Brooks D Cash, Mei Lu, Anthony Lembo, Paul Feuerstadt, Linda Nguyen, Emi Terasawa, Rajeev Ayyagari, Shawn Du, Selina Pi, Ben Westermeyer, Brian Terreri, Mena Boules, Baharak Moshiree
{"title":"A real-world study of persistence and adherence to prescription medications in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation in the United States.","authors":"Brooks D Cash, Mei Lu, Anthony Lembo, Paul Feuerstadt, Linda Nguyen, Emi Terasawa, Rajeev Ayyagari, Shawn Du, Selina Pi, Ben Westermeyer, Brian Terreri, Mena Boules, Baharak Moshiree","doi":"10.18553/jmcp.2024.30.10.1136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>At present, 4 prescription therapies have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) in adults.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare persistence with and adherence to prucalopride vs 3 other prescription medications for CIC in a US population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective, observational cohort study used data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental Databases (January 2015-June 2020). Inclusion criteria were patients (aged ≥18 years) with at least 1 prescription fill for prucalopride, lubiprostone, linaclotide, or plecanatide on or after April 2, 2019 (commercial availability of prucalopride), and at least 1 constipation-related diagnosis code. Persistence was assessed by time to discontinuation, and adherence was assessed by the proportion of days covered (PDC) and the proportion of patients who achieved PDC of at least 80%. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for discontinuation and odds ratios for adherence were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14,700 patients (mean age = 48.3 years; female = 81.9%) were included (prucalopride, n = 675; lubiprostone, n = 1,591; linaclotide, n = 11,105; plecanatide, n = 1,329). After adjusting for confounding factors, the HRs for discontinuation were significantly higher for all comparator medications compared with prucalopride after 2 months (HR [95% CI]: lubiprostone, 1.70 [1.48-1.95]; linaclotide, 1.25 [1.10-1.41]; plecanatide, 1.31 [1.13-1.51], all <i>P</i> < 0.001). The unadjusted mean (SD) PDC was 0.53 (0.32) with prucalopride compared with 0.41 (0.31); <i>P</i> less than 0.001 with lubiprostone, 0.48 (0.31), <i>P</i> less than 0.05 with linaclotide, and 0.48 (0.29), <i>P</i> = 0.98 with plecanatide. The comparator medications were all associated with lower odds of achieving PDC of at least 80% relative to prucalopride (odds ratio [95% CI]: lubiprostone, 0.52 [0.40-0.69], <i>P</i> < 0.001; linaclotide, 0.73 [0.58-0.93], <i>P</i> = 0.009; plecanatide, 0.70 [0.53-0.93], <i>P</i> = 0.015).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings of this study indicate that prucalopride has higher treatment persistence and adherence compared with other CIC prescription medications. This research represents the first instance of a real-world claims study showcasing such outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":16170,"journal":{"name":"Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11424913/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2024.30.10.1136","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: At present, 4 prescription therapies have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) in adults.
Objectives: To compare persistence with and adherence to prucalopride vs 3 other prescription medications for CIC in a US population.
Methods: This retrospective, observational cohort study used data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental Databases (January 2015-June 2020). Inclusion criteria were patients (aged ≥18 years) with at least 1 prescription fill for prucalopride, lubiprostone, linaclotide, or plecanatide on or after April 2, 2019 (commercial availability of prucalopride), and at least 1 constipation-related diagnosis code. Persistence was assessed by time to discontinuation, and adherence was assessed by the proportion of days covered (PDC) and the proportion of patients who achieved PDC of at least 80%. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for discontinuation and odds ratios for adherence were calculated.
Results: A total of 14,700 patients (mean age = 48.3 years; female = 81.9%) were included (prucalopride, n = 675; lubiprostone, n = 1,591; linaclotide, n = 11,105; plecanatide, n = 1,329). After adjusting for confounding factors, the HRs for discontinuation were significantly higher for all comparator medications compared with prucalopride after 2 months (HR [95% CI]: lubiprostone, 1.70 [1.48-1.95]; linaclotide, 1.25 [1.10-1.41]; plecanatide, 1.31 [1.13-1.51], all P < 0.001). The unadjusted mean (SD) PDC was 0.53 (0.32) with prucalopride compared with 0.41 (0.31); P less than 0.001 with lubiprostone, 0.48 (0.31), P less than 0.05 with linaclotide, and 0.48 (0.29), P = 0.98 with plecanatide. The comparator medications were all associated with lower odds of achieving PDC of at least 80% relative to prucalopride (odds ratio [95% CI]: lubiprostone, 0.52 [0.40-0.69], P < 0.001; linaclotide, 0.73 [0.58-0.93], P = 0.009; plecanatide, 0.70 [0.53-0.93], P = 0.015).
Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that prucalopride has higher treatment persistence and adherence compared with other CIC prescription medications. This research represents the first instance of a real-world claims study showcasing such outcomes.
期刊介绍:
JMCP welcomes research studies conducted outside of the United States that are relevant to our readership. Our audience is primarily concerned with designing policies of formulary coverage, health benefit design, and pharmaceutical programs that are based on evidence from large populations of people. Studies of pharmacist interventions conducted outside the United States that have already been extensively studied within the United States and studies of small sample sizes in non-managed care environments outside of the United States (e.g., hospitals or community pharmacies) are generally of low interest to our readership. However, studies of health outcomes and costs assessed in large populations that provide evidence for formulary coverage, health benefit design, and pharmaceutical programs are of high interest to JMCP’s readership.