Patients with multiple sclerosis choose a collaborative role in making treatment decision: results from the Italian multicenter SWITCH study

BACKGROUND

Clinicians are increasingly recognizing the importance of shared decision-making in complex treatment choices, highlighting the importance of the patient's rationale and motivation for switching therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the association between different modalities of changing multiple sclerosis (MS) treatments, cognitive profile and attitude and preferences of patients concerning treatment choice.

METHODS

This multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted at 28 Italian MS centers in the period between June 2016 and June 2017. We screened all MS patients treated with any DMT, with a treatment compliance of at least 80% of therapy administered during the 3 last months who needed to modify MS therapy because of efficacy, safety or other reasons during a follow-up visit. At the time of switching the symbol digit modalities test (SDMT) and the Control Preference Scale (CPS) were evaluated. According to the CPS, patients were classified as "active" (i.e. who prefer making the medical decision themselves), "collaborative" (i.e. who prefer decisions be made jointly with the physician), or "passive" (i.e. who prefer the physician make the decision).

RESULTS

Out of 13,657 patients recorded in the log, 409 (3%) changed therapy. Of these, 336 (2.5%) patients, 69.6% were female and with mean age 40.6 ± 10.5 years, were enrolled. According to the CPS score evaluation, a significant high percentage of patients (51.1%) were considered collaborative, 74 patients (22.5%) were passive, and 60 (18.2%) patients were active. Stratifying according to CPS results, we found a higher SDMT score among collaborative patients compared to active and passive ones (45.8 ± 12.3 versus 41.0 ± 13.2 versus 41.7 ± 12.8, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the CPS evaluation showed that more than 50% of patients who needed to change therapy chose a "collaborative" role in making treatment decision. Cognitive profile with SDMT seems to correlate with patients' preference on treatment decision, showing better scores in collaborative patients.

Clinical effects of switching from minodronate to denosumab treatment in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis: a retrospective study

Background

Denosumab is a major treatment option for patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis; however, the evidence for its use is lacking. Therefore, in this 24-month retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of switching from minodronate (MIN) to denosumab in these patients.

Methods

Patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis either switched from MIN to denosumab (Group 1; n = 32) or continued MIN treatment (Group 2; n = 24). Bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine (L2–L4) and femoral neck was assessed at baseline and every 6 months for 24 months. Serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) and N-terminal telopeptide were measured at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months.

Results

Twenty-nine of the 32 patients (90.6%) in group 1 and all patients (24/24) in group 2 completed the 24-month follow-up. Switching from MIN to denosumab (Group 1) significantly increased lumbar BMD at 12, 18, and 24 months (6.1, 7.4, and 9.6%, respectively) and femoral neck BMD at 12, 18, and 24 months (2.8, 3.2, and 3.4%, respectively), whereas MIN continuous treatment (Group 2) showed no significant difference from baseline. Switching therapy also showed a significant decrease in serum BAP from baseline to 12 and 24 months (− 19.3 and − 26.5%, respectively) and serum NTX from baseline to 12 months (− 13.1%), whereas continuous MIN treatment failed to show any significant differences from baseline.

Conclusion

Switching from MIN to denosumab in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis showed clinical benefits with regard to BMD and bone turnover markers in comparison with continuous MIN treatment. It may therefore be a valid treatment option in the clinical setting.

Switching from vitamin K antagonist to dabigatran in atrial fibrillation: differences according to dose

AIMS

In atrial fibrillation (AF) patients 150 mg b.i.d. dabigatran is the standard dose, yet guidelines recommend 110 mg b.i.d. when bleeding risk is high. It is unknown to which extend these recommendations are followed in patients switching from vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to dabigatran. The aim of this study was to investigate if AF patients are switched from VKA to the appropriate dose of dabigatran.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using nationwide registries (22 August 2011 to 31 December 2012), we identified VKA-experienced AF patients with available creatinine values who switched to dabigatran. European guidelines criteria 2012 on dabigatran dosing were examined: age ≥80 years, HAS-BLED ≥3, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)<50 mL/min/1.73 m2, or use of interacting drugs. We identified 1626 VKA-experienced AF patients who switched to dabigatran 110 mg (820 patients) or 150 mg (806 patients). Patients who switched to 110 mg compared with 150 mg were older [median age 82 years (Q1-Q3: 77-86) vs. 68 years (Q1-Q3: 64-74)], more often females (54% vs. 35%), had a higher comorbidity burden, higher proportion with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (98% vs. 80%), and more with a HAS-BLED score ≥3 (46% vs. 28%). Patients switched to 110 mg had a higher absolute risk of mortality compared with patients switched to 150 mg. Overall, 26% were inappropriately dosed and 14% were switched to 110 mg although the higher dose was indicated. Furthermore, 39% of patients switched to 150 mg fulfilled one or more criteria for 110 mg, this mostly driven by high HAS-BLED scores (28.2% of patients on 150 mg). Female sex, age ≥80 years, eGFR < 50 mL/min/1.73 m2, drugs interacting with dabigatran, and prior bleeding were associated with switch to 110 mg. Patients inappropriately dosed had similar risk of mortality as patients appropriately dosed.

