Impact of High Deductible Health Plans on U.S. Adults With Chronic Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pain affects an estimated 20% of U.S. adults. Because high-deductible health plans have captured a growing share of the commercial insurance market, it is unknown how high-deductible health plans impact care for chronic pain. METHODS: Using 2007-2017 claims data from a large national commercial insurer, statistical analyses conducted in 2022-2023 estimated changes in enrollee outcomes before and after their firm began offering a high-deductible health plan compared with changes in outcomes in a comparison group of enrollees at firms never offering a high-deductible health plan. The sample included 757,530 commercially insured adults aged 18-64 years with headache, low back pain, arthritis, neuropathic pain, or fibromyalgia. Outcomes, measured at the enrollee year level, included the probability of receiving any chronic pain treatment, nonpharmacologic pain treatment, and opioid and nonopioid prescriptions; the number of nonpharmacologic pain treatment days; number and days' supply of opioid and nonopioid prescriptions; and total annual spending and out-of-pocket spending. RESULTS: High-deductible health plan offer was associated with a 1.2 percentage point reduction (95% CI= -1.8, -0.5) in the probability of any chronic pain treatment and an $11 increase (95% CI=$6, $15) in annual out-of-pocket spending on chronic pain treatments among those with any use, representing a 16% increase in average annual out-of-pocket spending over the pre-high deductible health plan offer annual average. Results were driven by changes in nonpharmacologic treatment use. CONCLUSIONS: By reducing the use of nonpharmacologic chronic pain treatments and marginally increasing out-of-pocket costs among those using these services, high-deductible health plans may discourage more holistic, integrated approaches to caring for patients with chronic pain conditions.

Receipt of Out-of-State Telemedicine Visits Among Medicare Beneficiaries During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, states implemented temporary changes allowing physicians without a license in their state to provide care to their residents. There is an ongoing debate at both the federal and state levels on whether to change licensure rules permanently to facilitate out-of-state telemedicine use. Objective: To describe out-of-state telemedicine use during the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of telemedicine visits included all patients with traditional Medicare from January through June 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Telemedicine visits from January through June 2021 where the patient's home address and the physician's practice address were in different states. Results: In describing which patients and specialties were using out-of-state telemedicine, we focused on the period between January to June 2021. We chose this period because it was after the turmoil of the early pandemic, when vaccines became widely available and the health care system had stabilized, but before many of the temporary licensing regulations began to lapse by mid-2021. In the first half of 2021, there were 8 392 092 patients with a telemedicine visit and, of these, 422 547 (5.0%) had 1 or more out-of-state telemedicine visits. Those who lived in a county close to a state border (within 15 miles) accounted for 57.2% of all out-of-state telemedicine visits. Among the out-of-state visits in this time period, 64.3% were with a primary care or mental health clinician. For 62.6% of all out-of-state visits, a prior in-person visit occurred between the same patient and clinician between March 2019 and the visit. The demographics and conditions treated were similar for within-state and out-of-state telemedicine visits, with several notable exceptions. Among those with a telemedicine visit, people in rural communities were more likely to receive out-of-state telemedicine care (33.8% vs 21.0%), and there was high of out-of-state telemedicine use for cancer care (9.8% of all telemedicine visits for cancer care). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that licensure restrictions of out-of-state telemedicine would have had the largest effect on patients who lived near a state border, those in rural locales, and those who received primary care or mental health treatment.

Many Medicare Beneficiaries Do Not Fill High-Price Specialty Drug Prescriptions.

