Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) experience initial and recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) more commonly and at a younger age than the general population, and it confers a higher mortality for patients with SCD. However, limited evidence is available to guide anticoagulant use for VTE treatment in this population. The primary objective of this study is to characterize the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and warfarin for VTE treatment among patients with SCD. This single-center retrospective study includes adult patients with SCD who were diagnosed with VTE. Data was obtained from review of electronic health records for the 6 months after VTE diagnosis. Among the 22 patients treated initially with a DOAC, 6 (27%) developed recurrent VTE, none experienced major bleeding, and 3 (14%) experienced clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB). Similarly, of 15 patients initially treated with warfarin, 3 (20%) developed a recurrent VTE, 1 (7%) experienced major bleeding, and 2 (13%) experienced CRNMB. Twelve patients received more than one oral anticoagulant during the study period, most commonly due to a recurrent VTE, concern for non-adherence, or subtherapeutic INR. Overall, the incidence of VTE recurrence and bleeding events were similar between groups, but occurred at a higher rate than those found in major clinical trials of anticoagulant agents. Prescribers should continue to individualize therapeutic decision-making regarding oral anticoagulant therapy for VTE treatment for individuals with SCD based on patient-specific factors and anticipated ability to adhere to the drug regimen or required monitoring.

Although the most commonly reported SCD complication among all patients was pain, patients who received ICT were less likely to experience pain and other complications than those who did not. These results highlight the need for increased patient and provider education on the importance of comprehensive disease management.

Introduction While treating patients (pts) with sickle cell disease (SCD) can be costly, costs are not evenly distributed across pts; rather, a minority of pts accounts for a majority of costs. Identifying those pts who consume a disproportionately large share of healthcare resources can assist payers and providers in directing appropriate and targeted interventions to deliver better pt care with lower costs. The objective of this study was to understand characteristics of pts who have increased utilization of inpatient (IP) and emergency department (ED) resources in a population of SCD pts ≥16 years old. Method Medical records of 254 SCD pts ≥16 years old were retrospectively reviewed between 8/2011 and 7/2012 at three US tertiary care centers. The high utilization threshold was derived from the literature and defined as pts with ≥ 5 days of IP+ED care (assuming 1 day/ED visit) for SCD-related complications per year (high utilizer group). Pts were also classified into cohorts based on cumulative blood transfusion units and use iron chelation therapy (ICT): <15 units, no ICT (Cohort 1 [C1]), ≥15 units, no ICT (Cohort 2 [C2]), and ≥15 units, with ICT (Cohort 3 [C3]). SCD complication rates were expressed as the number of SCD complications per pt per year (PPPY); rate ratios (RRs) were used for cohort comparisons. A logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with high utilization of IP+ED care. Results Of the 254 pts (C1: 69, C2: 91, C3: 94), 30% (n =76) were classified as high utilizers (C1: 14 [18.4%], C2: 37 [48.7%], C3: 25 [32.9%]). Patients in the high utilizer group were younger (median [range] (21 years old [16-65], vs. 23 years old [16-59]) and had shorter follow-up (4.2 years [0.6-23.9], vs. 5.4 years [0.5-33.3]) compared to the rest of the sample. Those in the high utilizer group accounted for 68% of all SCD-related complications and over 88% of all IP+ED days for treatment of these complications. Similar to the rest of the sample, pain (81%) and infection (7%) were the two key complications seen in this high utilizer group. The rate of IP +ED days was significantly higher among the high utilizer group with 16.63 [16.28-16.99] IP+ED days PPPY compared to 0.89 [0.84-0.94] PPPY for other pts. Similarly, the high utilizer group had 4.58 [95% CI: 4.39-4.76] IP+ED visits PPPY, compared to 0.34 [0.31-0.37] visits PPPY for other pts (Table). Among regularly transfused pts (C2+C3) in the high utilizer group, those who received ICT had lower rates of IP+ED visits (C2 vs. C3 rate ratio [RR] [95% CI]: 1.31[1.20-1.44]), IP+ED days (C2 vs. C3 RR: 1.30 [1.24-1.36]), and readmission to IP+ED settings within 30 days (1.70 [1.49-1.93]) compared with those who did not (Table). History of infections (odds ratio: 7.45, p<0.0001) was associated with an increased risk of high utilization of IP+ED care. Conclusion Results from this study show that a relatively small fraction of SCD pts account for the majority of IP+ED visits. Moreover, among regularly transfused pts identified as high utilizers, those who received ICT had lower rates of IP+ED utilization than those who did not. Pts receiving ICT may also receive closer monitoring, which may help with early identification and intervention to delay or prevent the development of complications and improve outcomes. Closer management of pts with SCD, especially those at risk of becoming high utilizers, is critical to lowering IP+ED utilization and reducing the overall costs of care. Disclosures: Jordan: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy. Adams-Graves:Analysis Group, Inc.: Research Funding. Kanter-Washko:Analysis Group, Inc.: Research Funding. Oneal:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria; Analysis Group, Inc.: Research Funding. Sasane:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Vekeman:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Bieri:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Marcellari:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Magestro:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Adams:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Duh:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

No abstract

A143utilization over time among this high-need population in Ontario. Methods: A longitudinal HIV+ cohort study of Ontarians (N= 3,545) was undertaken from 2008-2012 by linking the Ontario HIV Treatment Network(OHTN) Cohort Study and the administrative health databases. Co-morbid depression defined based on either the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale(Scores> = 20) or the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale(Scores> = 23) was assessed from the yearly interviews. Patterns of emergency and inpatient care utilization were assessed during the 12 months following each interview. Urgent and non-urgent emergency room visits were defined using the five-level Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale(CTAS). Generalized mixed effect regressions were used to examine associations between the acute care utilization and the co-morbid depression over time. Results: At baseline, 950(27%) were identified with co-morbid depression. The HIV+ patients with comorbid depression were more likely to be age< 50 years(OR:1.6;95%CI:1.4-1.9), female(OR:1.6;95%CI:1.3-1.9), have CD4 count< 200cell/mm 3 (OR:1.3;95%CI:1.1-1.7) and have used non-medical drugs in past 6 months(OR:1.8;95%CI:1.5-2.1). The prevalence of the use of urgent and non-urgent emergency room and inpatient care for those with co-morbid depression were 58vs.42%,44vs.31%,13vs.7% when compared to their non-depressed counterparts. Over the five-year follow-up, those with co-morbid depression were more likely to use urgent (Adjusted OR (aOR):1.7;95%CI:1.2-2.5) and non-urgent (aOR:1.4;95%CI:1.03-2.0) emergency services and to be hospitalized (aOR: 1.6;95%CI:1.3-2.1) when compared to their nondepressed counterparts after controlling for socio-demographics, clinical markers, and behaviourial confounders. ConClusions: Co-morbid depression experienced in persons living with HIV significantly increases the use of acute care services. Incorporation of strategies in managing and detecting co-morbid depression would be important to deliver successful HIV care in Ontario.