Search This Blog

Saturday, April 2, 2022

Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy

 

Contribution To Literature:

The CHAP trial showed that antihypertensive therapy improves pregnancy outcomes among pregnant women with mild chronic hypertension.

Description:

The goal of the trial was to evaluate antihypertensive therapy compared with control among pregnant women with mild chronic hypertension.

Study Design

  • Randomized
  • Parallel
  • Open-label

Pregnant individuals with mild chronic hypertension were randomized to a blood pressure goal <140/90 mm Hg (active treatment) (n = 1,208) versus control (n = 1,200). In the control group, antihypertensive therapy was withheld unless the blood pressure was ≥160/105 mm Hg.

In the active treatment group, patients received standard first-line antihypertensive agents in pregnancy (labetalol or extended-release nifedipine); however, amlodipine or methyldopa could also be used, if needed. The medication was titrated to the maximum dose, as necessary, before starting a second agent.

  • Total number of enrollees: 2,408
  • Duration of follow-up: 34 weeks
  • Mean patient age: 32 years
  • Percentage with diabetes: 15.8%

Inclusion criteria:

  • Pregnant women with mild chronic hypertension
  • Known chronic hypertension was confirmed by elevated blood pressure and previous/current antihypertensive therapy, while new chronic hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 on ≥2 occasions ≥4 hours apart
  • Gestational age <23 weeks

Exclusion criteria:

  • Need for >1 antihypertensive medication, secondary hypertension, multiple fetuses, high-risk illnesses, or complications that could warrant treatment at a lower blood pressure level
  • Obstetric conditions that increase fetal risk
  • Contraindications to first-line antihypertensive drugs in pregnancy

Other salient features/characteristics:

  • Non-Hispanic black women: 48%
  • Mean body mass index: 37.5 kg/m2
  • Mean systolic blood pressure between randomization and delivery: 129.5 mm Hg in the active treatment group vs. 132.6 mm Hg in the control group

Principal Findings:

The primary outcome, composite of pre-eclampsia with severe features, medically indicated preterm birth at <35 weeks’ gestation, placental abruption, or fetal/neonatal death, occurred in 30.2% of the active treatment group vs. 37.0% of the control group (p < 0.001).

Secondary outcomes:

  • The safety outcome, small-for-gestational-age birth weight below the 10th percentile for gestational age: 11.2% in the active treatment group vs. 10.4% in the control group (p = 0.56)
  • Pre-eclampsia with severe features: 23.3% in the active treatment group vs. 29.1% in the control group
  • Fatal/neonatal death: 3.5% in the active treatment group vs. 4.3% in the control group

Interpretation:

Among pregnant women with mild chronic hypertension, antihypertensive therapy targeted to a blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg reduced the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with usual care. Active treatment improved outcomes without increasing the risk for low birth weight. A large proportion of non-Hispanic blacks were enrolled in this trial.

References:

Tita AT, Szychowski JM, Boggess K, et al., on behalf of the Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy (CHAP) Trial Consortium. Treatment for Mild Chronic Hypertension During Pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2022;Apr 2:[Epub ahead of print].

https://www.acc.org/Latest-in-Cardiology/Clinical-Trials/2022/04/01/03/19/CHAP?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_post&utm_campaign=acc22

An Overview of Aphasia: The Condition Causing Bruce Willis to Step Away from Acting

 This week, the world was shook by the news that Bruce Willis’ acting  career is in jeopardy due cognitive impairment caused by aphasia. The 67-year-old renowned Hollywood star – known for his roles in such blockbusters as “Die Hard” and “The Sixth Sense” – is stepping away from acting, as announced by his ex-wife, Demi Moore, in an Instagram post on Wednesday.

“To Bruce’s amazing supporters, as a family we wanted to share that our beloved Bruce has been experiencing some health issues and has recently been diagnosed with aphasia, which is impacting his cognitive abilities,” Moore posted. “As a result of this and with much consideration Bruce is stepping away from the career that has meant so much to him.”

