Closing the Gap: Identifying Rates and Reasons for Nonadherence in a Specialty Population

Assessment of Phosphorodiamidate Morpholino Oligomer Treatment Patterns for Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A MarketScan Claims Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomers (PMOs), weight-based treatments administered weekly by intravenous infusion, are approved in the US for patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) amenable to certain exon skipping. Evidence regarding PMO treatment patterns in real-world settings is limited. This study used longitudinal administrative claims data to characterize PMO treatment patterns among US patients with DMD.

METHODS

MarketScan® commercial and Medicaid data (January 1, 2018-December 31, 2021) were used to identify claims for PMO treatments (eteplirsen, golodirsen, viltolarsen, casimersen). The proportion of days covered (PDC), proportion with continuous PMO claims coverage (no gaps in claims ≥ 30 days), and time to subsequent PMO claims after a ≥ 30-day gap in PMO claims were described.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-three patients with ≥ 1 PMO claim were identified. Multiple codes were needed to identify PMO treatment coverage. Mean age was 14.1 years; all patients were male. Mean continuous follow-up duration was 669.3 days. Median PDC was 83.4%. Seventy-four (55.6%) patients had continuous PMO claims coverage (no ≥ 30-day gaps in claims). Of the 59 patients with ≥ 1 gap in PMO claims of ≥ 30 days, 39 had ≥ 1 subsequent PMO claim. Accounting for censoring via Kaplan-Meier analysis, 75.5% had a subsequent PMO claim within 1 year after a ≥ 30-day gap, with a median time of 64 days (including the qualifying 30 days).

CONCLUSION

Understanding treatment patterns is important for characterizing real-world utilization of precision genetic medicines. This study observed a high PDC for PMO treatments for DMD. Most patients had continuous PMO claims coverage, and most patients with a gap in PMO claims had a subsequent PMO claim. Nonetheless, the observed persistence may have been underestimated given shortcomings of claims data and payer coverage considerations. Caution should be exercised when inferring treatment effectiveness or tolerability based on observed treatment patterns from claims data alone for weight-based, infused PMO treatments.

Evaluating patient-reported adherence and outcomes in specialty disease states: A dual-site initiative

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are often used by clinicians to evaluate patient response to specialty medications used to treat multiple sclerosis (MS) and rheumatologic conditions. Identifying associations among PROs and patient characteristics could inform patient-centered treatment monitoring.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association among patient characteristics and PROs, including patient-reported adherence (defined as no missed doses), medication tolerance, patient perceived effectiveness, and health care resource utilization (HCRU; defined as emergency department visits or hospitalizations), for patients prescribed specialty medications in 2 health system specialty pharmacies.

METHODS

A dual-center, retrospective review of monthly medication assessments completed by Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy and University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System specialty pharmacy was conducted. Patients were included if they received at least 3 fills of a specialty medication from rheumatology or MS clinics from October 2019 to March 2022, excluding patients with more than a 30-day supply. Primary outcomes were the PROs of patient-reported adherence, medication tolerability, perceived effectiveness, and HCRU. For each of the 2 primary outcomes (adherence and tolerability), a mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to test for associations with age, sex, race, clinic, site, and the other PROs.

RESULTS

A total of 61,926 assessments were completed from 3,677 patients (Site 1 = 3,346; 91.0% and Site 2 = 331; 9.0%). Patients were predominantly White (75.6%) and female (71.7%) with a median age of 50 years (IQR = 37-61). Assessments most frequently originated from rheumatology (76.0%). Nonadherence was reported 4.0% of the time, with the most common explanations being forgetfulness (33.1%) and medication being held because of a procedure or illness (29.5%). Most responses indicated perceived effectiveness as good/excellent (93.9%), with 98.5% of responses indicating no issues with tolerability. Patients who reported tolerability issues were 2.5 times more likely to report a missed dose (95% CI = 1.87-3.23, P < 0.001). An effectiveness rating of fair was associated with a 61% increase in the odds of a missed dose compared with a rating of good/excellent (95% CI = 1.33-1.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients filling rheumatology or MS specialty medications within health system specialty pharmacies reported high rates of medication effectiveness and adherence and low rates of issues with tolerability and HCRU. Patients who report tolerability issues or lower perceived effectiveness may benefit from additional monitoring to prevent nonadherence.

Individual and Community-Level Characteristics and Adherence to Specialty Medications

Background: Understanding risk factors for nonadherence can help specialty pharmacies optimize resources to prevent nonadherence and inform risk-stratification processes. Objective: To determine which individual and community-level characteristics are associated with nonadherence to specialty medications. Methods: We analyzed a cohort of patients enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial having filled a specialty medication at least 4 times in the previous 12 months with a proportion of days (PDC) covered < 0.90. We collected patient age, gender, race, medication administration type, therapy start date, home address, insurance type, and online patient portal status from the electronic health record. An ordinal logistic regression model was used to assess the association of nonadherence with individual and community-level patient characteristics. Results: Most patients were female (68%), white (82%), and held commercial insurance (58%) with a median age of 53 (interquartile range [IQR] 40, 64) years. Patients were mostly from the adult rheumatology (35%), multiple sclerosis (20%) and lipid (17%) clinics. Given a 10-year increase in age, patients had lower odds of having lower PDC (odds ratio [OR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.71-0.94, P = 0.005). Patients on therapy greater than or equal to 1 year had half the odds of having lower PDC relative to patients on therapy less than 1 year (OR = 0.52, CI = 0.35 - 0.75, P < 0.001). No statistically significant associations were found between PDC and gender, race, insurance type, route of administration, clinic type, patient portal status, median income, percent receiving government assistance, or percent with no health insurance. Conclusion: Patients with younger age and shorter duration on treatment may be at-risk for lower adherence. Specialty pharmacies may benefit from targeting adherence interventions to these groups.

