Real-world lessons: combining cancer registry and retail pharmacy data for oral cancer drugs.

BACKGROUND: Recent cancer care advances have introduced new oral therapies, and yet population registries lack detailed treatment data, hampering investigations into therapy uptake, adherence, and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the representativeness and completeness of linking Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data with data from two major retail pharmacy chains, collectively covering a large segment of the US market. METHODS: A deterministic data linkage between 11 SEER cancer registries and retail pharmacy data (excluding mail order fills) was conducted for individuals diagnosed with selected cancers from 2013 to 2017, with follow-up through 2019. Descriptive characteristics of the linked and unlinked populations were examined. In a selected subcohort of older women (aged ≥65) with first and only primary breast cancer who had Medicare Part D claims for tamoxifen, we further validated the linkage using Medicare Part D event data as the reference standard. RESULTS: Among 758 068 eligible individuals, only 6.4% were linked to CVS/Walgreens data; the linkage percentage varied by age, sex, race, ethnicity, registry, and cancer type. Within the subcohort of 5963 older women with breast cancer and a claim for tamoxifen in Part D data, 25% were identified as tamoxifen users in retail pharmacy data. Out of these 1490 women, 749 (50.3%) had complete longitudinal tamoxifen dispensing information from retail pharmacy data. CONCLUSION: Retail pharmacy data show promise in identifying oral anticancer treatments, enhancing SEER registry efforts, but they require further validation. We propose an evaluation framework, sharing insights and potential use cases for this resource.

Expanding Medicare Coverage Of Anti-Obesity Medicines Could Increase Annual Spending By $3.1 Billion To $6.1 Billion.

The introduction of highly effective anti-obesity drugs, such as Wegovy, has prompted debate over Medicare's prohibition on coverage of such products. In this study, we estimated the costs of allowing Medicare coverage of anti-obesity medications. Our analysis incorporated data on drug costs, real-world adherence rates, and potential changes to other health care spending. Using Medicare claims, we also documented beneficiaries' eligibility for nearly identical products approved for different indications. Assuming that anti-obesity drugs were covered in 2025 and that 5 percent or 10 percent of newly eligible patients were prescribed one, annual Part D costs were estimated to increase by $3.1 billion or $6.1 billion, respectively. The marginal costs of this policy could fall by as much as 62.5 percent from baseline estimates if products were approved for additional indications in coming years because these additional conditions are common among people with obesity. This would increase Medicare spending but would occur regardless of a policy change. Longer-term estimates come with significant uncertainty about utilization and price changes, but these results are consistent with this policy change likely increasing Medicare costs by the low to middle tens of billions of dollars over ten years.

Total cost of care of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries participating in an appointment-based model in a national pharmacy chain.

BACKGROUND: The appointment-based model (ABM) is a pharmacy service to improve medication-related health outcomes. ABM involves medication synchronization and medication review, plus other services such as medication reconciliation, medication therapy management, vaccine administration, and multimedication packaging. ABM can improve medication adherence, but the economic impact is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a national pharmacy chain's ABM program for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries on total cost of care (TCOC). METHODS: This study analyzed administrative claims data from April 7, 2017, through February 29, 2020, for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with Part D using a propensity score-matched cohort design. The national pharmacy chain provided a list of ABM participants. Eligibility criteria for the ABM and control (non-ABM) groups included age 65 years or older on the index date (initial participation, ABM; random fill date, control) and continuous enrollment from at least 6 months pre-index (baseline) date through at least 6 months post-index (follow-up) date. Medical inflation-adjusted (2020) TCOC was calculated as the sum of all health care spending from Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with Part D plan and patient paid amounts, standardized to per patient per month (PPPM), during the follow-up period. Secondary outcomes included medication adherence calculated across prevalent maintenance therapeutic classes using proportion of days covered (PDC). RESULTS: Each group contained 5,225 patients with balanced characteristics after matching: 64% female, 73% White, mean age 75 years, mean Quan-Charlson comorbidity index score 0.9, and hypertension and dyslipidemia, each >65%. Median baseline all-cause PPPM health care costs in the ABM and control groups, respectively, were $517 and $548 ($221 and $234 medical, $135 and $164 pharmacy). Baseline PDC of at least 80% was 83% in the ABM group and, similarly, 84% in the control group. The mean (SD) follow-up was 604 (155) days for the ABM group and 598 (151) days for the control group. During the follow-up period, the median PPPM TCOC for the ABM group was $656 and was $723 for the control group (P = 0.011). Median pharmacy costs were also significantly less in the ABM group ($161 vs $193, P < 0.001), whereas median medical costs were $328 in the ABM group and $358 among controls (P = 0.254). More patients in the ABM group were adherent during follow-up, with 84% achieving PDC of at least 80% vs 82% among controls (P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The ABM program was associated with significantly lower follow-up median total costs (medical and pharmacy), driven primarily by pharmacy costs. More patients were adherent in the ABM program. Payers and pharmacies can use this evidence to assess ABM programs for their members.