What is Aphasia?

Aphasia, as explained by Mayo Clinic, is a condition that affects one’s ability to communicate. It typically occurs following a stroke or head injury, but can also be spurred on by a slow-growing brain tumor or degenerative, permanent brain damage. The condition’s severity is dependent on a myriad of factors, including the severity of the brain damage. As noted by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, aphasia affects ~1 million people, or 1 in 250 in the United States today, with no discernible differences found in incidence between men and women.

People suffering from aphasia may:

  • Speak in short or incomplete sentences
  • Speak incoherently
  • Display mental confusion
  • Write sentences that don’t make sense
  • Make up words
  • Have difficulty understanding spoken words
  • Provide unreliable answers to simple “yes or no” questions
  • Demonstrate difficulty following fast speech

Willis’ aphasia symptoms have unfortunately manifested while on movie sets in recent years. The LA Times reported that on the set of “Hard Kill” two years ago, Willis allegedly misfired a gun off cue, according to the outlet, which cited two sources close to the incident.

How is Aphasia Diagnosed and Treated?

Identifying aphasia falls heavily in the realm of speech-language pathologists (SLPs), who play a significant role in screening, assessment, and diagnosis. SLPs screen individuals who present with language and communication difficulties and determine the need for further testing and/or referral for additional services. They also consult with other professionals to facilitate optimal treatment plans, provide treatment, and document patient progress. Making an accurate diagnosis for aphasia also includes the use of imaging procedures such as computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography.

Treatment for aphasia is individually-based, and depends on such factors as age, overall health, extent of the disorder, and tolerance for specific medications, therapies, and procedures. The condition is treated using speech-language therapy, individualized and group therapy, and nonverbal communication therapies (e.g., computers or pictures).

Outlook for Aphasia Patients

Fortunately, according to Johns Hopkins Medicine, “some people with aphasia recover completely without treatment.” However, for others, remnants of the disease are permanent. Treatments are often successful in helping patients recover some speech and language functions over time, but some communication problems may always persist. Computers can help aphasia patients effectively communicate, and of course, new innovations are constantly being developed.

From everybody here at DocWire News, we wish Bruce Willis the best, and hope for a full recovery.

https://www.docwirenews.com/latest-neurology-news/an-overview-of-aphasia-the-condition-causing-bruce-willis-to-step-away-from-acting/

New HF Guidelines Stress Four-Drug Approach

 New heart failure guidelines released in the United States today stress a four-drug-class approach in patients with reduced ejection fraction, define a new category of “mildly reduced” heart failure, and celebrate new options for patients who have heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) or amyloidosis, along with a number of other key updates.

The document was simultaneously published in the journals and on the websites of the three societies behind today’s update: the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA). “The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure,” the authors state.

The last full set of HF guidelines published by these societies dates back to 2013, with a “focused update” released in 2017. Of note, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) released its newest heart failure guidelines last fall during the ESC Congress. There are many areas of overlap between the two documents.

But as Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD (Baylor College of Medicine, Houston TX), writing committee vice chair for the US guidelines, pointed out to TCTMD, EMPEROR-Preserved came out just 1 hour after the release of the ESC guidelines—long past the cutoff for the writing committee to consider the data. As such, a crucial difference between the European and American recommendations is the newer advice for HFpEF patients.

“For the first time we have a therapy, and consideration of other therapies, that improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved EF,” Bozkurt told TCTMD. “And that makes for exciting times for us.”

Other major highlights in the 2022 guidelines include the emphasis on four different medication classes in heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF), to be initiated in tandem as swiftly as possible, she noted. Those are sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system RAAS) inhibition—with an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) given preference over an ACE inhibitor or ARB in class II to III heart failure patients. That’s in line with recommendations also made by the European guideline committee last year. So, too, is the addition of “mildly reduced” to denote heart failure patients with ejection fractions ranging from 41% to 49%, given the acronym “HFmrEF.”

