Publications by Year: 2020

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of routine, screening renal bladder ultrasound (RBUS) for children age 2-24 months after a first febrile urinary tract infection (UTI), as recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

STUDY DESIGN: We developed a decision analytic model that simulates a population of children after a first febrile UTI. The model incorporates the diagnostic utility of RBUS to detect vesicoureteral reflux and genitourinary anomalies. We adopted a health-system perspective, 5-year horizon, and included 1-way and 2-way sensitivity analyses. Costs were inflated to 2018 US dollars, and our model incorporated a 3% discounting rate. We compared routine RBUS after first, febrile UTI compared with routine RBUS after second UTI (ie, control arm). Our main outcomes were recurrent UTI rate and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS: Among children 2-24 months after a first febrile UTI, RBUS had an overall accuracy (true positives + true negatives) of 64.4%. The recurrent UTI rate in the intervention arm was 19.9% compared with 21.0% in the control arm. Thus, 91 patients would need to be screened with RBUS to prevent 1 recurrent UTI. RBUS increases QALYs by +0.0002 per patient screened, corresponding to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $803 000/QALY gained. In the RBUS arm, 20.6% of children would receive unnecessary voiding cystourethrograms compared with 12.2% of children in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS: Screening RBUS after a first, febrile UTI in children age 2-24 months does not meet cost-effectiveness guidelines. Our findings support deferred screening until a second UTI.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is one of the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States, and it causes a significant proportion of adverse drug events. Patients taking warfarin fall outside of the recommended therapeutic range 30% of the time, largely because of inadequate laboratory monitoring and dose adjustment. This leads to an increased risk of blood clots or bleeding events. We propose a comparative effectiveness study to examine whether a technology-enabled anticoagulation management program can improve long-term clinical outcomes compared with usual care.

OBJECTIVE: Our proposed intervention is the implementation of an electronic dashboard (integrated into a preexisting electronic health record) and standardized workflow to track patients' laboratory results, identify patients requiring follow-up, and facilitate the use of a validated nomogram for dose adjustment. The primary outcome of this study is the time in therapeutic range (TTR) at 6 months post intervention (a validated metric of anticoagulation quality among patients receiving warfarin).

METHODS: We will employ a pre-post quasi-experimental design with a nonequivalent usual-care comparison site and a difference-in-differences approach to compare the effectiveness of a technology-enabled anticoagulation management program compared with usual care at a large university-affiliated safety-net clinic.

RESULTS: We used a commercially available health information technology (HIT) platform to host a registry of patients on warfarin therapy and create the electronic dashboard for panel management. We developed the intervention with, and for, frontline clinician users, using principles of human-centered design. This study is funded until September 2020 and is approved by the University of California, San Francisco Institutional Review Board until June 22, 2020. We completed data collection in September 2019 and expect to complete our proposed analyses by February 2020.

CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that the intervention will increase TTR among patients taking warfarin and that the use of this HIT platform will facilitate tracking and monitoring of patients on warfarin, which could enable outreach to those overdue for visits or laboratory monitoring. We will use these findings to iteratively improve the platform in preparation for a larger, multiple-site, pragmatic clinical trial. If successful, our study will demonstrate the integration of HIT platforms into existing electronic health records to improve patient care in real-world clinical settings.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13835.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension (HTN) is the single leading risk factor for human mortality worldwide, and more prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa than any other region [1]-although resources for HTN screening, treatment, and control are few. Most regional pilot studies to leverage HIV programs for HTN control have achieved blood pressure control in half of participants or fewer [2,3,4]. But this control gap may be due to inconsistent delivery of services, rather than ineffective underlying interventions.

METHODS: We sought to evaluate the consistency of HTN program delivery within the SEARCH study (NCT01864603) among 95,000 adults in 32 rural communities in Uganda and Kenya from 2013-2016. To achieve this objective, we designed and performed a fidelity evaluation of the step-by-step process (cascade) of HTN care within SEARCH, calculating rates of HTN screening, linkage to care, and follow-up care. We evaluated SEARCH's assessment of each participant's HTN status against measured blood pressure and HTN history.

FINDINGS: SEARCH completed blood pressure screens on 91% of participants. SEARCH HTN screening was 91% sensitive and over 99% specific for HTN relative to measured blood pressure and patient history. 92% of participants screened HTN+ received clinic appointments, and 42% of persons with HTN linked to subsequent care. At follow-up, 82% of SEARCH clinic participants received blood pressure checks; 75% received medication appropriate for their blood pressure; 66% remained in care; and 46% had normal blood pressure at their most recent visit.

CONCLUSION: The SEARCH study's consistency in delivering screening and treatment services for HTN was generally high, but SEARCH could improve effectiveness in linking patients to care and achieving HTN control. Its model for implementing population-scale HTN testing and care through an existing HIV test-and-treat program-and protocol for evaluating the intervention's stepwise fidelity and care outcomes-may be adapted, strengthened, and scaled up for use across multiple resource-limited settings.

