Impact of a drug utilization review program on high-risk use of prescription controlled substances.

BACKGROUND: Prescription drug abuse has prompted considerable concern. We evaluated a retrospective drug utilization review program to reduce controlled substance use among individuals with high-risk utilization. METHODS: We analyzed pharmacy claims from a large pharmaceutical benefits manager. For each eligible member, we calculated a controlled substance score based on the number and type of claims, prescribers and pharmacies, and utilization patterns over three months. Two state health plans sent controlled substance letters to prescribers of members meeting or exceeding a plan- and pre-specified controlled substance score. Two different state health plans did not send such letters. We used a difference-in-difference design and generalized estimating equations to quantify the impact of the program on the mean difference in reduction of the controlled substance score over six months. RESULTS: Eligible members in the intervention and comparison states had similar baseline mean controlled substance scores (19.0 vs. 18.6, p = 0.36). Adjusting for individuals' age, sex and pharmacy risk group score, reductions in the mean controlled substance score were greater in the intervention than comparison cohort (5.67 vs. 4.31, p = 0.01), corresponding with a 34.0% reduction in the intervention cohort compared to a 25.5% reduction in the comparison cohort. Changes were driven primarily by reductions in the number of controlled substance claims filled (30.5% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.01), as well as by a non-statistically significant trend towards reductions in the number of prescribers and pharmacies used (26.9% vs. 20.1%, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective drug utilization review programs may reduce controlled substance scores and claims among individuals with patterns suggesting high-risk utilization.

Real-world persistence and adherence to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among obese commercially insured adults without diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the first glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist product, liraglutide injection, for obesity treatment. Many GLP-1 obesity treatment clinical trials report significant weight loss and medication adherence at more than 85%. Little is known about the real-world GLP-1 obesity treatment adherence, persistence, and switch rates. OBJECTIVE: To measure GLP-1 therapy persistence, adherence, and switch rates in a real-world cohort of members without diabetes using these drugs for obesity treatment. METHODS: Integrated pharmacy and medical claims data from 16.5 million average monthly commercially insured membership were used to identify obese members without diabetes newly initiating GLP-1 therapy between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2021. Members were required to be continuously enrolled 1-year before and after the GLP-1 therapy start date and aged 19 years of age or older. Persistence was measured as no greater than or equal to 60-day gap with allowance for GLP-1 switching. Adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC) and members with a PDC greater than or equal to 80% were considered adherent. GLP-1 product switching was also assessed descriptively. RESULTS: 4,066 commercially insured obese members without diabetes that newly initiated GLP-1 therapy met all study criteria. The mean age was 46 years, and 81% were female. Overall, GLP-1 persistence was 46.3% at 180 days and 32.3% at 1 year. The highest and lowest persistence rates at 1 year were observed for semaglutide (Ozempic) at 47.1% and liraglutide (Saxenda) 19.2%, respectively. Average PDC during the 1-year assessment was 51.0% with 27.2% adherent to therapy and 11.1% switched GLP-1 drugs. CONCLUSIONS: This GLP-1 weight loss treatment real-world analysis, among obese individuals without diabetes, found poor 1-year persistence and adherence and low rates of switching between products. These findings will aid in assessing products cost-effectiveness, understanding obesity care management program needs, forecasting future GLP-1 use and cost trends, and negotiating GLP-1 pharmaceutical manufacturer value-based purchasing agreements.

Real-world outcomes and direct care cost before and after elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor initiation in commercially insured members with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a chronic, progressive genetic disease caused by mutations in the CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene resulting in a dysfunctional CFTR protein. Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) is a triple combination oral drug therapy with an annual cost greater than $300,000 and available to nearly 90% of the CF population based on age and genotype. Limited real-world direct medical cost offset data are available for ELX/TEZ/IVA among commercially insured individuals. OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare total cost of care and health care resource utilization (HRU) 180 days before and 180 days after first ELX/TEZ/IVA drug claim among CFTR modulator treatment-naive, commercially insured members. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of integrated pharmacy and medical claims data from 17.9 million commercially insured members. A 180-day prestudy and 180-day poststudy design was used to compare outcomes prior to and following ELX/TEZ/IVA initiation. Study inclusion was limited to members with first ELX/TEZ/IVA claim (index date) between October 21, 2019, and December 31, 2021, continuously enrolled 180 days before and 180 days after index date, and no CFTR-modulator drug claim 180 days prior to index date. Total paid amounts from medical and pharmacy claims after network discounts (defined as total cost of care), HRU, and pulmonary exacerbation events were summarized using descriptive statistics and compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: 494 members newly initiating ELX/TEZ/IVA met inclusion criteria. Prestudy to poststudy mean member total cost of care increased from $58,180 to $198,815 (difference: $140,635; P < 0.001). Mean member medical benefit costs decreased from $28,764 to $12,484 (difference: -$16,280; P < 0.001), whereas mean member pharmacy benefit costs increased from $29,416 to $186,331 (difference: $156,915; P < 0.001). Mean member inpatient hospitalizations (62% absolute reduction; P < 0.001), emergency department visits (43% absolute reduction; P < 0.01), and pulmonary exacerbation events (44% absolute reduction; P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the postperiod compared with the preperiod. CONCLUSIONS: Among members with CF newly initiating CFTR modulator with ELX/TEZ/IVA, mean member total cost of care increased 3-fold despite significant and meaningful reductions in pulmonary exacerbation events, HRU, and medical benefit spend. Pharmacy benefit spend outpaced medical benefit spend at a rate of $9.64 to $1 in the 180 days following ELX/TEZ/IVA initiation. Real-world data should be used to objectively measure the clinical and economic benefits of costly medications, such as CFTR modulators, to align price with value. DISCLOSURES: Drs Marshall, Espinosa, Starner, and Gleason are employees of Prime Therapeutics. The study was funded by Prime Therapeutics.