Key Recommendations

The document, in its entirety, is 159 pages, but that speaks to the comprehensiveness of the advice, not its complexity, Bozkurt stressed. Even for primary care physicians or cardiologists not specialized in the management of heart failure, the key messages from the new document are straightforward.

We have four medications to save lives and improve outcomes more than ever, and that therapy is standard core therapy with four drug classes . . . that can be initiated and optimized as soon as possible: that should be clear,” she said. “Every patient with reduced EF should have optimization of these four classes.”

Of note, the guidelines do not make recommendations on sequencing the four medication classes, Bozkurt said. “You will not see start this versus that, but we specified that we do have a recommendation for optimization meaning, though we did not specify how to sequence, there is a class 2a recommendation for titration and optimization frequently, as frequently as 1 to 2 weeks, depending on the patient. My response to you on behalf of the writing group is that, rather than sequencing, optimization matters amongst the four classes.” Only for the RAAS inhibitors did the writing committee give an ARNI priority over ACE inhibitors and ARB in certain patients.

Bozkurt’s personal view—not that of the writing group, she stressed—is that the sequence “by which the medications are to be started needs to be individualized according to patients,” taking into account etiology, comorbidities, and patient wishes.

A Heart Failure Top 10

Beyond that fundamental starting point, she said, are a range of other important updates, summarized in a “Top 10 Take-Home Messages,” which Bozkurt said she and other writing committee members are “very proud of.”

  1. The four medication classes making up class 1a guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF take the top spot, with SGLT2 inhibitors making their debut in the ACC/AHA/HFSA guidelines.
  2. SGLT2 inhibitors get a class 2a in the newly dubbed category of HFmrEF, while ARNIs, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, MRAs, and beta-blockers get a class 2b recommendation.
  3. New HFpEF recommendations, including SGLT2 inhibition (class 2a) and MRA and ARNI (both 2b) debut, along with the renewal of prior management recommendations in this group.
  4. A new category of “improved HF” denotes patients who have increased their EF above 40%, singled out because they will benefit from continuing their prescribed therapies.
  5. The addition of “Value Statements” to recommendation classes help to highlight therapies for which high-quality cost-effectiveness studies have been published.
  6. New screening, genetic sequencing, and therapeutic options for amyloid heart disease incorporate data from the ATTR-ACT study that made waves in 2019.
  7. Use of increased filling pressures, identified noninvasively, or through invasive, hemodynamic tests to aid diagnosis of HF when LVEF is > 40%. The CardioMEMs implantable pulmonary artery pressure sensor (Abbott), for example, is given a class 2b recommendation.
  8. Reliance on a HF team is urged to guide decision-making around prolonging life through advanced HF support therapies such as mechanical circulatory support and transplantation, as opposed to palliative care.
  9. New advice and revised terminology are provided around primary prevention of HF (stage A) or pre-HF (stage B).
  10. Updated recommendations are provided for HF patients also facing a range of comorbidities such as iron deficiency, anemia, hypertension, sleep disorders, type 2 diabetes, cancer, coronary artery disease, and atrial fibrillation. For the latter, for example, ablation is considered to be a “reasonable” option in patients with an LVEF  35% (class 2a).

 

Guidelines in Sync

To TCTMD, Bozkurt stressed that the new HF guidelines are in line with the recent valve disease guidance, including advice for treatment for patients with mitral regurgitation and aortic stenosis. These recommendations take into account trials—and conflicting interpretations—of recent transcatheter-edge-to-edge repair (TEER) and TAVI trials. Patients with secondary mitral regurgitation are to be first treated with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) supervised by an HF specialist before consideration for surgery or TEER, with the latter given a 2a recommendation so long as the patient meets a range of clinical and anatomic criteria.

Bozkurt also highlighted specific recommendations for heart failure and pregnancy, including patient-centric counselling, as well as a class 2b recommendation for anticoagulation with peripartum cardiomyopathy.

