Jason Legg

Efficacy and Safety of Evolocumab in Reducing Lipids and Cardiovascular Events

BACKGROUND Alirocumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9), has been shown to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels in patients who are receiving statin therapy. Larger and longer-term studies are needed to establish safety and efficacy. METHODS We conducted a randomized trial involving 2341 patients at high risk for cardiovascular events who had LDL cholesterol levels of 70 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) or more and were receiving treatment with statins at the maximum tolerated dose (the highest dose associated with an acceptable side-effect profile), with or without other lipid-lowering therapy. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive alirocumab (150 mg) or placebo as a 1-ml subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks for 78 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage change in calculated LDL cholesterol level from baseline to week 24. RESULTS At week 24, the difference between the alirocumab and placebo groups in the mean percentage change from baseline in calculated LDL cholesterol level was -62 percentage points (P<0.001); the treatment effect remained consistent over a period of 78 weeks. The alirocumab group, as compared with the placebo group, had higher rates of injection-site reactions (5.9% vs. 4.2%), myalgia (5.4% vs. 2.9%), neurocognitive events (1.2% vs. 0.5%), and ophthalmologic events (2.9% vs. 1.9%). In a post hoc analysis, the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (death from coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal ischemic stroke, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization) was lower with alirocumab than with placebo (1.7% vs. 3.3%; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.31 to 0.90; nominal P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS Over a period of 78 weeks, alirocumab, when added to statin therapy at the maximum tolerated dose, significantly reduced LDL cholesterol levels. In a post hoc analysis, there was evidence of a reduction in the rate of cardiovascular events with alirocumab. (Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ODYSSEY LONG TERM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01507831.).

Effect of evolocumab or ezetimibe added to moderate- or high-intensity statin therapy on LDL-C lowering in patients with hypercholesterolemia: the LAPLACE-2 randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE In phase 2 studies, evolocumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody to PCSK9, reduced LDL-C levels in patients receiving statin therapy. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of evolocumab when used in combination with a moderate- vs high-intensity statin. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Phase 3, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and ezetimibe-controlled study conducted between January and December of 2013 in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia at 198 sites in 17 countries. INTERVENTIONS Patients (n = 2067) were randomized to 1 of 24 treatment groups in 2 steps. Patients were initially randomized to a daily, moderate-intensity (atorvastatin [10 mg], simvastatin [40 mg], or rosuvastatin [5 mg]) or high-intensity (atorvastatin [80 mg], rosuvastatin [40 mg]) statin. After a 4-week lipid-stabilization period, patients (n = 1899) were randomized to compare evolocumab (140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly) with placebo (every 2 weeks or monthly) or ezetimibe (10 mg or placebo daily; atorvastatin patients only) when added to statin therapies. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Percent change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level at the mean of weeks 10 and 12 and at week 12. RESULTS Evolocumab reduced LDL-C levels by 66% (95% CI, 58% to 73%) to 75% (95% CI, 65% to 84%) (every 2 weeks) and by 63% (95% CI, 54% to 71%) to 75% (95% CI, 67% to 83%) (monthly) vs placebo at the mean of weeks 10 and 12 in the moderate- and high-intensity statin-treated groups; the LDL-C reductions at week 12 were comparable. For moderate-intensity statin groups, evolocumab every 2 weeks reduced LDL-C from a baseline mean of 115 to 124 mg/dL to an on-treatment mean of 39 to 49 mg/dL; monthly evolocumab reduced LDL-C from a baseline mean of 123 to 126 mg/dL to an on-treatment mean of 43 to 48 mg/dL. For high-intensity statin groups, evolocumab every 2 weeks reduced LDL-C from a baseline mean of 89 to 94 mg/dL to an on-treatment mean of 35 to 38 mg/dL; monthly evolocumab reduced LDL-C from a baseline mean of 89 to 94 mg/dL to an on-treatment mean of 33 to 35 mg/dL. Adverse events were reported in 36%, 40%, and 39% of evolocumab-, ezetimibe-, and placebo-treated patients, respectively. The most common adverse events in evolocumab-treated patients were back pain, arthralgia, headache, muscle spasms, and pain in extremity (all <2%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this 12-week trial conducted among patients with primary hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia, evolocumab added to moderate- or high-intensity statin therapy resulted in additional LDL-C lowering. Further studies are needed to evaluate the longer-term clinical outcomes and safety of this approach for LDL-C lowering. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01763866.