For high-price drugs, Medicare Part D beneficiaries who do not receive a low-income subsidy must pay a percentage of the drug's price for each medication fill. Without that subsidy, which lowers out-of-pocket spending, beneficiaries typically pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for a single fill. We estimated the proportion of Part D beneficiaries in fee-for-service Medicare, with and without a subsidy, who do not initiate treatment (that is, do not fill a new prescription) with high-price Part D drugs newly prescribed for four conditions. Examining 17,076 new prescriptions issued between 2012 and 2018 for Part D beneficiaries from eleven geographically diverse health systems, we found that beneficiaries receiving subsidies were nearly twice as likely to obtain the prescribed drug within ninety days as those without subsidies. Among beneficiaries without subsidies, we observed noninitiation for 30 percent of prescriptions written for anticancer drugs, 22 percent for hepatitis C treatments, and more than 50 percent for disease-modifying therapies for either immune system disorders or hypercholesterolemia. Our findings support current legislative efforts to increase the accessibility of high-price medications by reducing out-of-pocket expenses under Medicare Part D, particularly for beneficiaries without low-income subsidies.

Comparison of Anticancer Medication Use and Spending Under US Oncology Parity Laws With and Without Out-of-Pocket Spending Caps.

Importance: By 2020, nearly all states had adopted oncology parity laws in the US, ensuring that patients in fully insured private health plans pay no more for orally administered anticancer medications (OAMs) than infused therapies. Between 2013 and mid-2017, 11 states implemented parity with out-of-pocket spending caps, which may further reduce patient out-of-pocket spending. Objective: To compare OAM uptake and out-of-pocket and health plan spending on OAMs in states with parity with and without spending caps, as well as to assess out-of-pocket spending for caps that apply predeductible vs postdeductible. Design Setting and Participants: This cohort study analyzed OAM users enrolled in commercial health plans offered by Aetna, Humana, and United Healthcare in the US from 2011 to 2017, aggregated by the Health Care Cost Institute, using difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) analysis. Data analysis was conducted between June and August 2020. Exposures: Time (before vs after parity), whether the state parity law included an out-of-pocket spending cap, and whether the plan was fully insured (subject to parity) or self-funded (not subject to parity). Among states with caps, out-of-pocket spending was also compared by whether the cap was applied predeductible and postdeductible vs only postdeductible. Main Outcomes and Measures: Monthly OAM prescription fills per 100 000 enrollees, per-OAM prescription-fill out-of-pocket spending, and annual per-user health plan spending on OAMs. Results: In this study of 23 states (11 with caps and 12 without) and 207 579 OAM prescription fills, caps were associated with a modest increase in OAM use (DDD, 7.40 [95% CI, 3.41-11.39] per 100 000 enrollees). There was no difference in mean out-of-pocket spending comparing fully insured and self-funded enrollees in states with vs without caps (DDD, -$17 [95% CI, -$57 to $24), but caps were associated with lower spending among OAM users in the 95th percentile of out-of-pocket spending by $831 (95% CI, -$871 to -$791) per OAM prescription fill. Caps applied predeductible were associated with greater out-of-pocket savings relative to caps applied only postdeductible. This included per-OAM prescription-fill savings at the 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles. Postparity, mean annual spending on OAMs among users was $113 589 in states without caps and $102 252 in states with caps, with no differences between groups (DDD, $9799 [95% CI, -$4230 to $23 829). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, among states adopting oncology parity laws between 2013 and 2017, mean out-of-pocket spending per OAM prescription fill and mean health plan spending among OAM users was similar in states with and without caps. However, enrollees in states with parity plus out-of-pocket caps had greater reductions in out-of-pocket spending among the highest spenders. Caps may offer improved financial protection for the highest spenders without increasing mean health plan spending on OAMs.