New recommendations single out “vulnerable” populations, urging practitioners to look beyond traditional risk factors. “Risk assessment should target both known risks for cardiovascular disease and heart failure as well as social determinants of health as a means towards elimination of disparate heart failure outcomes,” she explained. Moreover, “evidence of health disparities should be monitored and addressed at the clinical-practice level, as well as health-system level, so we have recommendations for the health system, as well.”

There are messages to both payers and practitioners here, said Bozkurt, acknowledging that the ideal management of heart failure may not be affordable or accessible to many. “The lifesaving therapies and treatments that are reducing morbidity need to be affordable and covered, that is number one. Number two: disparities and health inequities needs to be addressed, and this whole [problem of] nonstandardization, the differences [seen] state to state, needs to be addressed. That requires a high level of legislation and coverage intervention, which needs to be done. But from the clinician side, yes, care coordination unfortunately needs to address all these barriers, lack of coverage as well as advocacy on behalf of our patients, until the infrastructure is fixed. The clinicians on the frontier are the ones who have to do the advocacy for their patients.”

Much to Stoke Excitement

Commenting on the new guidelines for TCTMD, Michelle Kittleson, MD, PhD (Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA), zeroed in several factors that she said she’s excited about.

These include the creation of the new category of HFmrEF, but also the notion of “improved” EF as a separate entity. “That really emphasizes the point that heart failure exists on a continuum,” she said. “It reinforces that physicians can’t have this false sense of reassurance that now that the patient has made it through and improved their ejection fraction, they don't need the GDMT anymore.” Instead, providers have to pay attention to a patients trajectory, stay aware of fluctuations, and not stop or ease off on guideline-recommended meds.

Rule number one is to do our best, to help every patient feel better and live longer, to optimize quality of life for as long as possible. 

The addition of SGLT2 inhibitors also got at thumbs up from Kittleson, as did their incorporation as part of a four-drug class approach. “I was glad the guidelines got behind that,” she said.

The options for diagnosing and screening amyloidosis are “very important,” she added, pointing out that the prior full iteration of the guidelines in 2013 could offer very little to this important group of patients. “I think that fact that the guidelines devoted an entire section to the diagnosis and treatment of cardiac amyloidosis, . . . as well as a diagnostic and treatment algorithm, is really important.

Lastly, said Kittleson, the addition of value statements for many therapies, when available, plus the emphasis on health disparities and social determinants of health, help to shine a light on the impact that disparities have on vulnerable populations and how those might be mitigated.

Asked if her excitement for all of the new treatments and approaches in the new guidelines is tempered by the stark realities posed by inequitable access to care, Kittleson was blunt.

“Rule number one is to do our best, to help every patient feel better and live longer, to optimize quality of life for as long as possible. That's our mission, our goal. And then we work within the construct of reality, where our best efforts sometimes are not supported by things like financial toxicity,” she said. “I think it's very important for the guidelines to always put forth what best medical therapy is, but recognize that the reality for some patients is that that may not be possible. And hopefully this is a signal to the policy makers out there that we recognize that financial toxicity exists for our patients.”

A special session on the AHA/ACC/HFSA heart failure guidelines takes place tomorrow, April 2, 2022, at the American College of Cardiology 2022 Scientific Session.


https://www.tctmd.com/news/new-hf-guidelines-stress-four-drug-approach-hfmref-amyloidosis-options-and-more

Exercise Provides Twice the CV Benefit in Anxiety, Depression

 Meeting guideline-recommended exercise targets is associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in everyone, but the benefits may be particularly clear for people with anxiety and depression, a new analysis suggests.

In a study of more than 50,000 adult patients with or without CVD or risk factors who were followed for a median of 1.8 years, the cardioprotective effects associated with exercise were almost twice as large in people with anxiety and depression than in those without these conditions.

Overall, individuals who met the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) recommendations for physical activity had a 17% lower risk of having coronary major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as unstable anginamyocardial infarction (MI), or coronary revascularization.