CONCLUSION

Among VKA-experienced AF patients one in four were switched to a dabigatran dose contrary to guideline recommendations.

High number of newly initiated direct oral anticoagulant users switch to alternate anticoagulant therapy

Real-world evidence focusing on medication switching patterns amongst direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) has not been well studied. The objective of this study is to evaluate patterns of prescription switching in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients initiated on a DOAC and previously naïve to anticoagulation (AC) therapy. Data was obtained from Truven Health MarketScan^® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental database (2009-2013). AC naïve (those without prior anticoagulant use) NVAF patients initiated on a DOAC, with 6 months of continuous health plan enrollment before and after treatment initiation and maintained on continuous therapy for a minimum of 6 months were included. Of 34,022 AC naïve NVAF patients initiating a DOAC, 6613 (19.4%) patients switched from an index DOAC prescription to an alternate anticoagulant and 27,409 (80.6%) remained on the DOAC [age: 68.5 ± 11.7 vs. 67.1 ± 12.7 years, p < 0.001; males: 3781 (57.2%) vs. 17,160 (62.6%), p < 0.001]. Amongst those that switched medication, 3196 (48.3%) did so within the first 6 months of therapy. Overall, 2945 (44.5%) patients switched to warfarin, 2912 (44.0%) switched to another DOAC and 756 (11.4%) switched to an injectable anticoagulant. The highest proportion of patients switched from dabigatran to warfarin (N = 2320; 42.5%) or rivaroxaban (N = 2252; 41.3%). The median time to switch from the index DOAC to another DOAC was 309.5 days versus 118.0 days (p < 0.001) to switch to warfarin. In NVAF patients newly initiated on DOAC therapy, one in five patients switch to an alternate anticoagulant and one of every two patients do so within the first 6 months of therapy. Switching from an initial DOAC prescription to traditional anticoagulants occurs as frequently as switching to an alternate DOAC.

Clinical outcomes in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis who switch from natalizumab to delayed-release dimethyl fumarate: A multicenter retrospective observational study (STRATEGY)

BACKGROUND

Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate (DMF) may be a therapeutic option for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) who are treated with natalizumab and require a change in therapy. However, there is limited information regarding predictors of favorable treatment outcomes in patients switching from natalizumab to DMF. Clinical practices and sequencing protocols vary. Herein, we present the clinical results, including annualized relapse rate (ARR) and risk of relapse, of a phase 4 retrospective observational study of patients with RRMS who switched from natalizumab to DMF in a community practice setting (STRATEGY).

METHODS

STRATEGY was performed through a single time point medical record abstraction; no study visits or procedures were required. Key inclusion criteria included age ≥ 18 years, RRMS diagnosis (McDonald criteria, 2010 revised), ≥ 12 months of continuous treatment with natalizumab monotherapy before DMF initiation, and initiation of DMF ≥ 12 months before enrollment. Patients were eligible to enroll regardless of current DMF use.

