Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Correction to: Drugs - Real World Outcomes (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-020-00183-x
Changes within text are indicated in bold.
Page 1, Abstract, Results section: The following sentence, which previously read:
“The oral treprostinil cohort had 66.9% lower total PAH-related healthcare costs (mean difference − $75,183; 95% confidence interval [CI] − 102,584 to − 49,771) and 70.6% lower PAH-related pharmacy costs (mean difference − $76,439; 95% CI − 104,512 to − 51,458) than the selexipag cohort, with similar differences in all-cause healthcare and pharmacy costs.”
should read:
“The selexipag cohort had 66.9% higher total PAH-related healthcare costs (mean difference $75,183; 95% confidence interval [CI] 49,771 to 102,584) and 70.6% higher PAH-related pharmacy costs (mean difference $76,439; 95% CI 51,458 to 104,512) than the oral treprostinil cohort, with similar differences in all-cause healthcare and pharmacy costs.”
Page 3, Methods, Section 2.2, top of column 2, lines 1–2: The following sentence that previously read:
“PAH-related HCRU was identified using PH diagnosis codes in any position.”
should read:
“PAH-related HCRU was identified using PH diagnosis codes in the primary diagnosis code field.”
Page 4, Results section, column 1, paragraph 1, lines 18–22: The following sentence that previously read:
“There was a 10% difference in the proportion of patients who underwent RHC in the 6 months prior to being prescribed oral prostacyclin, although this difference did not meet statistical significance (47.7 vs. 36.5% for oral treprostinil and selexipag, respectively; p = 0.07).”
should read:
“There was an 11.2% absolute difference in the proportion of patients who underwent RHC in the 6 months prior to being prescribed oral prostacyclin, although this difference did not meet statistical significance (47.7 vs. 36.5% for oral treprostinil and selexipag, respectively; p = 0.07).”
Page 6, Sect. 3.3 Healthcare Resource Use and Costs, column 1, paragraph 2, lines 7–10: The following sentence that previously read:
“Notably, a higher proportion of patients in the oral treprostinil cohort received RHC during the post-index period compared with the selexipag cohort (13.2 vs. 5.6%, respectively; p = 0.039).”
should read:
“Notably, a higher proportion of patients in the oral treprostinil cohort received RHC during the post-index period compared with the selexipag cohort (13.1 vs. 5.6%, respectively; p = 0.039).”
Page 6, Sect. 3.3 Healthcare Resource Use and Costs, column 2, last paragraph: The following sentence that previously read:
“After adjustment for covariates, treatment with oral treprostinil was associated with 51.4% lower total all-cause healthcare costs than treatment with selexipag(difference in mean − $73,680; 95% confidence interval [CI] − 103,702 to − 43,963) (Fig. 4). This difference in all-cause healthcare costs was largely driven by all-cause pharmacy costs, which were 68.2% lower in patients being treated with oral treprostinil than in those being treated with selexipag(difference in mean − $77,654; 95% CI − 105,392 to − 52,118). Treatment with oral treprostinil was associated with 66.9% lower total PAH-related healthcare costs compared with being treated with selexipag(difference in mean − $75,183; 95% CI − 102,584 to − 49,771). Differences in PAH-related healthcare costs were largely driven by PAH-related pharmacy costs, which were 70.62% lower in patients treated with oral treprostinil than in those treated with selexipag(difference in mean − $76,439; 95% CI − 104,512 to − 51,458).”
should read:
“After adjustment for covariates, treatment with selexipag was associated with 51.4% higher total all-cause healthcare costs than treatment with oral treprostinil(difference in mean $73,680; 95% confidence interval [CI] $43,963 to $103,702) (Fig. 4). This difference in all-cause healthcare costs was largely driven by all-cause pharmacy costs, which were 68.2% higher in patients being treated with selexipag than in those being treated with oral treprostinil(difference in mean $77,654; 95% CI $52,118 to $105,392). Treatment with selexipag was associated with 66.9% higher total PAH-related healthcare costs compared with being treated with oral treprostinil(difference in mean $75,183; 95% CI $49,771 to $102,584). Differences in PAH-related healthcare costs were largely driven by PAH-related pharmacy costs, which were 70.62% higher in patients treated with selexipag than in those treated with oral treprostinil(difference in mean $76,439; 95% CI $51,458 to $104,512).”
Page 7, Table 2, ‘Healthcare resource utilization during the post-index period’: The cell entry in the ‘p value’ column, ‘Inpatient visits’ row, which was previously blank, should read “0.073”
Page 8, Discussion section, column 1, first paragraph, lines 9–19: The following sentence that previously read:
“Results suggest that treatment with oral treprostinil was associated with 51.4% lower total all-cause healthcare costs compared with treatment with selexipag, and this was largely driven by all-cause pharmacy costs, which were 68.2% lower in patients treated with oral treprostinil than in those treated with selexipag. Treatment with oral treprostinil was associated with 66.9% lower total PAH-related healthcare costs compared with treatment with selexipag, again largely driven by 70.6% lower PAH-related pharmacy costs in patients being treated with oral treprostinil than in those being treated with selexipag.”
should read:
“Results suggest that treatment with selexipag was associated with 51.4% higher total all-cause healthcare costs compared with treatment with oral treprostinil, and this was largely driven by all-cause pharmacy costs, which were 68.2% higher in patients treated with selexipag than in those treated with oral treprostinil. Treatment with selexipag was associated with 66.9% higher total PAH-related healthcare costs compared with treatment with oral treprostinil, again largely driven by 70.6% higher PAH-related pharmacy costs in patients being treated with selexipag than in those being treated with oral treprostinil.”
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Dean, B.B., Saundankar, V., Stafkey-Mailey, D. et al. Correction to: Medication Adherence and Healthcare Costs Among Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Treated with Oral Prostacyclins: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Drugs - Real World Outcomes 7, 241–242 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-020-00198-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-020-00198-4