However, individuals with anxiety or depression had a 22% lower risk of coronary MACE during follow-up, compared to the 10% lower risk in individuals without these stress-related conditions.

Hadil Zureigat, MD, a clinical research fellow at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, reported these findings in a press briefing; the study will be presented at the American College of Cardiology 2022 Scientific Session, being held virtually and in person in Washington, DC, starting April 2.

Importantly, the "findings don't suggest that exercise is only effective in those with anxiety and depression," Zureigat stressed in an email to theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. Rather, they show that "people with these diagnoses derive a relatively greater cardiovascular benefit from exercise — roughly double the risk reduction."

These findings are "really important," said Andrew Kates, MD, who was not involved in this research.

"We use multiple medications for secondary prevention in our patients with CVD," Kates, professor of medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology in an email. "This gives us additional data to present to patients to encourage lifestyle changes as a way to combat CVD," or to prevent CVD in other patients.

"Anxiety and depression are common in patients with heart disease and estimated to be present in 15% to 30% of such patients," Kates noted.

"We should screen for this," he added, by asking "simple questions about fatigue, stress, self-esteem, etc, with a low threshold for referral to a primary provider for more formal assessment. For many, it is a matter of making sure patients are aware of the association of anxiety and depression with heart disease."

Building on Prior Imaging Studies

This study builds on two earlier ones using data from this biobank, both of which were presented at recent cardiology meetings, Zureigat noted.

In the first study, imaging data showed that exercise decreases stress-associated neural activity predominantly by upregulating regulatory medial prefrontal cortical activity. In a second study, she said, "we showed that this mechanism (that involves the brain) explains about 7% of the cardiovascular benefit of exercise.

"Given these findings," Zureigat said, "we asked the next logical question, 'Shouldn't people with stress-related conditions such as anxiety and depression, derive more cardiovascular benefit from exercise?' "

The current study did indeed show this and provides "further support of the importance of stress-related neural mechanisms in explaining the cardiovascular benefits of exercise."

Moreover, "any amount of exercise is helpful [to lower CVD risk], particularly for those with depression or anxiety," Zureigat said in a press release issued by the ACC.

"Not only will physical activity help them feel better, but they will also potentially reduce their risk of cardiovascular disease," she said. "It can be hard to make the transition, but once achieved, physical activity allows those with these common chronic stress-related psychiatric conditions to hit two birds with one stone."

Anxiety, Depression Common

The researchers analyzed data from 50,359 adults older than 18 years who were enrolled in the Mass General Brigham Biobank and who replied to questionnaires in which they reported physical activity.

Of these, 16,995 patients (34%) had a diagnosis of anxiety, and 14,015 patients (20%) had a diagnosis of depression, based on ICD codes.

The cohort included patients with a wide age range, with or without previous MI or stroke, and 15% to 48% had cardiovascular risk factors of type 2 diabeteshypertension, or hyperlipidemia, or current or past smoking.

The patients were classified as either meeting or exceeding, or not meeting AHA/ACC recommendations of at least 150 minutes of moderate physical activity per week, equivalent to 500 metabolic equivalent of task (MET) minutes per week.

Meeting or exceeding these physical activity recommendations was associated with a lower risk of coronary MACE compared to not meeting these targets, after adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors and age and sex, (odds ratio, 0.838, 95% CI, 0.78 – 0.90, P = .015).

Among patients with anxiety or depression, those with ≥500 MET minutes of physical activity per week had a lower risk of coronary MACE than those who did not meet this target.

Zureigat and Kates have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

American College of Cardiology (ACC) 2022 Scientific Session: Abstract 1007-05. To be presented April 2, 2022.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/971439

ACC 2022 – Bristol's rare hit could justify Myokardia

 Bristol Myers Squibb paid $13bn for mavacamten’s developer, Myokardia, so it needs the project to be a hit. Today the company got a boost with impressive results from Valor-HCM study, in a sicker population of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients than the one in which the asset had previously been tested.