RESULTS

A total of 530 patients at 45 US sites enrolled, and 506 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the modified evaluable population for analysis. Mean (SD) age at DMF initiation was 47.0 (10.9) years, with a mean (SD) of 12.7 (7.2) years since MS diagnosis. The mean (SD) duration of natalizumab treatment was 3.4 (1.9) years, and the mean (SD) washout from natalizumab discontinuation to DMF initiation (n = 502) was 101.6 (164.0) days. Overall risk of relapse 12 months after DMF initiation was 19.6%. Overall unadjusted ARR was higher during the 12 months following initiation of DMF treatment compared with the 12 months following initiation of natalizumab treatment (rate ratio, 2.32 [95% CI, 1.69-3.18]; p < 0.0001), but was lower compared with that observed in the year before initiation of natalizumab (rate ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.40-0.64]; p < 0.0001). At 1 year following initiation of DMF treatment, the relapse rate was lower for patients who did not experience a relapse during 1 year following initiation of natalizumab treatment than for those who did (rate ratio for relapse rate, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.16-1.38]; p = 0.1664). The relapse rate for patients who did not relapse during natalizumab treatment was significantly lower with a washout period of ≤ 90 days as compared with a washout period of > 90 days (rate ratio for relapse rate, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.26-0.90]; p = 0.0216). A total of 42 (8%) patients reported ≥ 1 adverse event leading to DMF discontinuation during the study; the most commonly reported events were gastrointestinal disorders (n = 21; 4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this multicenter retrospective observational study suggest that DMF may be an effective treatment option for patients who discontinue natalizumab in routine clinical practice. ARR was lower in patients who initiated DMF within 90 days of natalizumab discontinuation compared with patients who initiated DMF after 90 days of natalizumab discontinuation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02159573.

An assessor-blinded, randomized comparison of efficacy and tolerability of switching from olanzapine to ziprasidone and the combination of both in schizophrenia spectrum disorders

BACKGROUND

Ziprasidone (ZIP) is often used with olanzapine (OLZ) in 'switch' and combination therapy but empirical evidence to support these strategies is limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study was therefore designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of switching from OLZ to ZIP, the combination of both medications, and OLZ and ZIP monotherapy, in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD).

METHODS

In this 12 week open-label, assessor-blinded randomized trial, 148 patients with SSD who had not used antipsychotics for at least 3 months were assigned to ZIP (n = 49) or OLZ monotherapy (n = 31); OLZ for 4 weeks then a switch to ZIP (OLZ/ZIP, n = 35); or combination therapy (OLZ + ZIP, n = 33). The severity of psychosis and abnormal involuntary movements was evaluated at baseline, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks using standard instruments. Baseline-to-endpoint changes in weight gain and metabolic measures were compared.

RESULTS

The efficacy of both OLZ/ZIP and OLZ + ZIP was comparable OLZ monotherapy and better than ZIP monotherapy in reducing overall psychotic and negative symptoms at most 8 and 12 week measurement points. Changes in weight gain, glucose, and lipid measures did not differ between OLZ/ZIP and OLZ + ZIP, but were markedly higher following OLZ monotherapy. The OLZ + ZIP group had the lowest overall incidence of adverse events and extrapyramidal symptoms of all the treatment regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that combining ZIP and OLZ at the outset of treatment is superior to switching from OLZ to ZIP in terms of improving psychotic symptoms and limiting movement side effects without increasing the risk of metabolic syndrome.

Impact of switching from intravenous to oral linezolid therapy in Japanese patients: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

High oral bioavailability of antimicrobial agents can result in the replacement of intravenous (IV) therapy with oral therapy when a patient meets defined clinical criteria. However, few studies have evaluated the effects of switching antibiotic administration route in Japan, especially for linezolid. This study evaluated an IV-to-oral antibiotic switching program for linezolid treatment at a university hospital in Japan.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study of 73 patients, we assessed the efficacy and safety of IV-to-oral linezolid therapy (n = 21 patients) compared with IV therapy alone (n = 52 patients).

RESULTS

Duration of linezolid treatment, changes in C-reactive protein or platelet count from baseline, re-administration of anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus agent within 90 days of discharge, and mortality within 28 days of discharge were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

An IV-to-oral switching program could reduce the duration of IV linezolid therapy without worsening clinical outcomes in Japanese patients receiving linezolid therapy.

Fixed Combination of Travoprost and Timolol Maleate Reduces Intraocular Pressure in Japanese Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension: A Prospective Multicenter Open-Label Study

Introduction

The efficacy of lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) and safety of switching to travoprost/timolol fixed combination ophthalmic solution (Duotrav^®, Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA) in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma, normal tension glaucoma or ocular hypertension undergoing prostaglandin analog (PGA) monotherapy was investigated.