A retrospective study of the clinical and economic burden during hospitalizations among cancer patients with febrile neutropenia

Abstract Objective: The objective of this study was to provide up-to-date estimates of the clinical and economic burden that occurs during inpatient treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia (FN). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 2007–2010 hospital discharge data from the Premier database. The study population included adult patients with discharge diagnoses of neutropenia (ICD-9 code 288.0x) with fever or infection and receipt of intravenous antibiotics and female breast cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), or Hodgkin lymphoma. Primary study outcomes were inpatient mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and total hospitalization cost for each patient’s first FN-related hospitalization. Logistic regressions (for mortality) and multivariate linear regressions (for LOS and cost) were conducted to assess the effect of comorbidities and infection types on study outcomes, adjusting for other patient and hospital characteristics. Results: Among 16,273 cancer patients hospitalized with FN, the inpatient case fatality rate was 10.6%, mean LOS was 8.6 days, and mean total hospitalization cost was

Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data

18,880. Lung cancer patients had the highest inpatient case fatality rate (15.7%), and NHL patients had the longest LOS (10.1 days) and the highest cost (

Incidence, treatment, and consequences of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in the inpatient and outpatient settings

24,218). Multivariate analyses showed that most comorbidities were associated with a greater risk of mortality, longer LOS, and higher cost. Septicemia/bacteremia and pneumonia were associated with a greater risk of mortality, and most types of infection were associated with a longer LOS and higher cost. Limitations: The total burden of FN may be under-estimated in this study because outpatient treatment and any patient deaths or costs that occurred outside of Premier hospitals could not be captured. Conclusions: FN-related hospitalizations among cancer patients are costly and accompanied by considerable mortality risk. Substantial differences in the clinical and economic burden of FN exist depending on cancer types, comorbidities, and infection types.

Technical evaluation of methods for identifying chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in healthcare claims databases

Electronic medical records (EMRs) are used increasingly for research in clinical oncology, epidemiology, and comparative effectiveness research (CER). Objective To assess the utility of using EMR data in population-based cancer research by comparing a database of EMRs from community oncology clinics against Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data and two claims databases (Medicare and commercial claims). Study design and setting Demographic, clinical, and treatment patterns in the EMR, SEER, Medicare, and commercial claims data were compared using six tumor sites: breast, lung/bronchus, head/neck, colorectal, prostate, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). We identified various challenges in data standardization and selection of appropriate statistical procedures. We describe the patient and clinic inclusion criteria, treatment definitions, and consideration of the administrative and clinical purposes of the EMR, registry, and claims data to address these challenges. Results Sex and 10-year age distributions of patient populations for each tumor site were generally similar across the data sets. We observed several differences in racial composition and treatment patterns, and modest differences in distribution of tumor site. Conclusion Our experience with an oncology EMR database identified several factors that must be considered when using EMRs for research purposes or generalizing results to the US cancer population. These factors were related primarily to evaluation of treatment patterns, including evaluation of stage, geographic location, race, and specialization of the medical facilities. While many specialty EMRs may not provide the breadth of data on medical care, as found in comprehensive claims databases and EMR systems, they can provide detailed clinical data not found in claims that are extremely important in conducting epidemiologic and outcomes research.

Chapter 3 - Two-Phase Sampling

Objective To examine the incidence, treatment, and consequences of febrile neutropenia across inpatient and outpatient care settings. Methods Data were obtained from Humedicas National Electronic Health Record-Derived Longitudinal Patient-Level Database (2007–2010). The study population included adult patients who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy for a solid tumor or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. For each patient, each chemotherapy regimen course and each cycle within each regimen course was characterized. Febrile neutropenia episodes were identified on a cycle-specific basis based on any of the following: (1) absolute neutrophil count <1.0 × 109/L and evidence of infection or fever; (2) inpatient diagnosis of neutropenia, fever, or infection; (3) outpatient diagnosis of neutropenia and non-prophylactic antimicrobial use; or (4) mention of febrile neutropenia in physician notes. Febrile neutropenia episodes were categorized as inpatient or outpatient based on the initial setting of care (i.e. acute-care inpatient facility vs. ambulatory care facility). Febrile neutropenia consequences included hospital length of stay and mortality (inpatient cases only), as well as number of febrile neutropenia-related outpatient encounters. Results Among the 2131 patients in this study, 401 experienced a total of 458 febrile neutropenia episodes. Risk of febrile neutropenia during the chemotherapy regimen course was 16.8% (95% CI: 15.3, 18.4). In cycle 1 alone, risk of febrile neutropenia was 8.1% (7.1, 9.3). Most febrile neutropenia episodes (83.2%) were initially treated in the inpatient setting; the hospital mortality rate was 8.1% (5.8, 11.1), and mean hospital length of stay was 8.4 days (7.7, 9.1). Among febrile neutropenia episodes initially treated in the outpatient setting (16.8%), the mean number of outpatient management encounters was 2.6 (2.1, 3.1), most of which were in the physician’s office (69.2%) or emergency department (26.9%). Conclusions Febrile neutropenia remains a common occurrence among patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy and typically results in extended hospitalization and, for many patients, death. A minority of patients are, however, treated exclusively on an outpatient basis.