Development, implementation, and evaluation of a health outcomes and research program at an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy

PURPOSE

Health-system specialty pharmacies (HSSPs) provide high-quality, efficient, and collaborative care to patients receiving specialty therapy. Despite proven benefits of the integrated model, manufacturer and payer restrictions challenge the viability and utility of HSSPs. Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy developed a health outcomes and research program to measure and communicate the value of this model, drive improvement in patient care delivery, and advocate for recognition of HSSP pharmacists' role in patient care. The purpose of this descriptive report is to describe the development and results of this program.

SUMMARY

The health outcomes and research program began as an initiative for pharmacists to evaluate and convey the benefits they provide to patients, providers, and the health system. Early outcomes data proved useful in communicating the value of an integrated model to key stakeholders and highlighted the need to further develop research efforts. The department leadership invested resources to build a research program with dedicated personnel, engaged research experts to train pharmacists, and fostered internal and external collaborations to facilitate research efforts. As of March 2021, the health outcomes and research program team has published 33 peer-reviewed manuscripts, presented 88 posters and 7 podium presentations at national conferences, and received 4 monetary research awards. Further, the program team engages other HSSP teams to initiate and expand their own health outcomes research in an effort to empower all HSSPs in demonstrating their value.

CONCLUSIONS

The health outcomes and research program described has pioneered outcomes research among HSSPs nationwide and has proven valuable to specialty pharmacists, the health system, and key specialty pharmacy stakeholders.

Specialty pharmacist integration into an outpatient neurology clinic improves pimavanserin access

Introduction

Access to pimavanserin, the only Parkinson disease–related psychosis treatment approved by the FDA, is restricted by insurance requirements, a limited distribution network, and high costs. Following initiation, patients require monitoring for safety and effectiveness. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate impact of specialty pharmacist (SP) integration on time to insurance approval. Additionally, we describe a pharmacist-led monitoring program.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective study of adults prescribed pimavanserin by the neurology clinic from June 2016 to June 2018. Patients receiving pimavanserin externally or through clinical trials were excluded. Pre- (June 2016 to December 2016) and post-SP integration (January 2017 to June 2018) periods were assessed. Proportional odds logistic regression was performed to test association of approval time with patient characteristics (age, gender, insurance type) postintegration. Interventions were categorized as clinical care, care coordination, management of adverse event, or adherence.

Results

We included 94 patients (32 preintegration, 62 postintegration), 80% male (n = 75) and 96% white (n = 90) with a mean age of 73 years. Median time to approval was 22 days preintegration and 3 days postintegration. Higher rates of approval (81% vs 95%) and initiation (78% vs 94%) were observed postintegration. Proportional odds logistic regression suggested patients with commercial insurance were likely to have longer time to approval compared with patients with Medicare/Medicaid (odds ratio 7.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.9, 26.7; P = .004). Most interventions were clinical (51%, n = 47) or care coordination (42%, n = 39).

Conclusion

Median time to approval decreased postintegration. The SP performed valuable monitoring and interventions.

Pharmacist Interventions to Improve Specialty Medication Adherence: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of specialty medications in complicated clinical conditions depends on adherence to therapy. However, specialty medications pose unique barriers to adherence.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine whether pharmacist interventions improve specialty medication adherence.

METHODS

This is a single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial ongoing since 10 May 2019 at an integrated health system specialty pharmacy. This study evaluates usual care compared with usual care plus patient-tailored adherence interventions. Study design and procedures were informed by focus groups with patients and specialty pharmacists. Patients at Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy with a proportion of days covered (PDC) < 90% in the previous 4 months are identified by a daily query of the electronic pharmacy database. A pharmacist reviews these patients' electronic health records to identify and exclude ineligible patients. Eligible patients are randomized evenly to the control or intervention arm and stratified by historical clinic nonadherence rates. Patients randomized to the intervention arm undergo a baseline assessment to clarify reasons for nonadherence and subsequently receive patient-tailored interventions based on their specific reasons. Interventions and follow-up are provided at the discretion of the intervening pharmacist. The primary outcome is PDC calculated at 8 months post-enrollment. Enrollment of 438 participants will provide 90% power to detect a 5% difference in PDC between the two arms within each nonadherence risk stratum.

DISCUSSION

This trial will evaluate the effect of patient-tailored interventions on specialty medication adherence and will inform how often and why patients are misidentified as nonadherent.

REGISTRATION

The trial was deemed a quality improvement initiative by the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board. It was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03709277) on 17 October 2018.