Is It Working? Evaluating The First Round Of Medicare Drug Price Negotiations.

In the short and longer terms, the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program should be evaluated based on four categories of outcomes: beneficiary access, prices and spending, promotion of value, and effects on innovation.

Trends in Common Ownership among Insurers in Medicare Part D.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies document the rising prevalence of common ownership by institutional investors in specific industries. Those investors offer products, such as mutual and index funds, to trade securities on behalf of others and often own shares of multiple firms in the same industry to diversify portfolios. However, at present, few studies focus on common ownership trends in health care. OBJECTIVES: This paper examines institutional investors' common ownership in the major insurers offering plans in the Medicare Part D stand-alone prescription drug plan (PDP) market between 2013 and 2020. RESEARCH DESIGN: Using data from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) database and the Center for Research in Securities Prices, we compute the percentages of outstanding shares of each insurer owned by institutional investors. Data visualization and network analysis are employed to assess the trends in common ownership among major insurers. RESULTS: We document a high prevalence of and substantial increase in shared institutional investors in the PDP market. From 2013 to 2020, the degree of common ownership increased by 7% on average, and the common ownership network became more connected. Common ownership also varies across the 34 PDP regions depending on their reliance on listed insurers, that are traded in the stock exchange, offering stand-alone PDPs. CONCLUSIONS: High and rising common ownership in the Medicare Part D PDP market raises policy questions about potential effects on plan offerings, premiums, and quality for consumers.

Frailty, Specialized Care, and Sociodemographic Factors: Disparities in Oral Pharmacotherapy Class Utilization Among Medicare Part D Beneficiaries With Overactive Bladder in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence of frailty among Medicare beneficiaries with overactive bladder (OAB), analyze oral therapy patterns, and examine potential disparities in treatment. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized the 20% Research Identifiable File Medicare Part D prescription claims dataset (2013-2018). Using the Claims-Based Frailty Index (CFI), Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years old with OAB were categorized as not frail (CFI <0.15), prefrail (0.15 ≤CFI<0.25), and frail (CFI >0.25). Logistic regression models assessed associations between frailty and pharmacotherapy utilization. RESULTS: Among 111,761 patients (15.8% of the OAB cohort) receiving oral pharmacotherapy (anticholinergic oral medications or mirabegron), 71% were women, 83% were White, and 11.9% were frail. After controlling for age, copayments and dual eligibility status, frail status (OR 1.16; 95% CI [1.09-1.24]), urology (OR 2.05; 95% CI [1.94-2.16]) or gynecology (OR 1.74; 95% CI [1.6-1.9]) prescribers and residing in the Southern United States (OR 1.53; CI [1.49-1.61]) were associated with higher likelihood of mirabegron utilization. Black (OR 0.79; 95% CI [0.74-0.85]) and American Indian/Alaska Native (OR 0.54; 95% CI [0.39-0.74]) patients were less likely to utilize Mirabegron than White beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: Frail beneficiaries and those with urology and gynecology prescribers showed higher likelihoods of beta-3 agonist utilization. Despite adjustments, Black and American Indian/Alaskan Native patients were less likely to fill mirabegron prescriptions, suggesting disparities in treatment. Our findings highlight the need for policies, interventions, and initiatives to promote equitable OAB oral therapy utilization in vulnerable populations.

Affordability and adherence gains for Medicare Part D low-income subsidy recipients when low-income subsidy benefits expanded in 2024.