Rationale and Design of LAPLACE‐2: A Phase 3, Randomized, Double‐Blind, Placebo‐ and Ezetimibe‐Controlled Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Evolocumab in Subjects With Hypercholesterolemia on Background Statin Therapy

BackgroundHealthcare claims databases have been used in several studies to characterize the risk and burden of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) and effectiveness of colony-stimulating factors against FN. The accuracy of methods previously used to identify FN in such databases has not been formally evaluated.MethodsData comprised linked electronic medical records from Geisinger Health System and healthcare claims data from Geisinger Health Plan. Subjects were classified into subgroups based on whether or not they were hospitalized for FN per the presumptive “gold standard” (ANC <1.0×109/L, and body temperature ≥38.3°C or receipt of antibiotics) and claims-based definition (diagnosis codes for neutropenia, fever, and/or infection). Accuracy was evaluated principally based on positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity.ResultsAmong 357 study subjects, 82 (23%) met the gold standard for hospitalized FN. For the claims-based definition including diagnosis codes for neutropenia plus fever in any position (n=28), PPV was 100% and sensitivity was 34% (95% CI: 24–45). For the definition including neutropenia in the primary position (n=54), PPV was 87% (78–95) and sensitivity was 57% (46–68). For the definition including neutropenia in any position (n=71), PPV was 77% (68–87) and sensitivity was 67% (56–77).ConclusionsPatients hospitalized for chemotherapy-induced FN can be identified in healthcare claims databases--with an acceptable level of mis-classification--using diagnosis codes for neutropenia, or neutropenia plus fever.

Trends in Neutropenia-Related Inpatient Events

Publisher Summary Two-phase sampling is typically used when it is very expensive to collect data on the variables of interest, but it is relatively inexpensive to collect data on variables that are correlated with the variables of interest. For example, in forest surveys, it is very difficult and expensive to travel to remote areas to make on-ground determinations. However, aerial photographs are relatively inexpensive and determinations on forest type are strongly correlated with ground determinations. Two-phase sampling was called “double sampling” by Neyman. The problem was posed to him at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. A survey was to be conducted to estimate the total of a characteristic y . The determinations were very costly, but another variable x was known to be correlated with y and was cheap to observe. Two-phase samplings reduce the variance of the estimated total by using the correlation between x and y in constructing a total estimator. However, two-phase samplings are not always superior to one-phase designs. Given a fixed cost, selecting a first-phase sample reduces the number of observations on the response variable y . The two-phase framework can be applied in missing data problems, sampling at multiple occasions, and situations without a good frame.

A COMPREHENSIVE SAFETY ANALYSIS OF 6026 PATIENTS FROM PHASE 2 AND 3 SHORT AND LONG TERM CLINICAL TRIALS WITH EVOLOCUMAB (AMG 145)

Low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) levels are significantly associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk, and studies using interventions that lower LDL‐C levels have been shown to reduce the risk of ASCVD events and mortality. Statin treatment is the current first‐line therapy for lowering LDL‐C and reducing ASCVD risk. However, many patients are still unable to reach recommended LDL‐C goals on maximally tolerated statin therapy. Monoclonal antibodies that inhibit proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9, including evolocumab (previously AMG 145), dramatically lowered LDL‐C in phase 2 clinical trials when administered alone or in combination with a statin. The aim of this phase 3 study is to evaluate the efficacy of 12 weeks of subcutaneous evolocumab (vs placebo) administered every 2 weeks or every month in combination with a statin in patients with hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia. This study will also provide comparative efficacy, safety, and tolerability data between evolocumab and ezetimibe when added to background atorvastatin therapy.