Effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent policy decisions on off-label use in myelodysplastic syndromes.

Medicare & medicaid research review Pub Date : 2014-11-26 eCollection Date: 2014-01-01 DOI:10.5600/mmrr.004.04.a02
Franklin Hendrick, Amy J Davidoff, Amer M Zeidan, Steven D Gore, Maria R Baer
{"title":"Effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent policy decisions on off-label use in myelodysplastic syndromes.","authors":"Franklin Hendrick, Amy J Davidoff, Amer M Zeidan, Steven D Gore, Maria R Baer","doi":"10.5600/mmrr.004.04.a02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are widely used to treat anemia associated with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) as an off-label indication. In early 2007, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released safety alerts and mandated label changes, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented a National Coverage Determination (NCD) in August 2007, dramatically restricting ESA coverage based on specific clinical parameters in non-MDS patients. We sought to determine the effect on ESA use in MDS, examining both treatment initiation and concordance with guidelines designed to target patients most likely to benefit from therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We determined receipt of ESA within 6 months of diagnosis. For ESA recipients, we operationalized three National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines: serum erythropoietin determination before ESA initiation, transfusion-independent at ESA initiation, and initial ESA treatment episode of >= 8 weeks. Logistic regression models tested the effect of time (half-year increments pre-post the August '07 CMS NCD implementation), controlling for demographics and health status.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>17,491 (61.1%) of 28,627 beneficiaries with MDS received ESAs. ESA use increased prior to the reference period (Jan.-July 2007), but declined beginning in August 2007, the date of NCD implementation (marginal probability =-0.05, p-value<0.01). Concordance with treatment guidelines changed during the observation period, with increased rates of serum erythropoietin levels, but declined in the other two guidelines.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest a mixed pattern of change in the face of the FDA safety warnings and CMS NCD in MDS and highlight the importance of monitoring for unintended consequences of policy changes.</p>","PeriodicalId":89601,"journal":{"name":"Medicare & medicaid research review","volume":"4 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4254334/pdf/mmrr2014-004-04-a02.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicare & medicaid research review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5600/mmrr.004.04.a02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are widely used to treat anemia associated with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) as an off-label indication. In early 2007, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released safety alerts and mandated label changes, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented a National Coverage Determination (NCD) in August 2007, dramatically restricting ESA coverage based on specific clinical parameters in non-MDS patients. We sought to determine the effect on ESA use in MDS, examining both treatment initiation and concordance with guidelines designed to target patients most likely to benefit from therapy.

Methods: We determined receipt of ESA within 6 months of diagnosis. For ESA recipients, we operationalized three National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines: serum erythropoietin determination before ESA initiation, transfusion-independent at ESA initiation, and initial ESA treatment episode of >= 8 weeks. Logistic regression models tested the effect of time (half-year increments pre-post the August '07 CMS NCD implementation), controlling for demographics and health status.

Results: 17,491 (61.1%) of 28,627 beneficiaries with MDS received ESAs. ESA use increased prior to the reference period (Jan.-July 2007), but declined beginning in August 2007, the date of NCD implementation (marginal probability =-0.05, p-value<0.01). Concordance with treatment guidelines changed during the observation period, with increased rates of serum erythropoietin levels, but declined in the other two guidelines.

Conclusion: These results suggest a mixed pattern of change in the face of the FDA safety warnings and CMS NCD in MDS and highlight the importance of monitoring for unintended consequences of policy changes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

红细胞生成刺激剂政策决定对骨髓增生异常综合征标示外使用的影响。
背景:红细胞生成刺激剂(ESAs)作为一种标签外适应症被广泛用于治疗骨髓增生异常综合征(MDS)引起的贫血。2007 年初,美国食品和药物管理局 (FDA) 发布了安全警示并强制要求更改标签,美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心 (CMS) 于 2007 年 8 月实施了一项国家承保范围决定 (NCD),根据非 MDS 患者的特定临床参数大幅限制了 ESA 的承保范围。我们试图确定 ESA 在 MDS 患者中的使用效果,同时检查治疗的启动情况以及与旨在针对最有可能从治疗中获益的患者的指南的一致性:我们确定了确诊后 6 个月内接受 ESA 的情况。对于ESA接受者,我们采用了美国国家综合癌症网络的三项指南:ESA开始前测定血清促红细胞生成素、ESA开始时不依赖输血、ESA初始治疗时间>=8周。逻辑回归模型检验了时间的影响(2007 年 8 月 CMS NCD 实施前和实施后的半年增量),并对人口统计学和健康状况进行了控制:在 28,627 名患有 MDS 的受益人中,有 17,491 人(61.1%)接受了 ESA。在参照期(2007 年 1 月至 7 月)之前,ESA 的使用量有所增加,但从 2007 年 8 月 NCD 实施之日开始,ESA 的使用量有所下降(边际概率 =-0.05,P 值):这些结果表明,面对 FDA 安全警告和 CMS NCD,MDS 的变化模式不尽相同,并强调了监测政策变化意外后果的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信