Changes in List Prices, Net Prices, and Discounts for Branded Drugs in the US, 2007-2018.

Importance: Most studies that have examined drug prices have focused on list prices, without accounting for manufacturer rebates and other discounts, which have substantially increased in the last decade. Objective: To describe changes in list prices, net prices, and discounts for branded pharmaceutical products for which US sales are reported by publicly traded companies, and to determine the extent to which list price increases were offset by increases in discounts. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective descriptive study using 2007-2018 pricing data from the investment firm SSR Health for branded products available before January 2007 with US sales reported by publicly traded companies (n = 602 drugs). Net prices were estimated by compiling company-reported sales for each product and number of units sold in the US. Exposures: Calendar year. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included list and net prices and discounts in Medicaid and other payers. List prices represent manufacturers' price to wholesalers or direct purchasers but do not account for discounts. Net prices represent revenue per unit of the product after all manufacturer concessions are accounted for (including rebates, coupon cards, and any other discount). Means of outcomes were calculated each year for the overall sample and 6 therapeutic classes, weighting each product by utilization and adjusting for inflation. Results: From 2007 to 2018, list prices increased by 159% (95% CI, 137%-181%), or 9.1% per year, while net prices increased by 60% (95% CI, 36%-84%), or 4.5% per year, with stable net prices between 2015 and 2018. Discounts increased from 40% to 76% in Medicaid and from 23% to 51% for other payers. Increases in discounts offset 62% of list price increases. There was large variability across classes. Multiple sclerosis treatments (n = 4) had the greatest increases in list (439%) and net (157%) prices. List prices of lipid-lowering agents (n = 11) increased by 278% and net prices by 95%. List prices of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (n = 3) increased by 166% and net prices by 73%. List prices of insulins (n = 7) increased by 262%, and net prices by 51%. List prices of noninsulin antidiabetic agents (n = 10) increased by 165%, and net prices decreased by 1%. List price increases were lowest (59%) for antineoplastic agents (n = 44), but discounts only offset 41% of list price increases, leading to 35% increase in net prices. Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of branded drugs in the US from 2007 to 2018, mean increases in list and net prices were substantial, although discounts offset an estimated 62% of list price increases with substantial variation across classes.

Eliminated patient fee and changes in dispensing patterns of asthma medication in children-An interrupted time series analysis.

In 2016, all prescription drugs included in the reimbursement system in Sweden were made available for children (age 0-17 years) without any patient fees. Our aim was to estimate the association between this intervention and the dispensing patterns of asthma medications among children. Dispensing data on asthma medications for all children living in Stockholm County during 2014-2017 were selected to include two years before (January 2014-December 2015) and after (January 2016-December 2017) the intervention. In an uncontrolled before and after study, the measures of utilization were as follows: the proportion of children with at least one dispensed asthma medication (prevalence); the number of children initiated on treatment after an 18-month drug-free period (incidence); the number of defined daily doses (DDDs) dispensed per child; and the number of children with at least two prescriptions with controller medication (inhaled corticosteroid or leukotriene receptor antagonist) dispensed during 18 months (persistence). In an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis, all measures were included except for persistence. Socio-economic status was defined using Mosaic data. The prevalence increased after the intervention (from 11.9% to 13.0%). However, the ITS analysis showed a positive trend already before the intervention, and consequently, the increase was not attributable to the intervention. For incidence, similar patterns were observed. There was an increase in dispensed volumes related to the intervention, 46.3 DDDs/child/month before and 51.1 after the intervention (P-value 0.01). The proportion of children with persistent asthma medication increased from 46.0% to 51.9% in children with low socio-economic status. In conclusion, the intervention was only modestly associated with changes in the dispensing patterns of asthma medication, with the volume dispensed per child increasing slightly, particularly in children with low socio-economic status.

Supporting Cost Effective Innovations in Treatment.

Specialist IBD nurses at key to ensuring cutting edge biological therapies are used in a way which benefits both trust and patient, as Claire Read explains.

2016: An Unbelievable Year.

And not necessarily in a good way.