Bristol looks like it will have its work cut out to hit the $4bn-plus peak sales target it has set for mavacamten but, as with many rare diseases, the group hopes that having a therapy available will spur more patients to be diagnosed.

Amyloidosis on steroids

Valor’s lead investigator, Dr Milind Desai of the Cleveland Clinic, told Evaluate Vantage on the sidelines of the ACC meeting that in terms of market size hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) was "amyloidosis on steroids". 

Amyloidosis, of course, is a disorder that has proven a nice little earner for the likes of Pfizer and Alnylam.

HCM involves excessive contraction and progressive thickening of the heart muscle tissue, and can lead to heart failure and sudden cardiac death. There are no specific therapies approved.

Bristol is initially targeting the disorder's obstructive form, which involves blockage of the left ventricular outflow tract, where blood leaves the heart, and affects around two thirds of patients.

Here, mavacamten has a Pdufa date of April 28, based on data from the Explorer-HCM study (ESC 2020 – Myokardia odds-on for first approval in heart muscle disease, August 29, 2020).

Valor focused on a sicker group of patients than Explorer: those with severely symptomatic obstructive HCM who were candidates for septal reduction therapy, a procedure to reduce the thickness of the heart tissue that comes with its own risk of death.

Patients were randomised to either mavacamten or placebo, and continued on background therapy including disopyramide and beta blockers. At any time during the trial patients could opt for septal reduction.

The primary endpoint of Valor was the proportion of patients who had either decided to have the procedure, or were still eligible, at week 16. Only 18% of mavacamten-treated patients fell into these groups, versus 77% of those receiving placebo.

The study also hit all of its secondary endpoints.

Valor results at ACC 2022
EndpointMavacamtenPlaceboP value
Proportion of pts who had or were eligible for SRT*18%77%<0.0001
Change in post-exercise LVOT gradient-39.1mmHg-1.8mmHg?
No. of pts with ≥1 class NYHA improvement63%21%<0.0001
Change in KCCQ-23 clinical summary score+10.4 points+1.9 points<0.0001
*Primary endpoint; KCCQ=Kansas City cardiomyopathy questionnaire; LVOT=left ventricular outflow tract; NYHA=New York Heart Association. Source: ACC 2022.

As for safety, Valor did not throw up any new issues. As mavacamten, a cardiac myosin inhibitor, is designed to reduce the hypercontractility seen in HCM, there are concerns that the project could cause dangerously low ejection fractions.

Dr Desai explained that the “hard stop” in Valor was an LVEF of 30% or below, and highlighted that no patient met this criterion. However, two patients had LVEF that dropped below 50% – these subjects briefly stopped taking mavacamten, their ejection fractions recovered, and they subsequently resumed treatment on a lower dose.

Bristol plans to address these concerns with a risk-evaluation mitigation strategy (REMS), and it was updates to this that caused an FDA decision on mavacamten to be pushed back from the original target of November.

“The REMS was always something we’d planned for given the mechanism of action of the drug,” Marie-Laure Papi, the development lead for mavacamten at Bristol, told Vantage.

In Valor, echocardiogram measures were used to help titrate the dose of mavacamten to individual patients. It should soon become clear whether this strategy will be enough for the FDA.

HFpEF plans

Assuming it is, and mavacamten becomes the first approved therapy for HCM, Bristol is not stopping there. The group plans to start a phase 3 study in non-obstructive HCM this year, and the project is in phase 2 in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, another cardiac disorder that until recently has had few options.

The competition is some way behind: Cytokinetics recently started the phase 3 Sequoia-HCM trial of its rival cardiac myosin inhibitor aficamten (CK-274), while a couple of projects are in phase 2 for non-obstructive disease.

Dr Desai reckons that the 100,000 patients who are currently diagnosed with HCM in the US is the “tip of the iceberg”. If he is right there should be room for more than one player in this market.

