This study characterizes government, academia, and private funding for gene therapy trials in the United States by technology type and therapeutic and disease area.
INTRODUCTION: Dentists prescribe 1 in 10 opioid prescriptions in the U.S. When opioids are necessary, national guidelines recommend the prescription of low-dose opioids for a short duration. This study assesses the appropriate prescribing of opioids by dentists before guideline implementation.
METHODS: The authors performed a cross-sectional analysis of a population-based sample of 542,958 U.S. commercial dental patient visits between 2011 and 2015 within the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases (data analysis October 2018‒April 2019). Patients with recent hospitalization, active cancer treatment, or chronic pain conditions were excluded. Prescription opioids were ascertained using pharmacy claims data with standardized morphine equivalents and recorded days' supply. Appropriate prescribing was determined from the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for pain management based on a recommended 3 days' supply of opioid medication and anticipated post-procedural pain.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of prescribed opioids exceeded the recommended morphine equivalents for appropriate management of acute pain. Approximately half (53%) exceeded the recommended days' supply. Patients aged 18-34 years, men, patients residing in the Southern U.S., and those receiving oxycodone were most likely to have opioids prescribed inappropriately. The proportion of opioids that exceed the recommended morphine equivalents increased over the study period, whereas opioids exceeding the recommended days' supply remained unchanged.
CONCLUSIONS: Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 2 opioids prescribed to adult dental patients are overprescribed. Judicious opioid-prescribing interventions should be tailored to oral health conditions and dentists.
The Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires biomedical companies to report payments made to physicians and teaching hospitals to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Despite significant attention paid to industry payments to physicians, little is known about payments to teaching hospitals, which create the potential for both benefits and institutional conflicts of interest. We examined 2018 CMS Open Payments program data to identify all nonresearch payments made by industry to teaching hospitals and determined that 91 percent of teaching hospitals received industry payments totaling $832 million in 2018. We observed substantial royalty payments, which may reflect the downstream benefits of research partnerships, as well as substantial payments for gifts and education, which raise concerns for institutional conflicts of interest. Hospital predictors of receiving payments included large bed size, major medical school affiliation, and inclusion on the U.S. News & World Report Best Hospitals Honor Roll. Financial payments from industry to teaching hospitals are common and previously underrecognized. Hospitals should strengthen policies to prevent the institutional conflicts of interest that may arise from these payments while promoting beneficial industry collaborations. We also suggest that CMS reporting requirements be broadened to all hospitals to meet the Sunshine Act's goals of encouraging transparency and preventing inappropriate industry influence.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: High insulin prices and cost-related insulin underuse are increasingly common and vexing problems for healthcare providers. This review highlights several factors that contribute to high prices and limited generic competition in the US insulin market.
RECENT FINDINGS: An opaque and complex pricing and reimbursement system for insulin, allegations of collusive practices by insulin manufacturers, and a lack of generic competition drive and sustain high insulin prices. When combined with increasing insurance deductibles and cost sharing, these factors contribute to cost-related insulin underuse and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Healthcare providers facing patients with type 2 diabetes who struggle to afford insulin should consider initiating or switching from analogue to human insulin as one way to help address the challenges of access and affordability. However, it is also important to support initiatives to advocate for affordable pricing for insulin for patients who can benefit from the flexibility offered by many of the newer insulin preparations.
This economic evaluation study examines the authors’ experience of prescribing tafamidis in terms of their cost and the insurance status of patients.
BACKGROUND: After non-fatal opioid overdoses, opioid prescribing patterns are often unchanged and the use of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) remains low. Whether such prescribing differs by race/ethnicity remains unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of race/ethnicity with the prescribing of opioids and MOUDs after a non-fatal opioid overdose.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients prescribed ≥ 1 opioid from July 1, 2010, to September 30, 2015, with a non-fatal opioid overdose in the Veterans Health Administration (VA).
MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients prescribed: (1) any opioid during the 30 days before and after overdose and (2) MOUDs within 30 days after overdose by race and ethnicity. We conducted difference-in-difference analyses using multivariable regression to assess whether the change in opioid prescribing from before to after overdose differed by race/ethnicity. We also used multivariable regression to test whether MOUD prescribing after overdose differed by race/ethnicity.
KEY RESULTS: Among 16,210 patients with a non-fatal opioid overdose (81.2% were white, 14.3% black, and 4.5% Hispanic), 10,745 (66.3%) patients received an opioid prescription (67.1% white, 61.7% black, and 65.9% Hispanic; p < 0.01) before overdose. After overdose, the frequency of receiving opioids was reduced by 18.3, 16.4, and 20.6 percentage points in whites, blacks, and Hispanics, respectively, with no significant difference-in-difference in opioid prescribing by race/ethnicity (p = 0.23). After overdose, 526 (3.2%) patients received MOUDs (2.9% white, 4.6% black, and 5.5% Hispanic; p < 0.01). Blacks (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.6; 95% CI 1.2, 1.9) and Hispanics (aOR 1.8; 95% CI 1.2, 2.6) had significantly larger odds of receiving MOUDs than white patients.
CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of patients with non-fatal opioid overdose in VA, there were no racial/ethnic differences in changes in opioid prescribing after overdose. Although blacks and Hispanics were more likely than white patients to receive MOUDs in the 30 days after overdose, less than 4% of all groups received such therapy.
OBJECTIVES: Continuation of aspirin for secondary prevention in persons with limited life expectancy (LLE) is controversial. We sought to determine the incidence and predictors of aspirin discontinuation in veterans with LLE and/or advanced dementia (LLE/AD) who were taking aspirin for secondary prevention at nursing home admission, stratified by whether their limited prognosis (LP) was explicitly documented at admission.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using linked Veterans Affairs (VA) and Medicare clinical/administrative data and Minimum Data Set resident assessments.
SETTING: All VA nursing homes (referred to as community living centers [CLCs]) in the United States.
PARTICIPANTS: Older (≥65 y) CLC residents with LLE/AD, admitted for 7 days or longer in fiscal years 2009 to 2015, who had a history of coronary artery disease and/or stroke/transient ischemic attack, and used aspirin within the first week of CLC admission (n = 13 844).
MEASUREMENTS: The primary dependent variable was aspirin discontinuation within the first 90 days after CLC admission, defined as 14 consecutive days of no aspirin receipt. Independent variables included an indicator for explicit documentation of LP, sociodemographics, environment of care characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, bleeding risk factors, individual markers of poor prognosis (eg, cancer, weight loss), and facility characteristics. Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard models with death as a competing risk were used to assess predictors of discontinuation.
RESULTS: Cumulative incidence of aspirin discontinuation was 27% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 26%-28%) in the full sample, 34% (95% CI = 33%-36%) in residents with explicit documentation of LP, and 24% (95% CI = 23%-25%) in residents with no such documentation. The associations of independent variables with aspirin discontinuation differed in residents with vs without explicit LP documentation at admission.
CONCLUSION: Just over one-quarter of patients discontinued aspirin, possibly reflecting the unclear role of aspirin in end of life among prescribers. Future research should compare outcomes of aspirin deprescribing in this population. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:725-735, 2020.
