Publications

IMPORTANCE: Despite hydroxyurea being an established treatment for sickle cell disease (SCD), it remains underused. The recent approval of the disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) l-glutamine, crizanlizumab, and voxelotor underscores the need to understand the uptake of DMTs in the current treatment landscape.

OBJECTIVE: To explore characteristics that may be associated with DMT use and to describe observed patterns of yearly DMT use from 2014 to 2021.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used administrative claims data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2021, to identify adults and children with SCD. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2022, to August 28, 2023.

EXPOSURE: Use of DMTs.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patient characteristics across groups with varying patterns of DMT use and yearly patterns of prescription fills for hydroxyurea, crizanlizumab, voxelotor, and l-glutamine.

RESULTS: A total of 5022 beneficiaries with SCD (2081 [41.4%] aged 18-45 years; 2929 [58.3%] female) were included in sample A (144 [2.9%] inconsistent users, 274 [5.5%] incident users, 892 [17.8%] consistent users, and 3712 [73.9%] non-DMT users). Inconsistent users had a higher prevalence of vaso-occlusive crises (mean [SD], 3.7 [4.7]), splenic complications (6 of 144 [4.2%]), pulmonary complications (36 of 144 [25.0%]), kidney disease (21 of 144 [14.6%]), acute chest syndrome (18 of 144 [12.5%]), and health care visits (eg, mean [SD] inpatient visits, 7.0 [10.7]) compared with the other use groups. Non-DMT users had the lowest prevalence of vaso-occlusive crises (mean [SD], 0.8 [2.4]), acute chest syndrome (109 of 3712 [2.9%]), and inpatient (mean [SD], 2.0 [6.6]) and emergency department (mean [SD], 0.7 [3.1]) visits and the highest proportion of adults 65 years and older (593 of 3712 [16.0%]). In sample B (6387 beneficiaries with SCD), hydroxyurea use modestly increased from 428 of 2188 participants (19.6%) in 2014 to 701 of 2880 (24.3%) in 2021. Use of l-glutamine increased briefly but gradually decreased throughout the study period. In 2021, out of 2880 participants, 102 (3.5%) had at least 1 fill for crizanlizumab and 131 (4.6%) had at least 1 fill for voxelotor. Overall, total DMT use increased from 428 of 2188 participants (19.6%) in 2014 to 815 of 2880 patients (28.3%) in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional analysis of adults and children with SCD, uptake of DMTs remained low from 2014 to 2021, despite the approval of newer therapies. Notable differences in patient characteristics across varied DMT exposure types necessitate further exploration into factors that facilitate DMT use and the creation of strategies to enhance DMT uptake.

BACKGROUND: Although statins are a class I recommendation for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and its complications, their use is suboptimal. Differential underuse may mediate disparities in cardiovascular health for systematically marginalized persons.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate disparities in statin use by race-ethnicity-gender and to determine whether these potential disparities are explained by medical appropriateness of therapy and structural factors.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2015 to 2020.

PARTICIPANTS: Persons eligible for statin therapy based on 2013 and 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood cholesterol guidelines.

MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was race-ethnicity-gender. The outcome of interest was use of a statin. Using the Institute of Medicine framework for examining unequal treatment, we calculated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to estimate disparities in statin use adjusted for age, disease severity, access to health care, and socioeconomic status relative to non-Hispanic White men.

RESULTS: For primary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors among non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88]) and non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.74 [CI, 0.53 to 0.95]). For secondary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors for non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.81 [CI, 0.64 to 0.97]), other/multiracial men (aPR, 0.58 [CI, 0.20 to 0.97]), Mexican American women (aPR, 0.36 [CI, 0.10 to 0.61]), non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.57 [CI, 0.33 to 0.82), non-Hispanic White women (aPR, 0.69 [CI, 0.56 to 0.83]), and non-Hispanic Black women (aPR, 0.75 [CI, 0.57 to 0.92]).

LIMITATION: Cross-sectional data; lack of geographic, language, or statin-dose data.

CONCLUSION: Statin use disparities for several race-ethnicity-gender groups are not explained by measurable differences in medical appropriateness of therapy, access to health care, and socioeconomic status. These residual disparities may be partially mediated by unobserved processes that contribute to health inequity, including bias, stereotyping, and mistrust.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

INTRODUCTION: Most patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) do not have a previous diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE), demonstrating a failure of current screening practices. An understanding of patient attitudes and barriers is essential to develop and implement interventions to improve BE screening adherence.

METHODS: We conducted a Web-based survey of patients aged >50 years with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease at 3 academic medical centers and 1 affiliated safety net health systems. Survey domains included patient characteristics, endoscopy history, familiarity with screening practices, perceived BE/EAC risk, and barriers to screening.