BACKGROUND: The lowest-income beneficiaries enrolled in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program receive "full subsidies" that waive the premium and deductible and impose minimal copayments. Those with slightly higher incomes and assets may be eligible for "partial subsidies." Prior to 2024, individuals receiving partial subsidies faced reduced Part D premiums and deductibles and paid 15% coinsurance. Under provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, recipients of partial subsidies were upgraded to full subsidies beginning in 2024. The objective of this pilot study was to assess whether the new policy is likely to reduce cost-related nonadherence to prescribed medications- a common problem faced by older adults even among those receiving subsidies. OBJECTIVE: To compare cost-related nonadherence among partial- vs full-subsidy recipients with similar characteristics. METHODS: We used 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data for the study. The Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey is uniquely suited for this work because it contains administrative data on low-income subsidy enrollment plus extensive survey-based information on financial resources necessary to establish program eligibility and rates of cost-related nonadherence. Explanatory variables included sociodemographic characteristics, economic resources, work status, and health variables. RESULTS: We found that the partial-subsidy group reported significantly more cost-related nonadherence (39% vs 22%; P = 0.01) arising both from a lower propensity to fill some prescriptions (23% vs 12%; P = 0.03) and to more delays in filling others (29% vs 8%; P = 0.03). The differences were more pronounced for women and racial and ethnic minority groups in contrast to men and majority populations, respectively. Because the study samples were small, we could not conduct a detailed regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of cost-related nonadherence effects associated with partial-subsidy cost sharing suggests that the Inflation Reduction Act policy to expand low-income subsidies may boost medication adherence, most notably among women and racial and ethnic minority groups.

Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Type 2 Diabetes Medications When Aging Into Medicare.

Importance: For people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), out-of-pocket medication costs may influence medication choice, adherence, and overall diabetes management and progression. Little is known about how these costs change as insured people enter Medicare at age 65 years, when coinsurance in the coverage gap and catastrophic phases of Part D coverage can be increased greatly by use of insulin and newer, branded medications (eg, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors). Objective: To identify whether reaching age 65 years is associated with T2D medication out-of-pocket costs and utilization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study (2012-2020) featuring 7 years of follow-up used prescription drug claims data from the TriNetX Diamond Network. Participants included people in the US with diagnosed T2D, and claims for T2D medications were observed both before and after age 65 years. Data analysis was performed from October 2022 to September 2023. Exposure: Reaching age 65 years, according to participants' year of birth. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was patient out-of-pocket costs for T2D drugs per quarter (inflation adjusted to 2020 dollars). Utilization, measured as binary utilization of specific classes, and the number of claims for mutually exclusive classes and combinations of classes were also examined. All outcomes were examined using regression discontinuity design. Results: In claims data for 129 997 individuals with T2D diagnosed at ages 58 to 72 years (mean [SD] age, 65.50 [2.95] years; 801 235 female [50.9%]), reaching age 65 years was associated with an increase of $23.04 (95% CI, $19.86-$26.22) in mean quarterly out-of-pocket costs for T2D drugs, and an increase of $56.36 (95% CI, $51.48-$61.23) at the 95th percentile of spending, after utilization adjustment. Utilization decreased by 5.3% at age 65 years, from 3.40 claims per quarter (95% CI, 3.38-3.42 claims per quarter) to 3.22 claims per quarter (95% CI, 3.21-3.24 claims per quarter), but a shift in composition of utilization, including increased insulin use, was associated with additional increases in patient costs. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of individuals with T2D, the increase in spending upon reaching age 65 years (when most people enroll in Medicare) was associated with patient coinsurance in the coverage gap and catastrophic coverage phases of Medicare Part D. The increased patient cost burden at age 65 years and a modest reduction in overall T2D drug utilization suggest that as people with T2D age into Medicare, there is potentially an increase in nonadherence and diabetes complications.

Use of Muscle Relaxants After Surgery in Traditional Medicare Part D Enrollees.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons have come under increased scrutiny for postoperative pain management, particularly for opioid prescribing. To decrease opioid use but still provide pain control, nonopioid medications such as muscle relaxants are being used, which can be harmful in older adults. However, the prevalence of muscle relaxant prescribing, trends in use over time, and risk of prolonged use are unknown. STUDY DESIGN: Using a 20% representative Medicare sample, we conducted a retrospective analysis of muscle relaxant prescribing to patients ≥ 65 years of age. We merged patient data from Medicare Carrier, MedPAR, and Outpatient Files with Medicare Part D for the years 2013-2018. A total of 14 surgical procedures were included to represent a wide range of anatomic regions and specialties. RESULTS: The study cohort included 543,929 patients. Of the cohort, 8111 (1.5%) received a new muscle relaxant prescription at discharge. Spine procedures accounted for 12% of all procedures but 56% of postoperative prescribing. Overall, the rate of prescribing increased over the time period (1.4-2.0%, p < 0.001), with increases in prescribing primarily in the spine (7-9.6%, p < 0.0001) and orthopedic procedure groups (0.9-1.4%, p < 0.0001). Of patients discharged with a new muscle relaxant prescription, 10.7% had prolonged use. CONCLUSIONS: The use of muscle relaxants in the postoperative period for older adults is low, but increasing over time, especially in ortho and spine procedures. While pain control after surgery is crucial, surgeons should carefully consider the risks of muscle relaxant use, especially for older adults who are at higher risk for medication-related problems.

