5 research outputs found
Medication use in adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in a commercially-insured population in the United States
<p><b>Objective:</b> To examine real-world prescription medication usage among commercially-insured adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the US.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Adults with ADHD who received ≥1 ADHD medication during 2013 were identified from a large US claims database. Combination therapy was defined as an overlap of ≥30 days between the index (first treatment ≥30 days in 2013) and another medication(s). Patients were classified into six groups: long-acting (LA) monotherapy, short-acting (SA) monotherapy, LA + LA, SA + SA, LA + SA, and >2 therapies. Analyses compared baseline characteristics by regimen, ranked combination regimens, and estimated daily average consumption (DACON) for monotherapy users.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Of 206,443 adults with ADHD (mean age = 32.9 years; 51.6% female), 56.9% used LA monotherapy, 30.7% SA monotherapy, and 12.5% used combination therapies (LA + SA: 10.3%; LA + LA: 1.3%; SA + SA: 0.4%; >2 therapies: 0.5%). Extended-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-XR, 39.2%) and lisdexamfetamine (LDX, 31.5%) were the most common LA monotherapies. Nearly all SA monotherapy patients received immediate-release mixed amphetamine salts (MAS-IR; 81.7%). The top three therapies among combination categories were: (a) LA + LA: branded MAS-XR + generic MAS-XR (13.7%), LDX + generic MAS-XR (10.8%), LDX + guanfacine ER (10.7%); (b) SA + SA: generic MAS-IR + clonidine IR (33.5%), generic MAS-IR + generic MPH SA (17.9%), branded MAS-IR + generic MAS-IR (11.1%); (c) LA + SA: generic MAS-XR+/-IR (39.2%), LDX + generic MAS-IR (16.7%), LA + SA generic MPH (12.6%). Among monotherapy users, DACON was 1.2 ± 0.6 (LA) and 2.1 ± 0.9 (SA) tablets.</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> There is significant treatment heterogeneity among US adults with ADHD. A sizable proportion of patients received monotherapies at above the recommended dosages or combination therapies, suggesting existing single-tablet regimens may not meet patients’ needs.</p
Association between time to progression and subsequent survival inceritinib-treated patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer
<p><b>Objective:</b> Time to progression (TTP) is a surrogate marker of overall survival (OS). However, OS is also dependent on post-progression survival (PPS). This study evaluated the association between TTP and the duration of PPS among adult patients who received ceritinib (Zykadia<sup><a href="#EN0001" target="_blank">1</a></sup>) for the treatment of advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).</p> <p><b>Research design and methods:</b> A pooled analysis was performed on 181 ASCEND-1 (phase I) and ASCEND-2 (phase II) patients who experienced disease progression while on ceritinib. TTP was assessed on its association with PPS in a Kaplan–Meier analysis and in Cox proportional hazard models, adjusted for clinical covariates.</p> <p><b>Main outcome measures:</b> Main outcomes measured include TTP, PPS, and OS.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Patients with TTP ≥6 months experienced significantly longer PPS compared to those with TTP <6 months (median: 9.8 vs. 6.5 months, log-rank <i>p</i>-value < .01). When TTP was assessed as a continuous variable, every 3 months of longer TTP was associated with a 21% lower hazard of death following progression (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63–1.00; adjusted HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.64–0.99). This positive association translated into an OS benefit: each 3 months of longer TTP was associated with a lower hazard of death (adjusted HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.37–0.58). Median OS was 20.0 months for patients with TTP ≥6 months and was 10.9 months for patients with TTP <6 months.</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> A longer duration of TTP after treatment with ceritinib was significantly associated with a longer duration of both PPS and OS.</p
Economic Evaluation of Timely Versus Delayed Use of Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors for Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis in the US
<p><b>Article full text</b></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>The full text of this article can
be found here<b>. </b><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40744-016-0042-2">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40744-016-0042-2</a></p><p></p>
<p><br></p>
<p><b>Provide enhanced content for this
article</b></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>If you are an author of this
publication and would like to provide additional enhanced content for your
article then please contact <a href="http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/âmailto:[email protected]â"><b>[email protected]</b></a>.</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>The journal offers a range of
additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All
features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the
highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to
ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level
as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship
and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and
adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content
is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are
charged for hosting additional open access content.</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>Other enhanced features include,
but are not limited to:</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>• Slide decks</p>
<p>• Videos and animations</p>
<p>• Audio abstracts</p>
<p>• Audio slides</p
Economic Burden of Switching to a Non-Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Versus a Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Biologic Therapy among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis
<p><b>Article full text</b></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>The full text of this article can
be found here<b>. </b><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-016-0318-5">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-016-0318-5</a></p><p></p>
<p><br></p>
<p><b>Provide enhanced content for this
article</b></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>If you are an author of this
publication and would like to provide additional enhanced content for your
article then please contact <a href="http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/âmailto:[email protected]â"><b>[email protected]</b></a>.</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>The journal offers a range of
additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All
features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the
highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to
ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level
as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship
and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and
adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content
is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are
charged for hosting additional open access content.</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>Other enhanced features include,
but are not limited to:</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>• Slide decks</p>
<p>• Videos and animations</p>
<p>• Audio abstracts</p>
<p>• Audio slides</p
Comparative Efficacy of Treatments for Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
<p></p><p><b>Article full text</b></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>The full text of this article can
be found here<b>. </b><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-018-0734-9">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-018-0734-9</a></p><p></p><p></p><p>
</p><p><br></p>
<p><b>Provide enhanced content for this
article</b></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>If you are an author of this
publication and would like to provide additional enhanced content for your
article then please contact <a href="http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/âmailto:[email protected]â"><b>[email protected]</b></a>.</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>The journal offers a range of
additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All
features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the
highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to
ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level
as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship
and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and
adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content
is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are
charged for hosting additional open access content.</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>Other enhanced features include,
but are not limited to:</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>• Slide decks</p>
<p>• Videos and animations</p>
<p>• Audio abstracts</p>
<p>• Audio slides</p><br><p></p