RESULTS: We obtained a response rate of 22.6% (472/2,084) (74% men, mean age 67.9 years). Self-identified race and ethnicity of participants was 66.5% non-Hispanic White, 20.0% non-Hispanic Black, 13.4% other race, and 7.1% Hispanic. Screening for BE was recommended in only 13.2%, and only 5.3% reported previous screening. Respondents had notable gaps in knowledge about screening indications; only two-thirds correctly identified BE risk factors and only 19.5% believed BE screening was needed for gastroesophageal reflux disease. More than 1 in 5 respondents believed they would get BE (31.9%) or EAC (20.2%) but reported barriers to screening. Compared with White respondents, more Black respondents were concerned about getting BE/EAC and interested in screening but report higher barriers to screening.

DISCUSSION: Patients at risk for BE, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, are worried about developing EAC but rarely undergo screening and have poor understanding of screening recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Although statins are a class I recommendation for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and its complications, their use is suboptimal. Differential underuse may mediate disparities in cardiovascular health for systematically marginalized persons.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate disparities in statin use by race-ethnicity-gender and to determine whether these potential disparities are explained by medical appropriateness of therapy and structural factors.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2015 to 2020.

PARTICIPANTS: Persons eligible for statin therapy based on 2013 and 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood cholesterol guidelines.

MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was race-ethnicity-gender. The outcome of interest was use of a statin. Using the Institute of Medicine framework for examining unequal treatment, we calculated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to estimate disparities in statin use adjusted for age, disease severity, access to health care, and socioeconomic status relative to non-Hispanic White men.

RESULTS: For primary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors among non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88]) and non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.74 [CI, 0.53 to 0.95]). For secondary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors for non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.81 [CI, 0.64 to 0.97]), other/multiracial men (aPR, 0.58 [CI, 0.20 to 0.97]), Mexican American women (aPR, 0.36 [CI, 0.10 to 0.61]), non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.57 [CI, 0.33 to 0.82), non-Hispanic White women (aPR, 0.69 [CI, 0.56 to 0.83]), and non-Hispanic Black women (aPR, 0.75 [CI, 0.57 to 0.92]).

LIMITATION: Cross-sectional data; lack of geographic, language, or statin-dose data.

CONCLUSION: Statin use disparities for several race-ethnicity-gender groups are not explained by measurable differences in medical appropriateness of therapy, access to health care, and socioeconomic status. These residual disparities may be partially mediated by unobserved processes that contribute to health inequity, including bias, stereotyping, and mistrust.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

INTRODUCTION: Most patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) do not have a previous diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE), demonstrating a failure of current screening practices. An understanding of patient attitudes and barriers is essential to develop and implement interventions to improve BE screening adherence.

METHODS: We conducted a Web-based survey of patients aged >50 years with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease at 3 academic medical centers and 1 affiliated safety net health systems. Survey domains included patient characteristics, endoscopy history, familiarity with screening practices, perceived BE/EAC risk, and barriers to screening.

RESULTS: We obtained a response rate of 22.6% (472/2,084) (74% men, mean age 67.9 years). Self-identified race and ethnicity of participants was 66.5% non-Hispanic White, 20.0% non-Hispanic Black, 13.4% other race, and 7.1% Hispanic. Screening for BE was recommended in only 13.2%, and only 5.3% reported previous screening. Respondents had notable gaps in knowledge about screening indications; only two-thirds correctly identified BE risk factors and only 19.5% believed BE screening was needed for gastroesophageal reflux disease. More than 1 in 5 respondents believed they would get BE (31.9%) or EAC (20.2%) but reported barriers to screening. Compared with White respondents, more Black respondents were concerned about getting BE/EAC and interested in screening but report higher barriers to screening.

DISCUSSION: Patients at risk for BE, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, are worried about developing EAC but rarely undergo screening and have poor understanding of screening recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Although statins are a class I recommendation for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and its complications, their use is suboptimal. Differential underuse may mediate disparities in cardiovascular health for systematically marginalized persons.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate disparities in statin use by race-ethnicity-gender and to determine whether these potential disparities are explained by medical appropriateness of therapy and structural factors.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2015 to 2020.

PARTICIPANTS: Persons eligible for statin therapy based on 2013 and 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood cholesterol guidelines.

MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was race-ethnicity-gender. The outcome of interest was use of a statin. Using the Institute of Medicine framework for examining unequal treatment, we calculated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to estimate disparities in statin use adjusted for age, disease severity, access to health care, and socioeconomic status relative to non-Hispanic White men.

RESULTS: For primary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors among non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88]) and non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.74 [CI, 0.53 to 0.95]). For secondary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors for non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.81 [CI, 0.64 to 0.97]), other/multiracial men (aPR, 0.58 [CI, 0.20 to 0.97]), Mexican American women (aPR, 0.36 [CI, 0.10 to 0.61]), non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.57 [CI, 0.33 to 0.82), non-Hispanic White women (aPR, 0.69 [CI, 0.56 to 0.83]), and non-Hispanic Black women (aPR, 0.75 [CI, 0.57 to 0.92]).

