Publications

2026

Mukhopadhyay, Amrita, Samrachana Adhikari, Xiyue Li, Dhruv S Kazi, Adam N Berman, Ian Kronish, Carine Hamo, et al. (2026) 2026. “Prior Authorization Requirements and Prescription Fill Patterns Among Patients With Heart Failure.”. JACC. Advances 5 (2): 102583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102583.

BACKGROUND: Prior authorizations could hinder the filling of life-saving heart failure (HF) medications, such as angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to determine whether prior authorizations were associated with delayed or decreased filling for ARNI and SGLT2i.

METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record, pharmacy fill, and neighborhood-level data from a large, academic health system. We included patients with HF and a new prescription for ARNI or SGLT2i between April 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023, and assessed for presence of prior authorization requirement. Outcomes included days to first fill and never filling the prescription. Analyses were conducted using inverse probability weighting methods.

RESULTS: Among 2,183 patients, 12.2% (152/1,243) and 14.3% (165/1,150) had a prior authorization requirement for ARNI or SGLT2i, respectively. Patients requiring prior authorization tended to be younger, identify as non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic, have non-Medicare insurance, and have fewer comorbidities. In weighted models, patients requiring prior authorization took 3.03 (95% CI: 2.16-4.25) times longer to fill ARNI, 6.75 (95% CI: 4.44-10.3) times longer to fill SGLT2i, and were 2.23 (95% CI: 1.37-3.65) times more likely to never fill SGLT2i prescriptions (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Prior authorization requirements were more common for patients identifying as Black or Hispanic and were associated with decreased and delayed filling of ARNI and SGLT2i. Our findings highlight an important barrier to mortality-reducing, guideline-recommended medications for HF.

Palaniappan, Latha P, Norrina B Allen, Zaid I Almarzooq, Cheryl A M Anderson, Pankaj Arora, Christy L Avery, Carissa M Baker-Smith, et al. (2026) 2026. “2026 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association.”. Circulation 153 (9): e275-e906. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001412.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, nutrition, sleep, and obesity) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, glucose control, and cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The 2026 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, brain health, complications of pregnancy, kidney disease, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, sudden cardiac arrest, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, valvular disease, venous thromboembolism, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS: The American Heart Association, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States and globally to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistics Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2026 Statistics Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2025 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes a new chapter on cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome, as well as an expanded chapter on tobacco and nicotine use and exposure.

RESULTS: Each of the chapters in the Statistics Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS: The Statistics Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Decker, Sérgio R R, Richard S Chaudhary, Kosuke Inoue, Yang Song, Chiadi E Ndumele, Sadiya S Khan, and Dhruv S Kazi. (2026) 2026. “Socioeconomic Factors and Initiation of Semaglutide or Tirzepatide Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Type 2 Diabetes.”. Diabetes Care 49 (2): 277-81. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc25-1619.

OBJECTIVE: Identifying social and economic factors associated with initiation of semaglutide or tirzepatide may inform strategies to support equitable uptake.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using 100% of Medicare claims of patients ≥65 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The outcome was initiation of semaglutide or tirzepatide. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for each exposure (self-reported race and ethnicity, dual enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid, rurality, and social vulnerability index), accounting for demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS: Among 13,922,387 patients with T2DM, 673,776 (4.8%) initiated semaglutide or tirzepatide in 2023. Minoritized racial and ethnic identity (e.g., non-Hispanic Black compared with White; aOR 0.72; 95% CI 0.71-0.72), dual enrollment (aOR 0.90; 0.89-0.91), and residence in the most versus least vulnerable socially vulnerable neighborhoods (aOR 0.93; 0.92-0.93) were associated with lower initiation.

CONCLUSIONS: Minoritized racial and ethnic identity and adverse socioeconomic factors were associated with lower odds of initiation among Medicare beneficiaries with T2DM.

2025

Decker, Sérgio R R, Ana Paula Beck da S Etges, André Zimerman, Fernanda D Alves, Caique M Ternes, Juliana S Santos, Leandro Zimerman, et al. (2025) 2025. “Conduction System Pacing Vs Biventricular Pacing in Chronic Heart Failure: Protocol for the Economic Analysis of the PhysioSync-HF Trial.”. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia 122 (12): e20250254. https://doi.org/10.36660/abc.20250254.