Oral Oncology Parity Laws, Medication Use, and Out-of-Pocket Spending for Patients With Blood Cancers.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we sought to estimate the association between oral oncology parity law adoption and anticancer medication use for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia or multiple myeloma. METHODS: This was an observational study of administrative claims from 2008 to 2017. Among individuals initiating tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for chronic myeloid leukemia or immunomodulatory drugs for multiple myeloma, we compared out-of-pocket spending, adherence, and discontinuation before and after parity among individuals in fully insured plans (subject to parity) vs self-funded plans (exempt from parity) using propensity-score weighted difference-in-differences regression models. RESULTS: Among patients initiating TKIs (N = 2082) or immunomodulatory drugs (N = 3326) there were no statistically significant differences in adherence or discontinuation associated with parity. The proportion of patients with initial out-of-pocket payments of $0 increased in fully insured plans after parity from 5.7% to 46.1% for TKIs and from 10.9% to 48.8% for immunomodulatory drugs. Relative to changes in self-funded plans, those in fully insured plans were 4.27 (95% CI = 2.20 to 8.27) times as likely to pay nothing for TKIs and 1.96 (95% CI = 1.40 to 2.73) times as likely to pay nothing for immunomodulatory drugs after parity. Similarly, the proportion paying more than $100 decreased from 30.3% to 24.7% for TKIs and 30.6% to 27.5% for immunomodulatory drugs in fully insured plans after parity. Relative to changes in self-funded plans, those in fully insured plans were 0.74 (95% CI = 0.54 to 1.01) times as likely to pay more than $100 for TKIs and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.68 to 1.06) times as likely to pay more than $100 for immunomodulatory drugs after parity. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients initiating TKIs or immunomodulatory drugs, parity was not associated with better adherence or less discontinuation of therapy but yielded decreased patient out-of-pocket payments for some patients.

Factors Contributing To Geographic Variation In End-Of-Life Expenditures For Cancer Patients.

Health care spending in the months before death varies across geographic areas but is not associated with outcomes. Using data from the prospective multiregional Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS) study, we assessed the extent to which such variation is explained by differences in patients' sociodemographic factors, clinical factors, and beliefs; physicians' beliefs; and the availability of services. Among 1,132 patients ages sixty-five and older who were diagnosed with lung or colorectal cancer in 2003-05, had advanced-stage cancer, died before 2013, and were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, mean expenditures in the last month of life were $13,663. Physicians in higher-spending areas reported less knowledge about and comfort with treating dying patients and less positive attitudes about hospice, compared to those in lower-spending areas. Higher-spending areas also had more physicians and fewer primary care providers and hospices in proportion to their total population than lower-spending areas did. Availability of services and physicians' beliefs, but not patients' beliefs, were important in explaining geographic variations in end-of-life spending. Enhanced training to better equip physicians to care for patients at the end of life and strategic resource allocation may have potential for decreasing unwarranted variation in care.

Out-of-Pocket and Health Care Spending Changes for Patients Using Orally Administered Anticancer Therapy After Adoption of State Parity Laws.

Importance: Oral anticancer medications are increasingly important but costly treatment options for patients with cancer. By early 2017, 43 states and Washington, DC, had passed laws to ensure patients with private insurance enrolled in fully insured health plans pay no more for anticancer medications administered by mouth than anticancer medications administered by infusion. Federal legislation regarding this issue is currently pending. Despite their rapid acceptance, the changes associated with state adoption of oral chemotherapy parity laws have not been described. Objective: To estimate changes in oral anticancer medication use, out-of-pocket spending, and health plan spending associated with oral chemotherapy parity law adoption. Design, Setting, and Participants: Analysis of administrative health plan claims data from 2008-2012 for 3 large nationwide insurers aggregated by the Health Care Cost Institute. Data analysis was first completed in 2015 and updated in 2017. The study population included 63 780 adults living in 1 of 16 states that passed parity laws during the study period and who received anticancer drug treatment for which orally administered treatment options were available. Study analysis used a difference-in-differences approach. Exposures: Time period before and after adoption of state parity laws, controlling for whether the patient was enrolled in a plan subject to parity (fully insured) or not (self-funded, exempt via the Employee Retirement Income Security Act). Main Outcomes and Measures: Oral anticancer medication use, out-of-pocket spending, and total health care spending. Results: Of the 63 780 adults aged 18 through 64 years, 51.4% participated in fully insured plans and 48.6% in self-funded plans (57.2% were women; 76.8% were aged 45 to 64 years). The use of oral anticancer medication treatment as a proportion of all anticancer treatment increased from 18% to 22% (adjusted difference-in-differences risk ratio [aDDRR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13; P = .34) comparing months before vs after parity. In plans subject to parity laws, the proportion of prescription fills for orally administered therapy without copayment increased from 15.0% to 53.0%, more than double the increase (12.3%-18.0%) in plans not subject to parity (P < .001). The proportion of patients with out-of-pocket spending of more than $100 per month increased from 8.4% to 11.1% compared with a slight decline from 12.0% to 11.7% in plans not subject to parity (P = .004). In plans subject to parity laws, estimated monthly out-of-pocket spending decreased by $19.44 at the 25th percentile, by $32.13 at the 50th percentile, and by $10.83 at the 75th percentile but increased at the 90th ($37.19) and 95th ($143.25) percentiles after parity (all P < .001, controlling for changes in plans not subject to parity). Parity laws did not increase 6-month total spending for users of any anticancer therapy or for users of oral anticancer therapy alone. Conclusions and Relevance: While oral chemotherapy parity laws modestly improved financial protection for many patients without increasing total health care spending, these laws alone may be insufficient to ensure that patients are protected from high out-of-pocket medication costs.