Methods

Patients treated with travoprost, latanoprost, tafluprost, or bimatoprost for ≥3 months and requiring additional medication were switched to Duotrav without washout. Baseline IOP was calculated from measurements at two visits during PGA monotherapy. IOP reductions at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after switching to Duotrav and adverse events were assessed.

Results

Of 162 patients enrolled, 157 patients (96.9%) with ≥4 weeks of follow-up after switching to Duotrav were analyzed. The mean IOP decreased significantly (baseline = 16.3 ± 3.1 mmHg; 4 weeks = 14.6 ± 3.1 mmHg, 8 weeks = 14.7 ± 3.3 mmHg, 12 weeks = 14.6 ± 3.2 mmHg; all P < 0.0001). When study eyes were divided into three groups according to baseline IOP (≥19 mmHg: 33 eyes, 21.0%; ≥15 to <19 mmHg: 78 eyes, 49.7%; <15 mmHg: 46 eyes, 29.3%), all groups showed significant IOP reductions (P = 0.0324 ~ P < 0.0001) after switching to Duotrav. Twenty-seven of 166 patients (16.3%) in the safety analysis experienced adverse events and 26/166 patients (15.7%) experienced adverse events, for which a relationship to Duotrav could not be ruled out. Adverse events in five patients led to treatment discontinuation (eye pruritus; eye irritation; increased blood pressure and rash; increased blurred vision; deepening of the eyelid sulcus and blepharoptosis). Twelve weeks after treatment switching, eyelash changes, blepharal pigmentation and deepening of the eyelid sulcus occurred in 42 (26.8%), 29 (18.5%), and 13 (8.3%) cases, respectively, among 157 patients with follow-up. There was no significant worsening from baseline for superficial punctate keratopathy (SPK) or conjunctival hyperemia after switching (SPK score: baseline = 0.58 ± 1.31; 12 weeks = 0.92 ± 1.76, P = 0.1819; conjunctival hyperemia score: baseline = 0.41 ± 0.64; 12 weeks = 0.49 ± 0.63, P = 0.3774).

Conclusion

Our findings confirm that switching to Duotrav^® in PGA monotherapy patients shows IOP-lowering effect with minimal safety concerns.

Funding

Japan Association of Health Service and Alcon Japan. Ltd.

Trial registration

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry identifier, UMIN000007028.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-015-0246-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Switching from salmeterol/fluticasone to formoterol/budesonide combinations improves peripheral airway/alveolar inflammation in asthma

BACKGROUND

Combination therapy with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) in a single inhaler is the mainstay of asthma management. We previously showed that switching from salmeterol/fluticasone combination (SFC) 50/250 μg bid to a fixed-dose formoterol/budesonide combination (FBC) 9/320 μg bid improved asthma control and pulmonary functions, but not fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), in patients with asthma not adequately controlled under the former treatment regimen.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether switching from SFC to FBC improves peripheral airway/alveolar inflammation in asthma (UMIN000009619).

METHODS

Subjects included 66 patients with mild to moderate asthma receiving SFC 50/250 μg bid for more than 8 weeks. Patients were randomized into FBC 9/320 μg bid or continued the same dose of SFC for 12 weeks. Asthma Control Questionnaire, 5-item version (ACQ5) score, peak expiratory flow, spirometry, FeNO, alveolar NO concentration (CANO), and maximal NO flux in the conductive airways (J'awNO) were measured.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients completed the study. The proportion of patients with an improvement in ACQ5 was significantly higher in the FBC group than in the SFC group (51.6% vs 16.7%, respectively, p = 0.003). A significant decrease in CANO was observed in the FBC group (from 8.8 ± 9.2 ppb to 4.0 ± 2.6 ppb; p = 0.007) compared to the SFC group (from 7.4 ± 7.8 ppb to 6.4 ± 5.0 ppb; p = 0.266) although there was no significant difference in the changes in pulmonary functions between the 2 groups. Similar significant differences were found in the CANO corrected for the axial back diffusion of NO (FBC, from 6.5 ± 8.2 ppb to 2.3 ± 2.5 ppb; and SFC, from 4.3 ± 5.3 ppb to 3.9 ± 4.3 ppb). There was no difference in the changes in FeNO or J'awNO between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching therapy from SFC to FBC improves asthma control and peripheral airway/alveolar inflammation even though there is no improvement in pulmonary functions, and FeNO in asthmatic patients.