BACKGROUND: Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as an alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), with potential clinical benefits and lower costs. PhysioSync-HF is a multicenter, randomized trial comparing these strategies from both clinical and economic perspectives in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

OBJECTIVE: To describe the rationale and design of the trial-based economic evaluation embedded within the PhysioSync-HF trial.

METHODS: The PhysioSync-HF trial enrolled 179 patients with 1-year follow-up. Procedural cost data will be collected using a time-driven activity-based costing approach. Costs associated with the device, adverse clinical events, and ambulatory care during follow-up will be estimated using resource-based accounting methods. Appropriate methods will address missing data, and statistical analyses will account for the skewed distribution of cost variables.

RESULTS: The primary economic outcome is the between-group difference in total direct medical costs per patient over the 1-year follow-up (CSP vs BVP). Secondary outcomes include component-level cost breakdowns of direct medical expenses and a budget impact analysis estimating the annual effect on Brazil's health care system if all eligible patients received CSP instead of BVP.

CONCLUSION: By leveraging a multicenter cardiovascular trial to measure costs of CSP versus BVP, this economic evaluation aims to identify cost-saving opportunities that could expand equitable access to CRT for individuals with HFrEF in Brazil, while providing insights relevant to other health care settings worldwide.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05572736.

Bellows, Brandon K, Yiyi Zhang, Natalia Ruiz-Negrón, Dhruv S Kazi, Amit Khera V, Jessica G Woo, Elaine M Urbina, et al. (2025) 2025. “Familial Hypercholesterolemia Screening in Childhood and Early Adulthood: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.”. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.20648.

IMPORTANCE: Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), a genetic condition, results in lifelong increased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and increases lifetime cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Most individuals with FH remain undiagnosed, so early FH identification and treatment could lower CVD burden.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the projected cost-effectiveness of population sequential FH screening (lipid testing followed by genetic testing after a high LDL-C measurement) at 10 or 18 years of age.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The CVD Policy Model, a validated discrete event simulation of CVD risk factor management and CVD outcomes in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants, was used to simulate lifetime health and economic outcomes from a health care sector perspective for a hypothetical cohort of 4.2 million US 10-year-olds. Individual characteristics and health care processes informed CVD events (coronary heart disease or stroke) and survival probabilities. Model inputs included national data sources, clinical trials, pooled longitudinal cohort studies, and published literature.

INTERVENTIONS: Usual care assumed only opportunistic lipid testing and LDL-C and CVD risk-guided treatment. When added to usual care, sequential FH screening strategies examined combinations of childhood (age 10 years) or early adulthood (age 18 years) screening with 3 LDL-C thresholds (≥130 mg/dL, ≥160 mg/dL, or ≥190 mg/dL) to select patients for genetic testing.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes were direct health care costs (2021 US dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Future costs and QALYs were discounted 3% annually. Strategies with an ICER of less than $100 000 per QALY gained were considered cost-effective.

RESULTS: For the simulated cohort, usual care would lead to 3 118 000 (95% uncertainty interval, 3 061 000-3 192 000) total lifetime CVD events, with 16 182 (95% uncertainty interval, 15 683-16 827) among those with FH. Childhood FH screening could avert between 1385 and 1820 CVD events (<0.1% reduction in overall population), and early adulthood FH screening could avert between 1154 and 1448 CVD events (<0.1% reduction). While effective, no FH screening strategies were cost-effective relative to usual care; screening at age 18 years using an LDL-C threshold of 190 mg/dL or greater had the lowest ICER, at $289 700 per QALY gained. Sequential FH screening could become cost-effective vs usual care if lifetime lipid monitoring plus lifestyle therapy increased after a high screening LDL-C result, including for patients with non-FH dyslipidemias.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Sequential FH screening in childhood or early adulthood could be effective but not cost-effective vs usual care. However, sequential FH screening could become cost-effective under highly optimistic assumptions about increased lifestyle therapy and increased lifetime lipid monitoring for patients with non-FH dyslipidemias.

Khoong, Elaine C, Hyunjin Cindy Kim, Junhong Li, Jorge Larreynaga, Isabel Luna, Andersen Yang, Dhruv S Kazi, et al. (2025) 2025. “Implementation Strategies for Self-Measured Blood Pressure Monitoring in Racially and Ethnically Diverse Populations (InSPIRED): A Study Protocol.”. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 108101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2025.108101.