Diffusion of Bevacizumab Across Oncology Practices: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Technological advances can improve care and outcomes but are a primary driver of health care spending growth. Understanding diffusion and use of new oncology therapies is important, given substantial increases in prices and spending on such treatments. OBJECTIVES: Examine diffusion of bevacizumab, a novel (in 2004) and high-priced biologic cancer therapy, among US oncology practices during 2005-2012 and assess variation in use across practices. RESEARCH DESIGN: Population-based observational study. SETTING: A total of 2329 US practices providing cancer chemotherapy. PARTICIPANTS: Random 20% sample of 236,304 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged above 65 years in 2004-2012 undergoing infused chemotherapy for cancer. MEASURES: Diffusion of bevacizumab (cumulative time to first use and 10% use) in practices, variation in use across practices overall and by higher versus lower-value use. We used hierarchical models with practice random effects to estimate the between-practice variation in the probability of receiving bevacizumab and to identify factors associated with use. RESULTS: We observed relatively rapid diffusion of bevacizumab, particularly in independent practices and larger versus smaller practices. We observed substantial variation in use; the adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of bevacizumab use was 2.90 higher (2.73-3.08) for practices 1 SD above versus one standard deviation below the mean. Variation was less for higher-value [odds ratio=2.72 (2.56-2.89)] than lower-value uses [odds ratio=3.61 (3.21-4.06)]. CONCLUSIONS: Use of bevacizumab varied widely across oncology practices, particularly for lower-value indications. These findings suggest that interventions targeted to practices have potential for decreasing low-value use of high-cost cancer therapies.

Medicaid Coverage Expansions and Cigarette Smoking Cessation Among Low-income Adults.

INTRODUCTION: Expanding Medicaid coverage to low-income adults may have increased smoking cessation through improved access to evidence-based treatments. Our study sought to determine if states' decisions to expand Medicaid increased recent smoking cessation. METHODS: Using pooled cross-sectional data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey for the years 2011-2015, we examined the association between state Medicaid coverage and the probability of recent smoking cessation among low-income adults without dependent children who were current or former smokers (n=36,083). We used difference-in-differences estimation to examine the effects of Medicaid coverage on smoking cessation, comparing low-income adult smokers in states with Medicaid coverage to comparable adults in states without Medicaid coverage, with ages 18-64 years to those ages 65 years and above. Analyses were conducted for the full sample and stratified by sex. RESULTS: Residence in a state with Medicaid coverage among low-income adult smokers ages 18-64 years was associated with an increase in recent smoking cessation of 2.1 percentage points (95% confidence interval, 0.25-3.9). In the comparison group of individuals ages 65 years and above, residence in a state with Medicaid coverage expansion was not associated with a change in recent smoking cessation (-0.1 percentage point, 95% confidence interval, -2.1 to 1.8). Similar increases in smoking cessation among those ages 18-64 years were estimated for females and males (1.9 and 2.2 percentage point, respectively). CONCLUSION: Findings are consistent with the hypothesis that Medicaid coverage expansions may have increased smoking cessation among low-income adults without dependent children via greater access to preventive health care services, including evidence-based smoking cessation services.