Projects in development for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
ProjectCompanyDescriptionTrial
Filed
MavacamtenBristol Myers SquibbCardiac myosin inhibitorPdufa April 2022 based on Explorer-HCM
Phase 3
AficamtenCytokineticsCardiac myosin inhibitorSequoia-HCM in obstructive HCM completes Sep 2023
Phase 2
IMB-101Imbria PharmaceuticalsPartial fatty acid oxidation inhibitorImprove-HCM in non-obstructive HCM completes Nov 2022
EntrestoNovartisAngiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitorNCT04164732 in non-obstructive HCM completes May 2023
Cufence (trientine dihydrochloride)Univar SolutionsCopper chelating agentTempest completes Dec 2023*
Phase 1
CT-G20CelltrionCardiac myosin inhibitorNCT04418297 in obstructive HCM completes Apr 2022
MYK-224Bristol Myers SquibbCardiac myosin inhibitorNCT05304533 completes Sep 2022
*Investigator-sponsored trial. Source: Evaluate Pharma & clinicaltrials.gov.

https://www.evaluate.com/vantage/articles/events/conferences/acc-2022-bristols-rare-hit-could-justify-myokardia

8 reasons why health care cost inflation is likely to escalate

 Health care costs in the U.S. decreased for the first time in our lifetimes due to decreases in elective, preventive, and chronic disease care caused by the pandemic. By 2021, however, health care costs caught up to pre-pandemic projections. Eight factors, outlined below, indicate a return to health care cost increases far above inflation, posing enormous challenges to employers and health plan sponsors.

1.  Provider costs have genuinely increased. 

Hospitals and providers are not impervious to general inflationary trends. Providers face increased costs for fuel and medical supplies and will seek to pass on these costs. The “Great Resignation” has not spared health care. Hospitals also face staffing shortages, and agency and “travel” nurse expenses have soared. These increases raise the cost basis for medical care and will increase health care inflation in coming years.

2.  Providers will have more leverage at the contracting table due to provider consolidation and public sympathy.

Weaker hospital systems and providers were more likely to fail during the pandemic, and their volume is likely to have been absorbed by stronger systems that enjoy more negotiating leverage and higher reimbursement rates.

Many health plan contracts with health systems are three or more years long, so these increases could extend through or beyond 2025.

Providers saved countless lives during the pandemic, and doctors, nurses and others practiced at great personal risk in excruciating conditions with crippling shortages of personal protective equipment. Health plans will have a harder time in the court of public opinion during contractual disputes, making them more likely to accede to provider financial demands.

3.  The cost of drugs will continue to rise.

There’s also been no slowdown in the rise of drug prices during the pandemic, and the federal government has failed to pass any meaningful legislation to control drug prices.

There is widespread public support for regulations to address the high cost of drugs in the U.S. compared to other developed countries, but little agreement among legislators about what action to take.

The pandemic led to a slowdown in research and approvals for new drugs not aimed at coronavirus. As the pandemic recedes, there will be an increase in the number of new and expensive personalized drugs.

4.  Preventive care, chronic disease management, and non-emergent surgeries were delayed or foregone during the pandemic.

Mammography and colonoscopy screenings fell dramatically during Spring 2020, and cancer screening rates have not yet recovered. Decreased cancer screening lowered medical costs during the pandemic but could raise future costs as more patients are diagnosed with later stage, high-cost cancers in subsequent years. For example, UC Davis has already reported a four-fold increase in diagnosis of Stage IV breast cancer.

Childhood immunization saves lives and costs by preventing epidemics like measles, but pediatric vaccinations were down 42 percent in Spring 2020. While vaccination of preadolescents has rebounded, adolescent vaccination continues to lag without a compensatory bump to make up for vaccinations missed in the first year of the pandemic. Childhood vaccines save thousands of lives and billions of dollars; fewer children fully immunized will increase health care costs as well as lead to preventable illness and death.

