Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Sep;10(9):2355-2366. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.05.022. Epub 2022 May 28.
Adherence barriers to asthma biologics may not be uniform across administration settings for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.
To examine differences in asthma biologic adherence and associated factors, as well as association with a 1-year all-cause emergency department (ED) visit, across administration settings.
A retrospective study of biologic naïve moderate-to-severe asthma patients with initial biologic therapy between January 1, 2016, and April 30, 2020, in the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart was performed. Three administration settings were identified: Clinic-only (outpatient office/infusion center), Home (self-administration), and Hybrid setting (mixture of clinic and self-administration). Asthma biologic adherence was the proportion of observed over expected biologic dose administrations received within 6 months from initial therapy. Factors associated with adherence were identified by administration setting, using Poisson regression analyses. A relationship between a 1-year all-cause ED visit and adherence was assessed for each administration setting using Cox regression analyses.
The study cohort was 3932 patients. Biologics adherence was 0.75 [0.5, 1] in Clinic setting, the most common administration setting, and 0.83 [0.5, 1] in both Home and Hybrid settings. Specialist access was consistently associated with better biologic adherence, whereas Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, lower education, Medicare only insurance, and higher patient out-of-pocket cost were associated with worse biologic adherence in some settings. In the Hybrid setting, hazard for a 1-year all-cause ED visit decreased with biologic adherence.
Asthma biologic adherence varied by administration setting. Efforts to improve asthma biologic adherence should consider promoting self-administration when beneficial, improving prior specialist access, and targeting patients with higher risk of suboptimal adherence particularly Black and Hispanic patients.
在中度至重度哮喘患者中,不同的给药环境下,哮喘生物制剂的用药依从性障碍可能并不一致。
检测不同给药环境下哮喘生物制剂的用药依从性及相关因素差异,以及与 1 年全因急诊就诊(ED)的相关性。
本研究为回顾性研究,纳入了 2016 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 4 月 30 日在 Optum Clinformatics Data Mart 中接受初始生物制剂治疗的生物制剂初治的中重度哮喘患者。共识别出 3 种给药环境:仅诊所(门诊/输液中心)、家庭(自我管理)和混合(诊所和自我管理的混合)。哮喘生物制剂的依从性是指在初始治疗后 6 个月内,观察到的生物制剂剂量与预期剂量之比。通过泊松回归分析,按给药环境确定与依从性相关的因素。对每种给药环境下 1 年全因 ED 就诊与依从性的关系,均采用 Cox 回归分析进行评估。
研究队列纳入了 3932 名患者。最常见的给药环境即诊所环境中的生物制剂依从性为 0.75 [0.5,1],家庭和混合环境中的生物制剂依从性均为 0.83 [0.5,1]。专科医生的可及性与更好的生物制剂依从性始终相关,而黑人种族、西班牙裔、较低的教育水平、仅拥有医疗保险和较高的患者自付费用,与某些环境下的生物制剂依从性较差相关。在混合环境中,生物制剂依从性越高,1 年全因 ED 就诊的风险越低。
哮喘生物制剂的依从性因给药环境而异。为了提高哮喘生物制剂的依从性,应该考虑在有利的情况下促进自我管理,改善专科医生的可及性,并针对依从性较差风险较高的患者,特别是黑人及西班牙裔患者进行治疗。