Impact of comprehensive medication reviews on potentially inappropriate medication discontinuation in Medicare beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) is associated with increased risk of hospitalizations and emergency room visits and varies by racial and ethnic subgroups. Medicare's nationwide medication therapy management (MTM) program requires that Part D plans offer an annual comprehensive medication review (CMR) to all beneficiaries who qualify, and provides a platform to reduce PIM use. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of CMR on PIM discontinuation in Medicare beneficiaries and whether this differed by race or ethnicity. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of community-dwelling Medicare Part D beneficiaries ≥66 years of age who were eligible for MTM from 2013 to 2019 based on 5% Medicare fee-for-service claims data linked to the 100% MTM data file. Among those using a PIM, MTM-eligible CMR recipients were matched to non-recipients via sequential stratification. The probability of PIM discontinuation was estimated using regression models that pooled yearly subcohorts accounting for within-beneficiary correlations. The most common PIMs that were discontinued after CMR were reported. RESULTS: We matched 24,368 CMR recipients to 24,368 CMR non-recipients during the observation period. Median age was 74-75, 35% were males, most were White beneficiaries (86%-87%), and the median number of PIMs was 1. In adjusted analyses, CMR receipt was positively associated with PIM discontinuation (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.20-1.32). There was no evidence of differential impact of CMR by race or ethnicity. The PIMs most commonly discontinued after CMR were glimepiride, zolpidem, digoxin, amitriptyline, and nitrofurantoin. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries who are using a PIM, CMR receipt was associated with PIM discontinuation, suggesting that greater CMR use could facilitate PIM reduction for all racial and ethnic groups.

Antiretroviral Therapy Use and Disparities Among Medicare Beneficiaries with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended for all people with HIV. Understanding ART use among Medicare beneficiaries with HIV is therefore critically important for improving quality and equity of care among the growing population of older adults with HIV. However, a comprehensive national evaluation of filled ART prescriptions among Medicare beneficiaries is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in ART use among Medicare beneficiaries with HIV from 2013 to 2019 and to evaluate whether racial and ethnic disparities in ART use are narrowing over time. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SUBJECTS: Traditional Medicare beneficiaries with Part D living with HIV in 2013-2019. MAIN MEASURES: Months of filled ART prescriptions each year. KEY RESULTS: Compared with beneficiaries not on ART, beneficiaries on ART were younger, less likely to be Black (41.6% vs. 47.0%), and more likely to be Hispanic (13.1% vs. 9.7%). While the share of beneficiaries who filled ART prescriptions for 10 + months/year improved (+ 0.48 percentage points/year [p.p.y.], 95% CI 0.34-0.63, p < 0.001), 25.8% of beneficiaries did not fill ART for 10 + months in 2019. Between 2013 and 2019, the proportion of beneficiaries who filled ART for 10 + months improved for Black beneficiaries (65.8 to 70.3%, + 0.66 p.p.y., 95% CI 0.43-0.89, p < 0.001) and White beneficiaries (74.8 to 77.4%, + 0.38 p.p.y.; 95% CI 0.19-0.58, p < 0.001), while remaining stable for Hispanic beneficiaries (74.5 to 75.0%, + 0.12 p.p.y., 95% CI - 0.24-0.49, p = 0.51). Although Black-White disparities in ART use narrowed over time, the share of beneficiaries who filled ART prescriptions for 10 + months/year was significantly lower among Black beneficiaries relative to White beneficiaries each year. CONCLUSIONS: ART use improved from 2013 to 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries with HIV. However, about 25% of beneficiaries did not consistently fill ART prescriptions within a given year. Despite declining differences between Black and White beneficiaries, concerning disparities in ART use persist.