This study uses data from the publicly available Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Inventory Tool to determine the proportion of CMS quality measures that are used or finalized for use in a CMS program, under development or consideration for use, or not in use.

BACKGROUND: In patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy, tafamidis reduces all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalizations and slows decline in quality of life compared with placebo. In May 2019, tafamidis received expedited approval from the US Food and Drug Administration as a breakthrough drug for a rare disease. However, at $225 000 per year, it is the most expensive cardiovascular drug ever launched in the United States, and its long-term cost-effectiveness and budget impact are uncertain. We therefore aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of tafamidis and its potential effect on US health care spending.

METHODS: We developed a Markov model of patients with wild-type or variant transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy and heart failure (mean age, 74.5 years) using inputs from the ATTR-ACT trial (Transthyretin Amyloidosis Cardiomyopathy Clinical Trial), published literature, US Food and Drug Administration review documents, healthcare claims, and national survey data. We compared no disease-specific treatment ("usual care") with tafamidis therapy. The model reproduced 30-month survival, quality of life, and cardiovascular hospitalization rates observed in ATTR-ACT; future projections used a parametric survival model in the control arm, with constant hazards reduction in the tafamidis arm. We discounted future costs and quality-adjusted life-years by 3% annually and examined key parameter uncertainty using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The main outcomes were lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and annual budget impact, assessed from the US healthcare sector perspective. This study was independent of the ATTR-ACT trial sponsor.

RESULTS: Compared with usual care, tafamidis was projected to add 1.29 (95% uncertainty interval, 0.47-1.75) quality-adjusted life-years at an incremental cost of $1 135 000 (872 000-1 377 000), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $880 000 (697 000-1 564 000) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Assuming a threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained and current drug price, tafamidis was cost-effective in 0% of 10 000 probabilistic simulations. A 92.6% price reduction from $225 000 to $16 563 would be necessary to make tafamidis cost-effective at $100 000/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were sensitive to assumptions related to long-term effectiveness of tafamidis. Treating all eligible patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy in the United States with tafamidis (n=120 000) was estimated to increase annual healthcare spending by $32.3 billion.

CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with tafamidis is projected to produce substantial clinical benefit but would greatly exceed conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds at the current US list price. On the basis of recent US experience with high-cost cardiovascular medications, access to and uptake of this effective therapy may be limited unless there is a large reduction in drug costs.

This study uses National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data to evaluate whether patients enrolled in the clinical trials that support the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline are representative of the US adult population recommended additional pharmacotherapy by the ACC/AHA guideline.

BACKGROUND: Whether passively collected data can substitute for adjudicated outcomes to reproduce the magnitude and direction of treatment effect observed in cardiovascular clinical trials is not well known.

METHODS: We linked adults ≥65 years of age in the HiR (US CoreValve Pivotal High Risk) and SURTAVI trials (Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients) to 100% Medicare inpatient claims, January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016. Primary (eg, death and stroke) and secondary trial end points were compared across treatment arms (eg, transcatheter aortic valve replacement [TAVR] versus surgical aortic valve replacement [SAVR]) using trial-adjudicated outcomes versus outcomes derived from claims at 1 year (HiR) or 2 years (SURTAVI).

RESULTS: Among 600 linked HiR participants (linkage rate, 80.0%), the rate of the trial's primary end point of all-cause mortality occurred in 13.7% of patients receiving TAVR and 16.4% of patients receiving SAVR at 1 year by using both trial data (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.65-1.09]; P=0.33) and claims data (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.66-1.11]; P=0.34; interaction P value=0.80). Noninferiority of TAVR relative to SAVR was seen by using both trial- and claims-based outcomes (Pnoninferiority<0.001 for both). Among 1005 linked SURTAVI trial participants (linkage rate, 60.5%), the trial's primary end point was 12.9% for TAVR and 13.1% for SAVR using trial data (hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.79-1.48]; P=0.90), and 11.3% for TAVR and 12.5% for SAVR patients using claims data (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.73-1.41]; P=0.58; interaction P value=0.89). TAVR was noninferior to SAVR when compared using both trial and claims (Pnoninferiority<0.001 for both). Rates of procedural secondary outcomes (eg, aortic valve reintervention, pacemaker rates) were more closely concordant between trial and claims data than nonprocedural outcomes (eg, stroke, bleeding, cardiogenic shock).

CONCLUSIONS: In the HiR and SURTAVI trials, ascertainment of trial primary end points using claims reproduced both the magnitude and direction of treatment effect in comparison with adjudicated event data, but nonfatal and nonprocedural secondary outcomes were not as well reproduced. Use of claims to substitute for adjudicated outcomes in traditional trial treatment comparisons may be valid and feasible for all-cause mortality and certain procedural outcomes but may be less suitable for other end points.