Dataset Information

Reductions in endometriosis-associated pain among women treated with elagolix are consistent across a range of baseline characteristics reflective of real-world patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Elagolix is an oral, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, that significantly reduces dysmenorrhea and non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) in women with moderate to severe endometriosis-associated pain.

Methods

Data were pooled from two 6-month, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies (Elaris Endometriosis [EM]-I and II) in which 2 doses of elagolix were evaluated (150 mg once daily and 200 mg twice daily). Pooled data from > 1600 women, aged 18-49, were used to evaluate the efficacy of elagolix and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in prespecified subgroups of women with various baseline characteristics.

Results

Of the 1686 women treated, 1285 (76.2%) completed the studies. The percentages of women with clinically meaningful reductions in dysmenorrhea and NMPP were generally consistent by subgroup. Significant treatment by subgroup interaction was demonstrated for dysmenorrhea response in baseline analgesic use (p < 0.01) and previous history of pregnancy (p < 0.05) subgroups, and for NMPP response in the baseline NMPP score (p < 0.05) and history of pregnancy (p < 0.05) subgroups. Patient-reported reduction in pain at month 3 was significant across all subgroups taking elagolix 200 mg BID, and significant across most subgroups with elagolix 150 mg QD. Women across subgroups experienced improvement within each domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30), although significant treatment by subgroup interactions were observed in several categories.

Conclusions

Elagolix was effective in reducing dysmenorrhea and NMPP, and improving HRQoL, compared with placebo across numerous subgroups of women with various baseline characteristics, covering a broad segment of the endometriosis disease and patient types.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01620528 ; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01931670 .

SUBMITTER: Abrao MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8210385 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of elagolix on clinically meaningful improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured by the EHP-30 (Endometriosis Health Profile-30).MethodsData from two phase III trials of elagolix for moderate to severe pain associated with endometriosis were pooled and analyzed as three groups: placebo, elagolix 150 mg once daily, or elagolix 200 mg twice daily. Patients were administered the EHP-30 questionnaire at baseline, and at months 1, 3, and 6 of treatment. Previously established responder definitions were applied to determine percentages of patients with clinically meaningful EHP-30 improvements. The probability of meeting EHP-30 responder definitions with elagolix compared with placebo at months 3 and 6 was determined by Poisson regression analysis, controlling for baseline scores.ResultsAt month 6, the probabilities of meeting EHP-30 subscale responder definitions for pain, control and powerlessness, self-image, social support, emotional well-being, and sexual intercourse were 169% (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 2.69, 95% CI 2.26-3.21), 129% (aRR 2.29, 95% CI 1.96-2.67), 80% (aRR 1.80, 95% CI 1.54-2.11), 70% (aRR 1.70, 95% CI 1.47-1.97), 67% (aRR 1.67, 95% CI 1.45-1.92), and 62% (aRR 1.62, 95% CI 1.36-1.92) greater, respectively (all P<.001), in the 200-mg group than in the placebo group. Although lower in magnitude than the 200-mg group, the 150-mg group also had greater probabilities of meeting responder definitions than the placebo group for all subscales except sexual intercourse. The probabilities of meeting responder definitions for pain, control and powerlessness, self-image, social support, and emotional well-being were 75% (aRR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44-2.14), 50% (aRR 1.50, 95% CI 1.25-1.80), 22% (aRR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47), 30% (aRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.09-1.53), and 35% (aRR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16-1.57) greater, respectively (all P<.05), in the 150-mg group than in the placebo group.ConclusionPatients with moderate to severe pain associated with endometriosis and were treated with elagolix experienced clinically meaningful HRQOL improvements.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01620528 and NCT01931670.Funding sourceAbbVie Inc.

