US commercial health plan coverage dynamics in pulmonary arterial hypertension therapies.

BACKGROUND: Health plan coverage is central to patient access to care, especially for rare, chronic diseases. For specialty drugs, coverage varies, resulting in barriers to access. Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare, progressive, and fatal disease. Guidelines suggest starting or rapidly escalating to combination therapy with drugs of differing classes (phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors [PDE5is], soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators [sGC stimulators], endothelin receptor antagonists [ERAs], and prostacyclin pathway agents [PPAs]). OBJECTIVE: To assess the variation in commercial health plan coverage for PAH treatments and how coverage has evolved. To examine the frequency of coverage updates and evidence cited in plan policies. METHODS: We used the Tufts Medical Center Specialty Drug Evidence and Coverage database, which includes publicly available specialty drug coverage policies. Overall, and at the drug and treatment class level, we identified plan-imposed coverage restrictions beyond the drug's US Food and Drug Administration label, including step therapy protocols, clinical restrictions (eg, disease severity), and prescriber specialty requirements. We analyzed variation in coverage restrictiveness and how coverage has changed over time. We determined how often plans update their policies. Finally, we categorized the cited evidence into 6 different types. RESULTS: Results reflected plan coverage policies for 13 PAH drugs active between August 2017 and August 2022 and issued by 17 large US commercial health plans, representing 70% of covered lives. Coverage restrictions varied mainly by step therapy protocols and prescriber restrictions. Seven plans had step therapy protocols for most drugs, 9 for at least one drug, and 1 had none. Ten plans required specialist (cardiologist or pulmonologist) prescribing for at least one drug, and 7 did not. Coverage restrictions increased over time: the proportion of policies with at least 1 restriction increased from 38% to 73%, and the proportion with step therapy protocols increased from 29% to 46%, with generics as the most common step. The proportion of policies with step therapy protocols increased for every therapy class with generic availability: 18% to 59% for ERAs, 33% to 77% for PDE5is, and 33% to 43% for PPAs. The proportion of policies with prescriber requirements increased from 24% to 48%. Plans updated their policies 58% of the time annually and most often cited the 2019 CHEST clinical guidelines, followed by randomized controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: Plan use of coverage restrictions for PAH therapies increased over time and varied across both drugs and plans. Inconsistency among health plans may complicate patient access and reduce the proportion who can persist on PAH treatments.

Erratum: Health disparities and treatment approaches in portopulmonary hypertension and idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension: An analysis of the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1177/20458940211020913.].

Prediction of patient outcomes through social determinants of health: The Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry (PHAR) evaluation.

Outcomes of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) may be associated with social determinants of health (SDOH) and other baseline patient characteristics. At present, there is no prognostic model to predict important patient outcomes in PAH based on SDOH. Utilizing information from the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry (PHAR), we derive a model (PHAR Evaluation or PHARE) to predict an important composite patient outcomes based on SDOH and other patient characteristics. Baseline data regarding SDOH from adult patients with PAH enrolled in the PHAR between 2015 and March 23, 2020, were included for analysis. We performed repeated measures logistic regression modeling with dichotomous outcome data (0 for no events, 1 for one or more events) to derive the PHARE. Here, 1275 consecutive adult patients enrolled in the PHAR from 47 participating centers were included. Variables included in our model are race, gender, ethnicity, household income, level of education, age, body mass index, drug use, alcohol use, marital status, and type of health insurance. Interaction effect between variables was analyzed and several interactions were also included in the PHARE. The PHARE shows a c-statistic of 0.608 (p < 0.0001) with 95% confidence intervals (0.583, 0.632). Using SDOH and baseline characteristics from the PHAR, the PHARE correlates with our composite patient outcome. Further work evaluating the role of SDOH in prognostic modeling of PAH is indicated.

Health disparities and treatment approaches in portopulmonary hypertension and idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension: an analysis of the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry.

Compared to idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), patients with portopulmonary hypertension (POPH) have worse survival. Health disparities may contribute to these differences but have not been studied. We sought to compare socioeconomic factors in patients with POPH and IPAH and to determine whether socioeconomic status and/or POPH diagnosis were associated with treatment and health-care utilization. We performed a cross-sectional study of adults enrolled in the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry. Patients with IPAH (n = 344) and POPH (n = 57) were compared. Compared with IPAH, patients with POPH were less likely to be college graduates (19.6% vs. 34.9%, p = 0.02) and more likely to be unemployed (54.7% vs. 30.5%, p < 0.001) and have an annual household income below poverty level (45.7% vs. 19.0%, p < 0.001). Patients with POPH had similar functional class, quality of life, 6-min walk distance, and mean pulmonary arterial pressure with a higher cardiac index. Compared with IPAH, patients with POPH were less likely to receive combination therapy (46.4% vs. 62.2%, p = 0.03) and endothelin receptor antagonists (28.6% vs. 55.1%, p < 0.001) at enrollment with similar treatment at follow-up. Patients with POPH had more emergency department visits (1.7 ± 2.1 vs. 0.9 ± 1.2, p = 0.009) and hospitalizations in the six months preceding enrollment (1.5 ± 2.1 vs. 0.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.02). Both POPH diagnosis and lower education level were independently associated with a higher number of emergency department visits. Compared to IPAH, patients with POPH have lower socioeconomic status, are less likely to receive initial combination therapy and endothelin receptor antagonists but have similar treatment at follow-up, and have increased health-care utilization.

Totally Implantable IV Treprostinil Therapy in Pulmonary Hypertension Assessment of the Implantation Procedure.

BACKGROUND: Prostacyclins improve symptoms and survival in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). In response to risks associated with external delivery systems, an implantable IV infusion system was developed. A multicenter, prospective, single-arm, clinical trial (DelIVery for PAH) was conducted to evaluate this system for treprostinil in PAH. This analysis describes the findings related to the implant procedure. METHODS: Patients (N = 64) with PAH (World Health Organization group 1) receiving stable IV treprostinil were enrolled. Patients were transitioned to a temporary peripheral IV infusion catheter prior to the procedure. System implantation was performed at 10 centers under general anesthesia or deep IV sedation by clinicians from various specialties. Central venous access was via the cephalic, subclavian, jugular, or axillary vein. Using an introducer and fluoroscopic guidance, the distal tip of the infusion catheter was placed at the superior caval-atrial junction. The catheter was tunneled from the venous access site to an abdominal subcutaneous pocket, where the pump was placed. RESULTS: Of the 64 patients enrolled, four exited prior to implantation. All 60 implant procedures were successful. At baseline, all patients were receiving treprostinil via an external pump at a mean dose of 71.4 ± 27.8 ng/kg/min (range: 22-142 ng/kg/min). The implant averaged 102 ± 32 min (range: 47-184 min). Clinically significant implant procedure-related complications included one pneumothorax, two infections, and one episode of atrial fibrillation. There were three postimplantation catheter dislocations in two patients. Common implant-related events that were not complications included implant site pain (83%) and bruising (17%). CONCLUSIONS: The procedure for inserting a fully implantable system for treprostinil was successfully performed, with few complications. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01321073; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.