Medicare Beneficiaries With Advanced Lung Cancer Experience Diverse Patterns Of Care From Diagnosis To Death.

Characterizations of average end-of-life care for people with cancer can obscure important differences in patients' experiences. Using Medicare claims data for 14,257 patients diagnosed with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer in the period 1995-2009, we used latent class analysis to identify classes of people with different care patterns. We characterized care trajectories from diagnosis to death using time spent in five care settings-home, hospital inpatient unit (acute), hospital intensive care unit (ICU), postacute skilled nursing facility, and hospice-and transitions across these settings. We identified four classes of patients: 66 percent spent the time primarily at home, 11 percent were primarily in hospice, 17 percent were largely in an acute setting, and 6 percent were largely in an ICU. Patients in these classes differed significantly in terms of baseline clinical characteristics, survival length, time spent in hospice, site of death, and spending. The findings show substantial heterogeneity in patterns of care for patients with advanced cancer, which should be accounted for in efforts to improve end-of-life care.

Survival and Toxicity After Cisplatin Plus Etoposide Versus Carboplatin Plus Etoposide for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Elderly Patients.

PURPOSE: Elderly patients with cancer are under-represented in clinical trials and risk greater toxicity from chemotherapy. These patients and their physicians need better evidence to decide among guideline-recommended regimens. We test whether patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES SCLC) have noninferior survival and less hospital-based health care after carboplatin/etoposide compared with cisplatin/etoposide. METHODS: We analyzed SEER-Medicare data for beneficiaries with ES SCLC diagnosed at age 67 years and older between 1995 and 2009. Among patients treated with first-line chemotherapy in the ambulatory setting, 831 received cisplatin/etoposide and 2,846 received carboplatin/etoposide. Propensity score matching (2:1 ratio) yielded 778 cisplatin/etoposide and 1,502 carboplatin/etoposide patients. RESULTS: Survival was nearly identical in the two groups: 35.7 weeks for cisplatin/etoposide and 35.9 weeks for carboplatin/etoposide. The hazard ratio of 1 (95% CI, 0.91 to 1.09) excluded our prespecified threshold, indicating noninferiority. Mortality at 6 months was indistinguishable: 35% for cisplatin/etoposide and 34% for carboplatin/etoposide. After carboplatin/etoposide, patients were less likely to be admitted to a hospital (80% v 86%, P < .001) and had fewer hospitalizations (median 1 v 2, odds ratio 0.76, 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.9), ED visits (median 1 v 2, odds ratio 0.82, 95% CI, 0.7 to 0.96), and ICU stays (median 0 v 0, odds ratio 0.82, 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: First-line carboplatin/etoposide is associated with similar survival and less subsequent hospital-based health care use than cisplatin/etoposide among elderly patients with ES SCLC treated in ambulatory settings.

Effects of Global Payment and Accountable Care on Tobacco Cessation Service Use: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death and disability. New payment and delivery system models including global payment and accountable care have the potential to increase use of cost-effective tobacco cessation services. OBJECTIVE: To examine how the Alternative Quality Contract (AQC) established in 2009 by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts (BCBSMA) has affected tobacco cessation service use. DESIGN: We used 2006-2011 BCBSMA claims and enrollment data to compare adults 18-64 years in AQC provider organizations to adults in non-AQC provider organizations. We examined the AQC's effects on all enrollees; a subset at high risk of tobacco-related complications due to certain medical conditions; and behavioral health service users. MAIN MEASURES: We examined use of: (1) any cessation treatment (pharmacotherapy or counseling); (2) varenicline or bupropion; (3) nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs); (4) cessation counseling; and (4) combination therapy (pharmacotherapy plus counseling). We also examined duration of pharmacotherapy use and number of counseling visits among users. KEY RESULTS: Rates of tobacco cessation treatment use were higher following implementation of the AQC relative to the comparison group overall (2.02 vs. 1.87 %, p < 0.0001), among enrollees at risk for tobacco-related complications (4.97 vs. 4.66 %, p < 0.0001), and among behavioral health service users (3.67 vs. 3.25 %, p < 0.0001). Statistically significant increases were found for use of varenicline or bupropion alone, counseling alone, and combination therapy, but not for NRT use, pharmacotherapy duration, or number of counseling visits among users. CONCLUSIONS: In its initial three years, the AQC was associated with increases in use of tobacco cessation services.