Price benchmarks of drugs selected for Medicare price negotiation and their therapeutic alternatives.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are currently negotiating prices with pharmaceutical manufacturers for the first 10 Part D drugs selected for Medicare drug price negotiation. Non-publicly available data, including the net prices of selected drugs and their therapeutic alternatives, will play a central role in the determination of the maximum fair prices (MFPs). OBJECTIVE: To estimate price benchmarks involved in the derivation of the starting point of the CMS initial price offer for the 10 drugs selected for Medicare price negotiation. METHODS: For the 10 drugs selected for negotiation, we reported (1) the list price, (2) the net price after manufacturer discounts, (3) the maximum negotiated price based on the minimum statutory discount, and (4) the ceiling of the MFP, estimated as the lowest of the latter 2. We also estimated net prices for therapeutic alternatives to the selected drugs. Net prices were estimated using peer-reviewed methodology that isolates commercial discounts negotiated between payers and manufacturers from mandatory discounts under government programs. All price benchmarks were estimated at the product level, for 30-day equivalent dosing, using 2021 data. RESULTS: 6 products (apixaban, rivaroxaban, empagliflozin, sacubitril/valsartan, etanercept, and insulin aspart) had therapeutic alternatives with lower net prices, which will be integrated with clinical benefit data in the derivation of initial price offers. The other 4 products (ustekinumab, ibrutinib, sitagliptin, and dapagliflozin) had therapeutic alternatives with higher net prices than the drugs selected for negotiation. For ibrutinib and ustekinumab, prices based on the minimum discounts were considerably lower than the estimated net prices and will likely set the starting point of the initial price offer. For dapagliflozin and sitagliptin, the starting point of the initial price offer will likely resemble their existing net prices. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses identify different negotiation scenarios for the first 10 drugs selected for Medicare price negotiation, based on key elements involved in the derivation of the initial price offer. Our analyses can help improve transparency in the negotiation process, because the CMS is not required to reveal the information used in the derivation of price offers.

Formulary Coverage of Brand-Name Adalimumab and Biosimilars Across Medicare Part D Plans.

This study examines formulary coverage of brand-name adalimumab and biosimilars across Medicare Part D plans.

Racial and ethnic disparities related to the Medicare Part D Medication Therapy Management Program.

Medicare's Part D Medication Therapy Management (MTM) programs serve approximately 4.5 million eligible beneficiaries. Prior research suggested that the thresholds to enter Part D MTM programs would disproportionately favor White beneficiaries compared with Black or Hispanic beneficiaries. This article summarizes those initial studies and compares the results with more recent analyses of racial and ethnic differences in MTM program enrollment, which, in general, show higher odds of MTM enrollment for minority beneficiaries compared with White beneficiaries. Disparities in the utilization of comprehensive medication review (CMR), a core MTM service, are also discussed. Although trends vary, disparities exist for various minority groups. For example, Black beneficiaries and Hispanic beneficiaries are less likely to be offered a CMR compared with White beneficiaries. Additionally, minority (Asian, Hispanic, and North American Native) beneficiaries are less likely to receive a CMR after being offered the service compared with White beneficiaries. Black, Hispanic, and Asian beneficiaries are more likely than White beneficiaries to have a longer duration between MTM enrollment and CMR offer. There is also a distinct difference in the type of pharmacist (ie, plan pharmacist, MTM vendor pharmacist, or community pharmacist) completing the CMR for certain racial and ethnic groups. For example, compared with White beneficiaries, Black beneficiaries were less likely to receive a CMR from a community pharmacist, whereas Asian beneficiaries were more likely.

Benefit Design And Biosimilar Coverage In Medicare Part D: Evidence And Implications From Recent Reforms.

There is substantial disparity between Medicare Part D and employer-sponsored health insurance plans in the coverage of biosimilars and their reference biologics. These disparities may be due to design elements of Part D plans that encourage the adoption of more expensive biologic drugs. We undertook several analyses to illustrate the dynamics of benefit design incentives over time, compare formulary coverage in Part D plans with that of employer-sponsored plans, and study how the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 affected Part D formulary coverage. Using these analyses of Part D reforms enacted through the Bipartisan Budget Act, we discuss the implications of elements of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 that will be implemented in 2025. Biosimilar coverage increased by 23 percentage points five quarters after the Bipartisan Budget Act was implemented. We predict that the Inflation Reduction Act will also have a positive effect on biosimilar coverage. Given ample evidence of a relationship between drug coverage and utilization, our results suggest that Medicare patients and the federal government could realize substantial savings if Part D formularies resembled those of employer-sponsored plans.

Role of Specialty Drugs in Rising Drug Prices for Medicare Part D.