INTRODUCTION: Self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring with clinical support is an evidence-based practice to improve hypertension control. However, it can be challenging to implement in safety-net systems that disproportionately serve low-income and/or racial/ethnic minority populations at risk of worse hypertension outcomes. We therefore propose a hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial to evaluate the effectiveness of multi-level implementation strategies to increase the use of SMBP monitoring in two urban safety-net systems.

METHODS: We will conduct a patient-level randomized controlled trial with 330 English-, Spanish-, and Chinese (Cantonese)-speaking patients with uncontrolled hypertension across six study sites with patients randomized to a low-intensity (SMBP education, text message education and reminders) vs high-intensity intervention (adds group classes and engagement of identified caregivers). To support increased use of SMBP data by the clinical team, we will concurrently deliver a staggered roll-out of a clinic-level implementation strategy (clinic education, shadowing, auditing with feedback, and optimization of electronic health record [EHR] use).

RESULTS: The primary outcomes will be clinic-measured systolic BP (SBP) among enrolled participants for the patient-level intervention and among all patients assigned to the clinic for the clinic-level intervention. We will additionally collect secondary clinical outcomes (BP control, home SBP), implementation outcomes (adoption, reach, and costs), and patient-reported outcomes (patient activation).

DISCUSSION: The results of this trial will address gaps in identifying cost-conscious implementation strategies for increasing adoption of SMBP in safety-net systems with the overarching goal of improving blood pressure control in low-income, diverse patient populations. Trial registration NCT, NCT06871462. Registered 4 March 2025, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06871462.

Kazi, Dhruv S, Abdul R Abdullah, Suzanne Arnold V, Anirban Basu, Brandon K Bellows, Khadijah Breathett, Derek S Chew, et al. (2025) 2025. “2025 AHA/ACC Statement on Cost/Value Methodology in Clinical Practice Guidelines (Update From 2014 Statement): A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.”. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2025.05.009.

AIM: The "2025 AHA/ACC Statement on Cost/Value Methodology in Clinical Practice Guidelines (Update From 2014 Statement)" describes a systematic approach for consistent implementation of "economic value statements" across ACC/AHA guidelines. It updates the cost-effectiveness threshold and proposes a new level of certainty framework that summarizes the strength of the available evidence. Additionally, it describes how cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) can help advance equity in population cardiovascular health.

METHODS: A focused literature search was conducted from January 9, 2024, to February 2, 2024, encompassing English-language publications related to CEA methodology in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, with publication dates ranging from 1973 to the present. Additional relevant studies published during the writing process (through June 25, 2024) were also considered by the writing committee.

STRUCTURE: This Cost/Value Methodology Statement updates prior guidance regarding the incorporation of evidence from published CEAs into clinical guidelines. It provides guidance for identifying and synthesizing relevant high-quality evidence, developing economic value statements, and communicating level of certainty in such statements. It defines the US cost-effectiveness threshold as $120,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained, highlights special considerations related to cardiovascular drugs and devices, emphasizes health equity considerations when interpreting CEAs, and defines a reference case for future CEAs.

Kazi, Dhruv S, Abdul R Abdullah, Suzanne Arnold V, Anirban Basu, Brandon K Bellows, Khadijah Breathett, Derek S Chew, et al. (2025) 2025. “2025 AHA/ACC Statement on Cost/Value Methodology in Clinical Practice Guidelines (Update From 2014 Statement): A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.”. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001377.

AIM: The "2025 AHA/ACC Statement on Cost/Value Methodology in Clinical Practice Guidelines (Update From 2014 Statement)" describes a systematic approach for consistent implementation of "economic value statements" across ACC/AHA guidelines. It updates the cost-effectiveness threshold and proposes a new level of certainty framework that summarizes the strength of the available evidence. Additionally, it describes how cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) can help advance equity in population cardiovascular health.

METHODS: A focused literature search was conducted from January 9, 2024, to February 2, 2024, encompassing English-language publications related to CEA methodology in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, with publication dates ranging from 1973 to the present. Additional relevant studies published during the writing process (through June 25, 2024) were also considered by the writing committee.

STRUCTURE: This Cost/Value Methodology Statement updates prior guidance regarding the incorporation of evidence from published CEAs into clinical guidelines. It provides guidance for identifying and synthesizing relevant high-quality evidence, developing economic value statements, and communicating level of certainty in such statements. It defines the US cost-effectiveness threshold as $120 000 per quality-adjusted life year gained, highlights special considerations related to cardiovascular drugs and devices, emphasizes health equity considerations when interpreting CEAs, and defines a reference case for future CEAs.