Dartmouth Atlas Area-Level Estimates of End-of-Life Expenditures: How Well Do They Reflect Expenditures for Prospectively Identified Advanced Lung Cancer Patients?

OBJECTIVE: Assess validity of the retrospective Dartmouth hospital referral region (HRR) end-of-life spending measures by comparing with health care expenditures from diagnosis to death for prospectively identified advanced lung cancer patients. DATA/SETTING/DESIGN: We calculated health care spending from diagnosis (2003-2005) to death or through 2011 for 885 patients aged ≥65 years with advanced lung cancer using Medicare claims. We assessed the association between Dartmouth HRR-level spending in the last 2 years of life and patient-level spending using linear regression with random HRR effects, adjusting for patient characteristics. FINDINGS: For each $1 increase in the Dartmouth metric, spending for our cohort increased by $0.74 (p < .001). The Dartmouth spending variable explained 93.4 percent of the HRR-level variance in observed spending. CONCLUSIONS: HRR-level spending estimates for deceased patient cohorts reflect area-level care intensity for prospectively identified advanced lung cancer patients.

How Do Payers Respond to Regulatory Actions? The Case of Bevacizumab.

PURPOSE: In February 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval for bevacizumab for metastatic breast cancer. After public hearings in July 2010, and June 2011, the FDA revoked this approved indication in November 2011, on the basis of additional evidence regarding its risk/benefit profile. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, local Medicare contractors, and commercial payers varied in their stated intentions to cover bevacizumab after FDA's regulatory actions. We examined payer-specific trends in bevacizumab use after the FDA's regulatory actions. METHODS: We used outpatient medical claims compiled by IMS Health to evaluate trends in bevacizumab use for breast cancer for Medicare-insured and commercially insured patients (N = 102,906) using segmented regression. Given that Medicare coverage policies may vary across regional contractors, we estimated trends in bevacizumab use across 10 local coverage areas. In a sensitivity analysis, we estimated trends in bevacizumab use for breast cancer compared with trends in use for lung cancer using difference-in-differences models. RESULTS: Among chemotherapy infusions for breast cancer, bevacizumab use decreased from 31% in July 2010, to 4% in September 2012. Use decreased by 11% among commercially insured and 13% among Medicare-insured patients after July 2010 (interaction P = .68) and continued to decline by 9% per month (interaction P = .61). We observed no contractor-level variation in bevacizumab use among Medicare beneficiaries. During the same period, bevacizumab use for lung cancer was stable. CONCLUSION: Although insurers varied in public statements regarding coverage intentions, bevacizumab use declined similarly among all payers, suggesting that provider decision making, rather than payer-specific coverage policies, drove reductions.