Importance: Prices for brand-name drugs affect both federal spending and out-of-pocket liability for Medicare Part D enrollees. Objective: To examine how prices for brand-name drugs, net of rebates and discounts, have changed from 2010 to 2019 and to examine the role of specialty drugs in those changes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study involved a descriptive analysis of prescription drug spending and prices between 2010 and 2019. The universe of prescription drug event data from those years were combined with confidential data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services on rebates and discounts that manufacturers and pharmacies pay to Medicare Part D plans to calculate rebate percentages, net spending, and net prices at the drug level. Specialty drugs were identified using information from IQVIA, allowing for a stratified analysis by specialty status. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to March 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Average prices (net of rebates and discounts in 2019 US dollars) and average annual price growth for brand-name prescription drugs, overall and separately for specialty and nonspecialty drugs. Results: Average net prices for brand-name drugs doubled from 2010 to 2019 (from $167 to $370). Growth in specialty drug prices was an underlying factor in those increases: average annual price growth was 13.2% for specialty drugs compared with 2.6% for nonspecialty drugs. Price growth for specialty drugs over the decade was smaller than what the Congressional Budget Office reported for the 2010 to 2015 period (increase of 22.3% per year vs 4.5% per year for nonspecialty drug prices), suggesting that price growth slowed after 2015. Drugs that treat hepatitis C contributed to that difference because prices for those drugs were initially high and then subsequently fell. Absent those drugs, price growth for specialty drugs averaged 18.1% in the first half of the decade and 6.9% in the second half. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study show that prices for specialty drugs have continued to increase over time in the Medicare Part D program, which contributes to high out-of-pocket liability for users of those drugs in addition to US federal budgetary expenditures.

Comprehensive Medication Review Completion Rates and Disparities After Medicare Star Rating Measure.

Importance: Comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) are offered to qualifying US Medicare beneficiaries annually to optimize medication regimens and therapeutic outcomes. In 2016, Medicare adopted CMR completion as a Star Rating quality measure to encourage the use of CMRs. Objective: To examine trends in CMR completion rates before and after 2016 and whether racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in CMR completion changed. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study using interrupted time-series analysis examined 2013 to 2020 annual cohorts of community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 years and older eligible for a CMR as determined by Part D plans and by objective minimum eligibility criteria. Data analysis was conducted from September 2022 to February 2024. Exposure: Adoption of CMR completion as a Star Rating quality measure in 2016. Main Outcome and Measures: CMR completion modeled via generalized estimating equations. Results: The study included a total of 561 950 eligible beneficiaries, with 253 561 in the 2013 to 2015 cohort (median [IQR] age, 75.8 [70.7-82.1] years; 90 778 male [35.8%]; 6795 Asian [2.7%]; 24 425 Black [9.6%]; 7674 Hispanic [3.0%]; 208 621 White [82.3%]) and 308 389 in the 2016 to 2020 cohort (median [IQR] age, 75.1 [70.4-80.9] years; 126 730 male [41.1%]; 8922 Asian [2.9%]; 27 915 Black [9.1%]; 7635 Hispanic [2.5%]; 252 781 White [82.0%]). The unadjusted CMR completion rate increased from 10.2% (7379 of 72 225 individuals) in 2013 to 15.6% (14 185 of 90 847 individuals) in 2015 and increased further to 35.8% (18 376 of 51 386 individuals) in 2020, in part because the population deemed by Part D plans to be MTM-eligible decreased by nearly half after 2015 (90 487 individuals in 2015 to 51 386 individuals in 2020). Among a simulated cohort based on Medicare minimum eligibility thresholds, the unadjusted CMR completion rate increased but to a lesser extent, from 4.4% in 2013 to 12.6% in 2020. Compared with White beneficiaries, Asian and Hispanic beneficiaries experienced greater increases in likelihood of CMR completion after 2016 but remained less likely to complete a CMR. Dual-Medicaid enrollees also experienced greater increases in likelihood of CMR completion as compared with those without either designation, but still remained less likely to complete CMR. Conclusion and Relevance: This study found that adoption of CMR completion as a Star Rating quality measure was associated with higher CMR completion rates. The increase in CMR completion rates was achieved partly because Part D plans used stricter eligibility criteria to define eligible patients. Reductions in disparities for eligible Asian, Hispanic, and dual-Medicaid enrollees were seen, but not eliminated. These findings suggest that quality measures can inform plan behavior and could be used to help address disparities.

Shingles Vaccination in Medicare Part D After Inflation Reduction Act Elimination of Cost Sharing.

This cross-sectional study uses data from retail pharmacies to examine shingles vaccine uptake among Medicare Part D beneficiaries following an IRA policy to eliminate cost sharing.