Impact of Out-of-Pocket Pharmacy Costs on Branded Medication Adherence Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Medication adherence is pivotal for the successful treatment of diabetes. However, medication adherence remains a major concern, as nonadherence is associated with poor health outcomes. Studies have indicated that increasing patients' share of medication costs significantly reduces adherence. Little is known about a potential out-of-pocket (OOP) cost threshold where substantial reduction in adherence may occur. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of diabetes OOP pharmacy costs on antihyperglycemic medication adherence and identify the potential threshold at which significant reduction in adherence may occur among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: This was an observational, retrospective cohort study using longitudinal U.S. pharmacy and medical claims data from the IMS Health Medical Claims (Dx) database. Patients with T2DM who initiated therapy with a branded antihyperglycemic medication during the index period (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2011) and had 3 years of follow-up data were included. The primary outcome was adherence to antihyperglycemic medications, measured as the number of days covered. Propensity scores were calculated using baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics to control for potential confounding factors. Four strata were created based on mean propensity scores. Across each stratum, patients were assigned to 5 diabetes OOP pharmacy (including generics) cost levels: $0-$10, $11-$40, $41-$50, $51-$75, and > $75. Multivariate regression models were used to estimate association of diabetes OOP pharmacy costs and adherence for each stratum. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of total OOP pharmacy costs and index drug category OOP costs on adherence. RESULTS: A total of 15,416 patients were assessed. Across each stratum in the diabetes OOP pharmacy cost analysis group, mean patient age ranged from 52.3 to 56.1 years, mean number of antihyperglycemic medication classes ranged from 1.5 to 3.2, and mean household income ranged from $60,763 to $79,373. Most patients used a commercial plan (55%-85%). The propensity-stratified multivariate regression model revealed an overall negative relationship between diabetes OOP pharmacy costs and adherence across several OOP cost levels. Diabetes OOP pharmacy cost level $51-$75 appeared as the threshold at which adherence reduced significantly (77-78 fewer days of coverage over 3 years of follow-up; P < 0.05) when compared with the lowest OOP costs ($0-$10) across all strata. Adherence reduced further (99-145 fewer days of coverage; P < 0.0001) for the higher diabetes OOP pharmacy cost levels (> $75) when compared with the lowest OOP cost levels. Sensitivity analyses with total OOP pharmacy costs and index drug category OOP costs revealed negative association with adherence across all strata. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes OOP pharmacy cost was negatively associated with patient adherence, and a potential OOP cost threshold ($51-$75) was identified at which adherence reduced significantly. The study findings may be beneficial in informing the design of health care plans to achieve optimal adherence and improve disease management in patients with T2DM. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Eli Lilly and Company. Eli Lilly and Company was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; preparation of the manuscript; and decision to submit for publication. Fu is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company. Taylor and Kwan are employees of Lilly USA. Fu and Kwan hold stock or stock options in Eli Lilly and Company. Bibeau was an employee of Eli Lilly and Company at the time of this study and initial submission of this manuscript. Bibeau is currently employed by Janssen Scientific Affairs. The abstract for this study was presented at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2016; April 19-22, 2016; San Francisco, California. Bibeau and Fu contributed to the study design and collected the data. All authors contributed equally to data interpretation and manuscript preparation and revision.

Low-Cost Generic Program Use by Medicare Beneficiaries: Implications for Medication Exposure Misclassification in Administrative Claims Data.

BACKGROUND: Administrative claims data are used for a wide variety of research and quality assurance purposes; however, they are prone to medication exposure misclassification if medications are purchased without using an insurance benefit. Low-cost generic drug programs (LCGPs) offered at major chain pharmacies are a relatively new and sparsely investigated source of exposure misclassification. LCGP medications are often purchased out of pocket; thus, a pharmacy claim may never be submitted, and the exposure may go unobserved in claims data. As heavy users of medications, Medicare beneficiaries have much to gain from the affordable medications offered through LCGPs. This use may put them at increased risk of exposure misclassification in claims data. Many high-risk medications (HRMs) and medications tracked for adherence and utilization quality metrics are available through LCGPs, and exposure misclassification of these medications may impact the quality assurance efforts reliant on administrative claims data. Presently, there is little information regarding the use of these programs among a geriatric population. OBJECTIVES: To (a) quantify the prevalence of LCGP users in a nationally representative population of Medicare beneficiaries; (b) compare clinical and demographic characteristics of LCGP users and nonusers; (c) assess determinants of LCGP use and medications acquired through these programs; and (d) analyze patterns of LCGP use during the years 2007-2012. METHODS: This study relied on data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) from 2007 to 2012. The first 3 objectives were completed with a cohort of individuals in the most recent MEPS panel, while the fourth objective was completed with a separate cohort composed of individuals who participated in MEPS from 2007 to 2012. Inclusion in either study cohort required that individuals were Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or greater, used at least 1 prescription drug during their 2-year panel period, and participated in all 5 rounds of data collection during their panel period. MEPS captures medication utilization by surveying individuals on current and previous medication use and verifies this information at the pharmacy level, so prescription fills can be observed irrespective of payment by an insurer or a filed claim. Pharmaceutical utilization was assessed at the individual level for each year of the study period, and LCGP use was recorded as a binary variable for each individual. An LCGP medication fill was identified if the total cost of the drug was paid out of pocket and matched the cost of medications listed on LCGP formularies available from major pharmacy retailers during these years. Cohort demographics and characteristics of interest included age, gender, race, employment status, marital status, family income level, education level, residence in a metropolitan statistical area, geographic region, prescription drug coverage, Medicare type, comorbidities, number of unique medications used, and number of medication fills. Comparisons were made between users and nonusers using chi-square and t-tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with LCGP use. RESULTS: From the most recent MEPS panel, 1,861 individuals were included in the study cohort, of which 53.5% were observed to be LCGP users. The 995 LCGP users in this cohort represented over 20 million Medicare beneficiaries who used LCGPs from 2011 to 2012. Significant differences between LCGP users and nonusers existed in terms of race, educational attainment, comorbidity burden, type of Medicare insurance, number of unique medications used, and number of medication fills. Each additional unique medication filled increased the odds of LCGP use by 12% (95% CI = 1.09-1.14). Individuals with insurance in addition to Medicare (i.e., Tricare/Veteran's Affairs or Medicaid) had less than half the odds of using LCGPs compared with those with Medicare or Medicare managed care insurance coverage only. The proportion of LCGP users and the proportion of LCGP fills out of all medications available through LCGPs increased from 2007 to 2012. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high rate of LCGP use among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or greater. Claims-based research and quality assurance programs focusing on the benefits and harms of medications available through these programs are at risk of underestimating the true medication exposure in this population and should account for this possibility in sensitivity analyses. Managed care organizations should incentivize the reporting of LCGP medication use or make adjustments to generic medication benefit structures to more effectively capture true medication exposure. DISCLOSURES: No direct sources of funding were used to conduct this study. Data acquisition was supported by the University of Kentucky Center for Clinical and Translational Science through funding from NIH NCATS grant #UL1TR000117. Brown is the Humana-Pfizer Research Fellow at the Institute for Pharmaceutical Outcomes & Policy at the University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy and is provided salary from these corporations. However, neither company provided any direct funding for the current study nor provided any input or guidance for the design, methods, or drafting of the manuscript. Pauly has no financial disclosures or conflicts of interest. Portions of these results were presented at the 20th International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research International Meeting; May 16-20, 2015; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Brown, along with the other authors. Brown took the lead in data collection and interpretation, along with Pauly and Talbert. All authors participated in the writing and revision of the manuscript.