Some patients delayed or avoided medical care for chronic conditions like heart disease or diabetes, and we might face higher costs from complications including end stage renal disease and congestive heart failure due to more advanced disease in subsequent years. Some patients will never get the non-emergency procedures they missed during the pandemic, but many delayed surgeries and other procedures will be scheduled in the future. Some of these, including operations for cancer and orthopedic disease, could be more complicated than originally planned.

5.  Costs of long-term complications of COVID-19 could be large.

As many as one in six who have recovered from COVID-19 continue to have symptoms six months later.

Researchers also found that incidence of heart attack, stroke and congestive heart failure soared after recovery from COVID-19. Even mild cases of COVID-19 can lead to lasting damage to small airways. Researchers have also identified cognitive decline and changes in brain anatomy associated with COVID-19.

There are ten drugs now under investigation to treat Long COVID; these could improve quality of life and decrease disability but are likely to be costly.

6.  The pandemic has worsened mental health.

Three times as many Americans report severe symptoms of anxiety and depression compared to before the pandemic, and drug overdose deaths are at their highest level in history.

Access to mental health care was poor even before the pandemic, and many continue to be unable to get necessary mental health care despite the dramatic increase in virtual care. Untreated mental illness is associated with substantial preventable medical costs, and the emotional trauma from an event with widespread death can last for years.

7.  Government programs that have funded vaccinations and treatments for COVID-19 will expire this year.

The federal government has purchased all COVID-19 vaccinations, monoclonal antibodies, and doses of oral medication for COVID-19 since the beginning of the pandemic. But funds to pay for these products are fast running out, and billions in funds for vaccines and therapeutics requested by the Biden administration face an uncertain future in Congress.

We often don’t know what price the government is paying for these products, but the unit cost paid by private insurance plans is likely to be higher, and employer-sponsored health plans are paying only administration costs for vaccinations and COVID-19 drugs now.

8.  The end of the pandemic emergency will decrease Medicaid enrollment and enhanced subsidies for exchange plans are set to end.

State Medicaid agencies have been prohibited from disenrolling Medicaid beneficiaries during the pandemic, but millions could lose their Medicaid benefits when the pandemic emergency is over.

Federal subsidies for those purchasing individual insurance on the exchanges will also decrease at the end of 2022 unless new legislation is passed.

Some employees or their family members who have remained on Medicaid or exchange plans and waived employer sponsored health insurance during the pandemic could seek coverage from employers. We will likely see an increase in those who are uninsured, which will place additional pressure to shift costs to commercial health plans.

All this points to a return to extreme annual health care inflation which will pose challenges to employers and other plan sponsors. Government will also feel pressure from rising health care costs, as it provides health insurance for government employees, senior citizens, the poor and disabled, and subsidizes insurance for many in the individual market. At a time when wages are increasing, health care inflation further increases total labor costs, increasing the likelihood that companies will pursue automation or offshoring.

Employers have responded to health care cost increases in the past by shifting costs to members, which lowers plan sponsor costs but exacerbates health care affordability concerns at a time when many families are already having trouble paying for health care. Employees are increasingly willing to consider leaving their current employer, making further cost shifting an undesirable approach. 

In response, employers will use formularies to manage drug costs and steer members to lower cost providers to manage medical costs. Additionally, they’ll look to better coordinate care of the 5 percent of members with serious illness who account for roughly half of total health care costs. Employers likely will continue to increase access and engagement in mental health services. Alternative payment models such as bundled payment and capitation can lower total cost by lowering utilization. Restrictions on site of service can decrease total costs by directing patients to lower cost settings. Other options include value-based contracting and value-based insurance design that can increase uptake of high-value care and decrease utilization of low-value care.

Overall, employers and other health plan sponsors will need to return to steady vigilance and proactive strategies and programs that allow them to prepare for substantial increases in health care costs coming over the coming years.

Jeff Levin-Scherz, M.D., MBA. is an assistant professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and a managing director and population health leader of the North American Health and Benefits Practice at Willis Towers Watson

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/3257431-8-reasons-why-health-care-cost-inflation-is-likely-to-escalate/