Project description:ObjectiveIn this post hoc analysis, we evaluated the impact of elagolix on dysmenorrhea and nonmenstrual pelvic pain across menstrual period (bleeding days) and nonmenstrual (nonbleeding) days.MethodsData from two randomized, 6-month, placebo-controlled trials (Elaris Endometriosis (EM)-I and EM-II) of elagolix (150 mg once daily (QD) and 200 mg twice daily (BID)) in premenopausal women with moderate to severe endometriosis-associated pain (N = 1686) were pooled. Women recorded the presence of menstrual period and severity of dysmenorrhea or nonmenstrual pelvic pain in a daily electronic diary.ResultsAt baseline, women in the placebo group and both elagolix treatment groups reported moderate or severe dysmenorrhea, on average, 81% of their menstrual period days and moderate/severe nonmenstrual pelvic pain, on average, 56% of their nonmenstrual (nonbleeding) days. Compared with placebo at month 6, elagolix-treated women had a significantly lower mean (standard deviation (SD)) percentage of menstrual period days with moderate or severe dysmenorrhea (elagolix 150 mg QD = 52.4 (38.9), p = 0.002; elagolix 200 mg BID = 38.5 (43.6), p < 0.001, placebo = 61.3 (33.7)) and a significantly lower mean (SD) percentage of nonmenstrual (nonbleeding) days with moderate or severe nonmenstrual pelvic pain (elagolix 150 mg QD = 31.1 (35.8), p < 0.001; elagolix 200 mg BID = 19.7 (29.9), p < 0.001; placebo = 35.6 (33.9)).ConclusionFollowing 6 months of elagolix treatment, women who still menstruated had a lower proportion of menstrual period days with moderate or severe dysmenorrhea compared with placebo, demonstrating pain reduction despite continued menses. Additionally, pain did not shift from dysmenorrhea to nonmenstrual pelvic pain, as the percentage of days with moderate or severe nonmenstrual pelvic pain was also reduced for elagolix-treated women compared with placebo.Trial registrationThe Elaris EM-I study is registered with the US National Library of Medicine, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01620528. The Elaris EM-II study is registered with the US National Library of Medicine, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01931670. Both studies are registered with the EU Clinical Trial Register, www.clinicaltrialsregister.ed, 2011-004295-11.

Project description:ABSTRACT Elagolix, a gonadotrophin?releasing hormone antagonist, is used in premenopausal women with endometriosis. There is a risk of bone loss with elagolix, but the long?term effects of BMD loss later in life cannot be directly assessed and has not been quantified. To address this gap in knowledge, this study indirectly estimated the impact of elagolix on postmenopausal fracture risk. BMD change in premenopausal women with endometriosis treated with elagolix was modeled from the phase III program data (elagolix group) and used to simulate treatment effects on (fracture risk assessment tool estimated) 10?year risks of hip and major osteoporotic fracture in women ages 50 to 79?years from the 2005–2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; N = 2303). Change in the proportion of women reaching risk?based antiosteoporotic treatment thresholds was also estimated. For elagolix versus NHANES, median 10?year risk of major osteoporotic fracture was 4.73% versus 4.70% in women ages 50 to 59?years, 7.03% versus 6.97% in women ages 60 to 69?years, and 10.83% versus 10.68% in women ages 70 to 79?years. Median 10?year risk of hip fracture in these same groups was 0.19% versus 0.18% for women ages 50 to 59?years, 0.51% versus 0.49% for women 60 to 69?years, and 2.22% versus 2.14% for women 70 to 79?years. The proportion of women reaching risk?based antiosteoporotic treatment thresholds caused by elagolix 150?mg daily for 12?months was 0.36% higher at age 50 to 59?years, 0.23% at age 60 to 69?years, and 1.79% at age 70 to 79?years. The number needed to harm was 643 for one additional hip fracture and 454 for one additional major osteoporotic fracture. Results were similar for elagolix 200?mg twice a day for 3?months. In the modeled scenarios, elagolix had minimal impact on long?term risk of fracture and reaching risk?based treatment thresholds. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Project description:Background and aimsSubstance use disorders (SUDs) affect approximately 40.3 million people in the USA, yet only approximately 19% receive evidence-based treatment each year. reSET® is a prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) and the only FDA-authorized treatment for patients with cocaine, cannabis, and stimulant use disorders. This study evaluated real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs 6 months after initiation of reSET in patients with SUD.MethodsA retrospective analysis of HealthVerity PrivateSource20 data compared the 6-month incidence of all-cause hospital facility encounters and clinician services in patients treated with reSET (re-SET cohort) before (pre-index period) and after (post-index period) reSET initiation (index). Incidence was compared using incidence rate ratios (IRR). HCRU-related costs were also assessed.ResultsThe sample included 101 patients (median age 37 years, 50.5% female, 54.5% Medicaid-insured). A statistically significant decrease of 50% was observed in overall hospital encounters from pre-index to post-index (IRR 0.50; 95% CI 0.37-0.67; P < 0.001), which included inpatient stays (56% decrease; IRR 0.44; 95% CI 0.26-0.76; P = 0.003), partial hospitalizations (57% decrease; IRR 0.43; 95% CI 0.21-0.88; P = 0.021), and emergency department visits (45% decrease; IRR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.80; P < 0.004). Additionally, some clinician services declined significantly including pathology and laboratory services: other (54% decrease; IRR 0.46; 95% CI 0.28-0.76; P = 0.003); pathology and laboratory services: drug assays prior to opioid medication prescription (37% decrease; IRR 0.63; 95% CI 0.41-0.96; P = 0.031); and alcohol and drug abuse: medication services (46% decrease; IRR 0.54; 95% CI 0.41-0.70; P < 0.001). Reductions in facility-encounters drove 6-month reSET per-patient cost reductions of $3591 post-index compared to pre-index.ConclusionsUse of reSET by patients with SUD is associated with durable reductions in HCRU and lower healthcare costs over 6 months compared to the 6 months before PDT treatment, after adjusting for covariates, providing an economic benefit to the healthcare system.