[Pharmacoeconomics - Challenges for Health Professionals].

Over the last 30 years, medical expenditure has increased throughout the world. The main reasons estimated to lay behind it include aging, ever more chronic diseases and new emerging diseases, new drugs, expanded indications of current drugs, and development of pharmaceutical industry. A challenge for healthcare professionals is to sustain current quality of care and enable medical innovations while attempting to contain costs. The overall goal is to demonstrate the pharmacoeconomic value, i.e. a balance of economic, humanistic and clinical outcomes.

The prevalence of self-reported underuse of medications due to cost for the elderly: results from seven European urban communities.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of self-reported underuse of medications due to procurement costs amongst older persons from seven European urban communities. METHODS: The data were collected in a cross-sectional study ("ABUEL, Elder abuse: A multinational prevalence survey") in 2009. Randomly selected people aged 60-84 years (n = 4,467) from seven urban communities: Stuttgart (Germany), Athens (Greece), Ancona (Italy), Kaunas (Lithuania), Porto (Portugal), Granada (Spain) and Stockholm (Sweden) were interviewed. Response rate - 45.2%. Ethical permission was received in each country. RESULTS: The results indicate that 3.6% (n = 162) of the respondents self-reported refraining from buying prescribed medications due to cost. The highest prevalence of this problem was identified in Lithuania (15.7%, n = 99) and Portugal (4.3%, n = 28). Other countries reported lower percentages of refraining from buying medications (Germany - 2.0%, Italy - 1.6%, Sweden - 1.0%, Greece - 0.6%, Spain - 0.3%). Females refrained more often from buying medications than males (2.6% vs. 4.4%, p < 0.0001). The prevalence of this refraining tended to increase with economic hardship. DISCUSSION: These differences between countries can be only partly described by the financing of health-care systems. In spite of the presence of cost reimbursement mechanisms, patients need to make co-payments (or in some cases to pay the full price) for prescribed medications. This indicates that the purchasing power of people in 10.1186/s12913-015-1089-4 the particular country can play a major role and be related with the economic situation in the country. Lithuania, which has reported the highest refrain rates, had the lowest gross domestic product (at the time of conducting this study) of all participating countries in the study. CONCLUSIONS: Refraining from buying the prescribed medications due to cost is a problem for women and men in respect to ageing people in Europe. Prevalence varies by country, sex, and economic hardship.

Medicine prices, availability, and affordability in the Shaanxi Province in China: implications for the future.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, China implemented the National Essential Medicines System (NEMS) to improve access to high-quality low-cost essential medicines. OBJECTIVE: To measure the prices, availability and affordability of medicines in China following the implementation of the NEMS. SETTING: 120 public hospitals and 120 private pharmacies in ten cities in Shaanxi Province, Western China. METHOD: The standardized methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International was used to collect data on prices and availability of 49 medicines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Median price ratio; availability as a percentage; cost of course of treatment in days' wages of the lowest-paid government workers. RESULTS: In the public hospitals, originator brands (OBs) were procured at 8.89 times the international reference price, more than seven times higher than the lowest-priced generics (LPGs). Patients paid 11.83 and 1.69 times the international reference prices for OBs and generics respectively. A similar result was observed in the private pharmacies. The mean availabilities of OBs and LPGs were 7.1 and 20.0 % in the public hospitals, and 12.6 and 29.2 % in the private pharmacies. Treatment with OBs is therefore largely unaffordable, but the affordability of the LPGs is generally good. CONCLUSION: High prices and low availability of survey medicines were observed. The affordability of generics, but not OBs, is reasonable. Effective measures should be taken to reduce medicine prices and improve availability and affordability in Shaanxi Province.