LIMITATION: Cross-sectional data; lack of geographic, language, or statin-dose data.

CONCLUSION: Statin use disparities for several race-ethnicity-gender groups are not explained by measurable differences in medical appropriateness of therapy, access to health care, and socioeconomic status. These residual disparities may be partially mediated by unobserved processes that contribute to health inequity, including bias, stereotyping, and mistrust.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

INTRODUCTION: Most patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) do not have a previous diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE), demonstrating a failure of current screening practices. An understanding of patient attitudes and barriers is essential to develop and implement interventions to improve BE screening adherence.

METHODS: We conducted a Web-based survey of patients aged >50 years with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease at 3 academic medical centers and 1 affiliated safety net health systems. Survey domains included patient characteristics, endoscopy history, familiarity with screening practices, perceived BE/EAC risk, and barriers to screening.

RESULTS: We obtained a response rate of 22.6% (472/2,084) (74% men, mean age 67.9 years). Self-identified race and ethnicity of participants was 66.5% non-Hispanic White, 20.0% non-Hispanic Black, 13.4% other race, and 7.1% Hispanic. Screening for BE was recommended in only 13.2%, and only 5.3% reported previous screening. Respondents had notable gaps in knowledge about screening indications; only two-thirds correctly identified BE risk factors and only 19.5% believed BE screening was needed for gastroesophageal reflux disease. More than 1 in 5 respondents believed they would get BE (31.9%) or EAC (20.2%) but reported barriers to screening. Compared with White respondents, more Black respondents were concerned about getting BE/EAC and interested in screening but report higher barriers to screening.

DISCUSSION: Patients at risk for BE, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, are worried about developing EAC but rarely undergo screening and have poor understanding of screening recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Most patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) do not have a previous diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE), demonstrating a failure of current screening practices. An understanding of patient attitudes and barriers is essential to develop and implement interventions to improve BE screening adherence.

METHODS: We conducted a Web-based survey of patients aged >50 years with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease at 3 academic medical centers and 1 affiliated safety net health systems. Survey domains included patient characteristics, endoscopy history, familiarity with screening practices, perceived BE/EAC risk, and barriers to screening.

RESULTS: We obtained a response rate of 22.6% (472/2,084) (74% men, mean age 67.9 years). Self-identified race and ethnicity of participants was 66.5% non-Hispanic White, 20.0% non-Hispanic Black, 13.4% other race, and 7.1% Hispanic. Screening for BE was recommended in only 13.2%, and only 5.3% reported previous screening. Respondents had notable gaps in knowledge about screening indications; only two-thirds correctly identified BE risk factors and only 19.5% believed BE screening was needed for gastroesophageal reflux disease. More than 1 in 5 respondents believed they would get BE (31.9%) or EAC (20.2%) but reported barriers to screening. Compared with White respondents, more Black respondents were concerned about getting BE/EAC and interested in screening but report higher barriers to screening.

DISCUSSION: Patients at risk for BE, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, are worried about developing EAC but rarely undergo screening and have poor understanding of screening recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Although statins are a class I recommendation for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and its complications, their use is suboptimal. Differential underuse may mediate disparities in cardiovascular health for systematically marginalized persons.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate disparities in statin use by race-ethnicity-gender and to determine whether these potential disparities are explained by medical appropriateness of therapy and structural factors.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2015 to 2020.

PARTICIPANTS: Persons eligible for statin therapy based on 2013 and 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood cholesterol guidelines.

MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was race-ethnicity-gender. The outcome of interest was use of a statin. Using the Institute of Medicine framework for examining unequal treatment, we calculated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to estimate disparities in statin use adjusted for age, disease severity, access to health care, and socioeconomic status relative to non-Hispanic White men.

RESULTS: For primary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors among non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88]) and non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.74 [CI, 0.53 to 0.95]). For secondary prevention, we identified a lower prevalence of statin use that was not explained by measurable differences in disease severity or structural factors for non-Hispanic Black men (aPR, 0.81 [CI, 0.64 to 0.97]), other/multiracial men (aPR, 0.58 [CI, 0.20 to 0.97]), Mexican American women (aPR, 0.36 [CI, 0.10 to 0.61]), non-Mexican Hispanic women (aPR, 0.57 [CI, 0.33 to 0.82), non-Hispanic White women (aPR, 0.69 [CI, 0.56 to 0.83]), and non-Hispanic Black women (aPR, 0.75 [CI, 0.57 to 0.92]).

LIMITATION: Cross-sectional data; lack of geographic, language, or statin-dose data.

CONCLUSION: Statin use disparities for several race-ethnicity-gender groups are not explained by measurable differences in medical appropriateness of therapy, access to health care, and socioeconomic status. These residual disparities may be partially mediated by unobserved processes that contribute to health inequity, including bias, stereotyping, and mistrust.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.