Physicians' propensity to discuss prognosis is associated with patients' awareness of prognosis for metastatic cancers.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis discussion is an essential component of informed decision-making. However, many terminally ill patients have a limited awareness of their prognosis and the causes are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of physicians' propensity to discuss prognosis on advanced cancer patients' prognosis awareness. DESIGN: Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS) study, a prospective cohort study with patient and physician surveys. SETTING/SUBJECTS: We investigated 686 patients with metastatic lung or colorectal cancer at diagnosis who participated in the CanCORS study and reported about their life expectancy. Data were linked to the physician survey from 486 physicians who were identified by these patients as filling important roles in their cancer care. RESULTS: Few patients with metastatic cancers (16.5%) reported an accurate awareness of their prognosis, defined as reporting a life expectancy of less than 2 years for lung cancer or less than 5 years for colorectal cancer. Patients whose most-important-doctor (in helping patient make decisions) reported discussing prognosis with terminally ill patients earlier were more likely than those whose doctors deferred these discussions to have an accurate prognosis awareness (adjusted proportion, 18.5% versus 7.6%; odds ratio, 3.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-7.52; p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Few patients with advanced cancer could articulate an accurate prognosis estimate, despite most having received chemotherapy and many physicians reported they would discuss prognosis early. Physicians' propensity to discuss prognosis earlier was associated with more accurate patient reports of prognosis. Enhancing the communication skills of providers with important roles in cancer care may help to improve cancer patients' understanding of their prognosis.

Cost sharing and adherence to tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.

PURPOSE: The introduction of imatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has greatly increased survival for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Conversely, nonadherence to imatinib and other TKIs undoubtedly results in disease progression and treatment resistance. We examined trends in imatinib expenditures from 2002 to 2011 and assessed the association between copayment requirements for imatinib and TKI adherence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used MarketScan health plan claims from 2002 to 2011 to identify adults (age 18 to 64 years) with CML who initiated imatinib therapy between January 1, 2002, and June 30, 2011, and had insurance coverage for at least 3 months before through 6 months after initiation (N = 1,541). Primary outcomes were TKI discontinuation and nonadherence. The primary independent variable was out-of-pocket cost for a 30-day supply of imatinib. By using a propensity-score weighted sample, we estimated the risk of discontinuation and nonadherence for patients with higher (top quartile) versus lower copayments. RESULTS: Monthly copayments for imatinib averaged $108; median copayments were $30 (range, $0 to $4,792). Mean total monthly expenditures for imatinib nearly doubled between 2002 and 2011, from $2,798 to $4,892. Approximately 17% of patients with higher copayments and 10% with lower copayments discontinued TKIs during the first 180 days following initiation (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.70; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.22). Similarly, patients with higher copayments were 42% more likely to be nonadherent (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.69). CONCLUSION: Patients with higher copayments are more likely to discontinue or be nonadherent to TKIs. Given the importance of these therapies for patients with CML, our data suggest a critical need to reduce patient costs for these therapies.

The impact of emerging safety and effectiveness evidence on the use of physician-administered drugs: the case of bevacizumab for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Spending on physician-administered drugs is high and uses not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are frequent. Although these drugs may be targets of future policy efforts to rationalize use, little is known regarding how physicians respond to emerging safety and effectiveness evidence. STUDY OBJECTIVE: We analyzed changes in bevacizumab (Avastin) use for breast cancer in response to its market launch (February 2008), 2 FDA meetings reviewing data suggesting that its risks exceed its benefits (July 2010 and June 2011), and the FDA's withdrawal of approval (November 2011). DATA: Data from a population-based audit of oncologists' prescribing (IntrinsiQ Intellidose) were used to measure the monthly number of breast cancer patients treated with bevacizumab (January 2008-April 2012). METHODS: The number of bevacizumab patients following each regulatory action was estimated using negative binomial regression, compared with patients before the first FDA meeting, adjusting for cancer stage, treatment line, patient age, and outpatient office affiliation. RESULTS: Bevacizumab use for breast cancer increased significantly after FDA approval. After all regulatory actions, there was a 65% decline (95% CI, 64%-65%) in use compared with the period before the first meeting. The largest decline was in the 6-month period after the first meeting (37%; 95% CI, 28%-47%). The rate of decline did not differ by patient or cancer characteristics and differed minimally by office affiliation. DISCUSSION: Bevacizumab use for breast cancer declined dramatically after FDA meetings and regulatory actions, a period without changes in guideline recommendations or insurance coverage. Physicians seem to be responsive to emerging evidence concerning physician-administered drug safety and effectiveness.