Project description:Most patients cannot be included in randomized clinical trials. We report real-world outcomes of all Danish patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with daratumumab-based regimens until 1 January 2019.MethodsInformation of 635 patients treated with daratumumab was collected retrospectively and included lines of therapy (LOT), hematologic responses according to the International Myeloma Working Group recommendations, time to next treatment (TNT) and the cause of discontinuation of treatment. Baseline characteristics were acquired from the validated Danish Multiple Myeloma Registry (DMMR).ResultsDaratumumab was administrated as monotherapy (Da-mono) in 27.7%, in combination with immunomodulatory drugs (Da-IMiD) in 57.3%, in combination with proteasome inhibitors (Da-PI) in 11.2% and in other combinations (Da-other) in 3.8% of patients. The median number of lines of therapy given before daratumumab was 5 for Da-mono, 3 for Da-IMiD, 4 for Da-PI, and 2 for Da-other. In Da-mono, overall response rate (ORR) was 44.9% and median time to next treatment (mTNT) was 4.9 months. In Da-IMiD, ORR was 80.5%, and mTNT was 16.1 months. In Da-PI, OOR was 60.6% and mTNT was 5.3 months. In patients treated with Da-other, OOR was 54,2% and mTNT was 5.6 months. The use of daratumumab in early LOT was associated with longer TNT (p<0.0001). Patients with amplification 1q had outcome comparable to standard risk patients, while patients with t(4;14), t(14;16) or del17p had worse outcome (p = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis indicated that timing of treatment (timing of daratumumab in the sequence of all LOT that the patients received throughout the course of their disease) was the most important factor for outcome (p<0.0001).ConclusionThe real-world outcomes of multiple myeloma patients treated with daratumumab are worse than the results of clinical trials. Outcomes achieved with daratumumab were best when daratumumab was used in combination with IMIDs and in early LOT. Patients with high-risk CA had worse outcomes, but patients with amp1q had similar outcomes to standard-risk patients.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The prevalence of endometriosis and the need for treatment in the USA has led to the need to explore the contemporary cost burden associated with the disease. This retrospective cohort study compared direct and indirect healthcare costs in patients with endometriosis to a control group without endometriosis. METHODS:Women aged 18-49 years with endometriosis (date of initial diagnosis = index date) were identified in the Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial database between 2010 and 2014 and female control patients without endometriosis were matched by age and index year. The following outcomes were compared: healthcare resource utilization (HRU) during the 12-month pre- and post-index periods (including inpatient admissions, pharmacy claims, emergency room visits, physician office visits, and obstetrics/gynecology visits), annual direct (medical and pharmacy) and indirect (absenteeism, short-term disability, and long-term disability) healthcare costs during the 12-month post-index period (in 2014 US$). Multivariate analyses were conducted to estimate annual total direct and indirect costs, controlling for demographics, pre-index clinical characteristics, and pre-index healthcare costs. RESULTS:Overall, 113,506 endometriosis patients and 927,599 controls were included. Endometriosis patients had significantly higher HRU during both the pre- and post-index periods compared to controls (p < 0.0001, all categories of HRU). Approximately two-thirds of endometriosis patients underwent an endometriosis-related surgical procedure (including laparotomy, laparoscopy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and other excision/ablation procedures) in the first 12 months post-index. Mean annual total adjusted direct costs per endometriosis patient during the 12-month post-index period was over three times higher than that for a non-endometriosis control [$16,573 (standard deviation (SD) = $21,336) vs. $4733 (SD = $14,833); p < 0.005]. On average, incremental direct and indirect 12-month costs per endometriosis patient were $10,002 and $2132 compared to their matched controls (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS:Endometriosis patients incurred significantly higher direct and indirect healthcare costs than non-endometriosis patients. FUNDING:AbbVie Inc.