Low Sustainment of High-Dose Oral Medication Regimens for Advanced Parkinson's Disease in Medicare Beneficiaries

Comparative Effectiveness of Carbidopa/Levodopa Enteral Suspension and Deep Brain Stimulation on Pill Burden Reduction in Medicare Fee-for-Service Patients with Advanced Parkinson's Disease

INTRODUCTION

Complex polypharmacy regimens to manage persistent motor fluctuations result in significant pill burden for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease (APD). This study evaluated the effectiveness of carbidopa/levodopa enteral suspension (CLES) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) on reducing pill burden in APD patients.

METHODS

We utilized 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2014 to 2018 linked to CLES Patient Support Program (PSP) data. CLES initiators (CLES-I) were propensity matched 1:1 with patients enrolled in PSP who did not initiate treatment (CLES-NI) (N = 188) or undergo DBS, and 1:3 with patients who received DBS (N = 204, N = 612). Average daily pill burden and levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD) were measured at baseline, 0-6 months and 7-12 months follow-up.

RESULTS

CLES-I and CLES-NI had higher pill burden than DBS patients at baseline. However, at 6 months post-treatment, CLES-I had significantly fewer pills/day than CLES-NI (4.7 versus 11.4, p < 0.05) and DBS (4.8 versus 7.4, p < 0.05). A significant reduction in pill burden was observed at 0-6 months (46.3%) and 7-12 months (68.3%) follow-up for CLES-I (p < 0.001) versus increased burden for CLES-NI (+10.5%, p < 0.05 and +8.2%, p > 0.05) and insignificant reductions for DBS (-3.9% and -6.1%, p > 0.05). Mean adjusted pill burden showed 57.3% fewer pills at 0-6 months and 74.1% at 7-12 months among CLES-I compared with CLES-NI, and 49.6% and 70.1% reduction compared with DBS. CLES-I showed a decrease in LEDD at 7-12 months compared with baseline (935 to 237 mg) and to CLES-NI (237 mg versus 1112 mg) and DBS patients (236 mg versus 594 mg).

CONCLUSION

CLES led to a significant reduction in pill burden and oral LEDD compared with CLES-NI and DBS patients. Pill burden reduction could be considered a treatment goal for patients with APD challenged by complex polypharmacy regimens that interfere with activities of daily living and quality of life.

Advanced‐Stage Parkinson's disease: From Identification to Characterization Using a Nationwide Database

Background

As Parkinson's disease (PD) progresses, response to oral medications decreases and motor complications appear. Timely intervention has been demonstrated as effective in reducing symptoms. However, current instruments for the identification of these patients are often complicated and inadequate. It has been suggested that anti-PD intensified therapy (IT) can serve as a proxy for increased burden of disease.

Objective

To explore whether IT aligns with events reflecting advanced PD (APD) burden.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of PD beneficiaries in the second-largest healthcare provider in Israel. Patients with PD diagnosed between January 2000 and June 2018 and treated with levodopa (l-dopa) ≥5 times/day and/or ≥1000 mg l-dopa equivalent daily dose were defined as the IT cohort (n = 2037). Treated patients with PD not fulfilling this criterion were defined as the nonintensified therapy (NIT) cohort (n = 3402). Point prevalence and 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence of IT were assessed. Baseline demographic and comorbidities, 1-year healthcare resource use, health costs, and time to clinical events were assessed and compared between cohorts.

Results

IT was associated with significantly (P < 0.05) higher healthcare resource use compared with NIT. In turn, IT patients incurred higher healthcare costs (P < 0.001) and were at greater risk for mortality, hospitalization, disability, and device-aided therapy use (P < 0.001, for all comparisons).

Conclusions

Treatment intensity can serve as an objective and robust indicator of more APD. This readily extractable marker can be easily integrated into electronic medical record alerts to actively target more advanced patients and to guide risk-appropriate care.

Levodopa treatment patterns in Parkinson’s disease: A retrospective chart review

•

Patients initiating monotherapy with levodopa-PDDI for PD have frequent treatment changes.

•

Patients who stop levodopa-PDDI generally restart it within the same year.

•

Patients with less severe disease start with lower levodopa doses than those with more severe disease.

Background

Medication regimens for Parkinson’s disease (PD) may change as the disease progresses, symptoms fluctuate, or medication-related adverse events occur. This study evaluated treatment trends by observation year for patients initially receiving monotherapy with levodopa and a peripheral dopa decarboxylase inhibitor (PDDI).

Methods

In this retrospective chart review, therapy changes were evaluated for patients across the US diagnosed with PD on or before 6/30/2014 who initially received levodopa-PDDI monotherapy. Index date was the first clinic visit. Post-index was any time between the first 31 days after index and study end (6/30/2019). Index Hoehn-Yahr (H-Y) score and medication changes were also analyzed by index low (<400 mg/day) or high (≥400 mg/day) levodopa doses in the levodopa-PDDI combinations.

Results

In the levodopa-PDDI cohort (n = 95), there were 0.39 dose escalations, 0.16 dose reductions, 0.12 discontinuations, 0.19 therapy switches, and 0.24 add-ons per patient per year during the study. Most dose escalations or add-ons occurred within the first 6 months post-index. Of those who ever stopped levodopa-PDDI (n = 34), 31 (91%) restarted within the study period. Most (83%) patients who restarted levodopa-PDDI did so in the same year as stopping treatment. Index low dose users were associated with lower H-Y scores, were more inclined to escalate their dose, and were less inclined to reduce their dose in the first 2 years of treatment than index high dose users.

Conclusions

Prescribers and patients tend to experiment with levodopa-PDDI treatment. Although many patients appeared to stop levodopa-PDDI after an initial course of treatment, most subsequently restarted treatment.

Validation and clinical value of the MANAGE-PD tool: A clinician-reported tool to identify Parkinson's disease patients inadequately controlled on oral medications

INTRODUCTION

Making Informed Decisions to Aid Timely Management of Parkinson's Disease (MANAGE-PD) is a clinician-reported tool designed to facilitate timely identification and management of patients with advancing Parkinson's disease (PD) with suboptimal symptom control while on standard therapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the validity and clinical value of the tool.

METHODS

Driven by structured inputs from a steering committee and panel of PD experts, the tool was developed to classify patients into 3 categories. Validity and clinical value were elucidated using a two-pronged approach: (i) hypothetical patient vignettes (n = 10) developed based on the MANAGE-PD tool and rated by 17 PD specialists and 400 general neurologists (GN) and (ii) patients with PD (n = 2546) managed in real-world clinical settings. Vignette validity was based on concordance between PD experts' clinical judgement and MANAGE-PD vignette categorization. Patient-level data was used for known-group comparisons (validity) and discordant pair analysis (clinical value).

RESULTS

The tool demonstrated strong validity and clinical value among PD specialists (intraclass coefficient [ICC] 0.843; Fleiss weighted kappa [ƙ_weighted] 0.79) and GN (ICC 0.690; ƙ_weighted 0.65) using patient vignettes. MANAGE-PD also demonstrated real-world validity and clinical value based on ability to identify patients with incrementally higher clinical, economic, and humanistic PD burden across categories of the tool (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

MANAGE-PD demonstrated robust validity and clinical value in identifying patients with suboptimal PD symptom control. Clinical use of MANAGE-PD may complement treatment decision-making and facilitate timely and comprehensive management of patients with advancing PD.