and nonadherence using multivariable logistic regression, and nonbinarized proportion of days covered using multivariable Poisson regression, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and neighborhood-level covariates. A total of 921 patients met inclusion criteria, with 192 (20.8%) having $0 copayment, 228 (24.8%) with $0.01 to $10 copayment, 206 (22.4%) with $10.01 to $100, and 295 (32.0%) with >$100. Patients with higher copayments had higher rates of nonadherence, ranging from 17.2% for $0 copayment to 34.2% for copayment >$100 (P<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, odds of nonadherence were significantly higher for copayment of $10.01 to $100 (odds ratio [OR], 1.93 [95% CI, 1.15-3.27], P=0.01) or >$100 (OR, 2.58 [95% CI, 1.63-4.18], P<0.001), as compared with $0 copayment. Similar associations were seen when assessing proportion of days covered as a proportion. Conclusions We found higher rates of not filling ARNI prescriptions among patients with higher copayments, which persisted after multivariable adjustment. Our findings support future studies to assess whether reducing copayments can increase adherence to ARNI and improve outcomes for heart failure.

Clinical and Socioeconomic Determinants of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor Prescription at Hospital Discharge in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) prescription in the United States remains suboptimal despite strong evidence for efficacy and value in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Factors responsible for under prescription are not completely understood. Economic limitations may play a disproportionate role in reduced access for some patients.

METHODS

This is an analysis of the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry, supplemented with data from the Distressed Community Index. Data were fit to a mixed-effects regression model to investigate clinical and socioeconomic factors associated with ARNI prescription at hospital discharge. Missing data were handled by multilevel multiple imputation.

RESULTS

Of the 136 144 patients included in analysis, 12.6% were prescribed an ARNI at discharge. The dominant determinants of ARNI prescription were ARNI use while inpatient (odds ratio [OR], 72 [95% CI, 58-89]; P<0.001) and taking an ARNI before hospitalization (OR 9 [95% CI, 7-13]; P<0.001). Having an ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/ARNI contraindication was associated with lower likelihood of ARNI prescription at discharge (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.10-0.12]; P<0.001). Socioeconomic factors associated with lower likelihood of ARNI prescription included having no insurance (OR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.50-0.72]; P<0.001) and living in a ZIP Code identified as distressed (OR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.70-0.93]; P=0.010). The rate of ARNI prescription is increasing with time (OR, 2 [95% CI, 1.8-2.3]; P<0.001 for patients discharged in 2020 as opposed to 2017), but the disparity in prescription rates between distressed and prosperous communities appears to be increasing.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple medical and socioeconomic factors contribute to low rates of ARNI prescription at hospital discharge. Potential targets for improving ARNI prescription rates include initiating ARNIs during hospitalization and aggressively addressing patients' access barriers with the support of inpatient social services and pharmacists.

Real-world use patterns of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (sacubitril/valsartan) among patients with heart failure within a large integrated health system

BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan is a first-in-class angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) that is now preferred in guidelines over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, it has not been broadly adopted in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To characterize ARNI use within a large diverse real-world population and assess for any racial disparities. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study within Kaiser Permanente Southern California. Adult patients with HFrEF who received ARNIs, ACEIs, or ARBs between January 1, 2014, and November 30, 2020, were identified. The prevalence of ARNI use among the cohort and patient characteristics by ARNIs vs ACEIs/ARBs use were described. Multivariable regression was performed to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs of receiving ARNI by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Among 12,250 patients with HFrEF receiving ACEIs, ARBs, or ARNIs, 556 (4.54%) patients received ARNIs. ARNI use among this cohort increased from 0.02% in 2015 to 7.48% in 2020. Patients receiving ARNIs were younger (aged 62 vs 69 years) and had a lower median ejection fraction (27% vs 32%) compared with patients receiving ACEIs/ARBs. They also had higher use of mineralocorticoid antagonists (24.1% vs 19.8%) and automatic implantable cardioverterdefibrillators (17.4% vs 13.3%). There were no significant differences in rate of ARNI use by race and ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Within a large diverse integrated health system in Southern California, the rate of ARNI use has risen over time. Patients given ARNIs were younger with fewer comorbidities, while having worse ejection fraction. Racial minorities were no less likely to receive ARNIs compared with White patients. DISCLOSURES: Dr Huang had stock ownership in Gilead and Pfizer. Dr Liang received support for article processing and medical writing.

Impact of Financial Considerations on Willingness to Take Sacubitril/Valsartan for Heart Failure

Background Sacubitril/valsartan improves health outcomes for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction relative to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, but it carries higher out-of-pocket costs. Neither the impact of cost nor how to integrate cost into medical decisions is well studied. Methods and Results To evaluate the impact of out-of-pocket costs and a novel cost-priming intervention on willingness to take sacubitril/valsartan for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, participants with self-reported heart disease were surveyed using the online Ipsos Knowledge Panel. Participants were presented with a modified decision aid for sacubitril/valsartan and then, in a 3×2 factorial design, randomly assigned to 1 of 3 cost conditions ($10, $50, or $100/month) and to a control group or cost-priming intervention, defined by being asked questions about their financial situation before learning about the benefits of sacubitril/valsartan. Of the 1013 participants included in the analysis, 85% of respondents were willing to take sacubitril/valsartan at $10, 62% at $50, and 33% at $100 (P<0.0001). In a multivariable logistic regression model, participants were more likely to take sacubitril/valsartan at $10 versus $100 (odds ratio [OR], 14.3 [95% CI, 9.4-21.8]) and $50 compared with $100 (OR, 3.6 [95% CI, 2.5-5.1]). Overall, participants in the cost-primed group were more willing to take sacubitril/valsartan than those not primed to consider their financial situation (63% versus 56%, P=0.04). There was no statistically significant interaction between cost conditions and cost priming. Perceived benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers decreased as cost increased but did not vary by cost priming. Conclusions Commonly encountered out-of-pocket costs of sacubitril/valsartan may impact individuals' willingness to take the medication even when recommended by their physicians. Priming individuals to consider personal finances before learning about the drug increased willingness to take sacubitril/valsartan.