Descriptive, real-world treatment patterns, resource use, and total cost of care among eculizumab- and ravulizumab-treated members with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria.

BACKGROUND: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a rare, genetic, chronic, and life-threatening blood disease with an estimated prevalence of 13 per 1,000,000 persons reported in the United States. Available at analysis, PNH treatment included the use of C5 inhibitors (C5is), which prevent formation of membrane attack complex and consequently intravascular hemolysis. Limited real-world evidence suggests some individuals with PNH continue to experience anemia and breakthrough hemolysis (BTH) after C5i treatment, indicating unmet needs. OBJECTIVE: To describe real-world treatment patterns and outcomes among individuals treated with C5is, eculizumab (ECU), and ravulizumab (RAV), focusing on affordability challenges and therapy unmet needs from a US payer perspective. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using deidentified data from Prime Therapeutics' approximately 15 million commercially insured US members with integrated medical and pharmacy claims data. Members were identified between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020. Inclusion criteria for cohort identification were adults aged 18 years or older at ECU or RAV index date requiring 2 or more claims for ECU or 1 or more claims for RAV. ECU and RAV users were excluded if they had a claim indicating treatment for a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved non-PNH indication. Members were required to be continuously enrolled 6 months before and 12 months after their index ECU or RAV claim. Real-world C5i claims-based treatment dosage and frequency patterns were compared with FDA-labeled dosing. Clinical outcomes, including transfusions and BTH events, were identified in the pre-index and post-index periods. Health care resource use and costs were calculated after network discounts, including member share. RESULTS: A total of 86 commercial members met analysis criteria: 34 in the ECU cohort and 52 in the RAV cohort. The mean age was 42.6 years, and 54.6% were female. Estimated higher-than-label PNH-recommended dosage occurred in 38.2% of ECU and 9.6% of RAV members. In total, 29.4% of ECU and 17.3% of RAV members had 4 or more transfusions in the post-index period. Additionally, 29.4% of ECU and 13.5% of RAV members had 1 or more BTH episodes. Post-index period mean per member total health care costs were $711,785 among ECU members and $624,911 among RAV members, and C5i costs accounted for 79.7% and 85.6% of total health care costs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although all members received at minimum FDA-approved dosages, transfusions and BTH events continue to occur for some members. These findings indicate potentially inadequate therapy responses in a substantial subset of C5i users, adding additional therapy costs to an already extremely expensive therapy. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Apellis Pharmaceuticals. Drs Broderick and Fishman report employment by Apellis Pharmaceuticals and own stock options. Dr Burke reports employment by Prime Therapeutics, LLC, which has received research funding from Apellis Pharmaceuticals. Dr Gleason reports employment by Prime Therapeutics, LLC, which has received research funding from Apellis Pharmaceuticals; serves on the advisory committee at the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review; and has served on the Board of Directors at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy.

Drug super spender tsunami: An integrated medical and pharmacy benefits assessment.

BACKGROUND: As new rare-disease drug therapy, gene therapies, and high-priced cancer drugs receive US Food and Drug Administration approval, there is an increasing potential for drug super spender individuals with more than $250,000 annual drug cost. OBJECTIVE: To categorize all members in a large, commercially insured population by their total annual combined drug costs from both medical and pharmacy benefits and to determine the trend in drug super spender prevalence. METHODS: Using a commercially insured population with integrated medical and pharmacy benefits, all unique members with any enrollment between January 2016 and December 2019 were identified. The sum of total cost for all pharmacy claims plus all medical benefit claim lines for drugs was determined for each member, for each calendar year. Cost was defined as the plan plus member liability at network-discounted price, with no further adjustment for any coupons or rebates. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the drug super spender growth. RESULTS: There was an average of 17.9 million members per year with at least 1 month of eligibility through the 4-year study period. In 2016, a total of 2,994 members with more than $250,000 drug cost per member accounted for $1,324 million drug spend. In 2019, there were 5,894 super spender members (97% increase), accounting for $2,579 million drug cost (95% increase), which was 9.6% of $26,618 million total drug spend. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, commercially insured population, a small (32 per 100,000) number of drug super spender members comprise a disproportionate portion of the total drug expenditures, at $1 of every $10 dollars of total drug expenditures. Health plans need to understand the drug super spender trend and develop strategies to maintain health care affordability. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded internally by Prime Therapeutics LLC. Drs Starner and Gleason are employees of Prime Therapeutics LLC, a pharmacy benefits management company. Dr Bowen is a former employee of Prime Therapeutics LLC.

Formulary review of 2 new biologic agents: tocilizumab for rheumatoid arthritis and ustekinumab for plaque psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Two autoimmune biologics were recently approved by the FDA: ustekinumab in September 2009 for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in adults who are candidates for phototherapy or systemic therapy and tocilizumab in January 2010 for adult patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have not responded adequately to 1 or more tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist therapies. Both agents use new mechanisms of action and add to the growing group of autoimmune biologics. OBJECTIVE: To critically review the phase 3 trials for ustekinumab and tocilizumab and provide managed care considerations in the context of the 9 other biologic agents on the market in the United States that are used to treat moderate to severe RA or psoriasis. METHODS: A MEDLINE review was performed for articles published and available through January 2010 using keywords "ustekinumab" and "tocilizumab" with an emphasis on phase 3 trials. The literature search was limited to articles in English, clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, and research conducted in humans. Search results for ustekinumab included 8 articles of which 4 were excluded for not being psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis trials. Search results for tocilizumab included 16 articles of which 8 were excluded for not being RA trials or using biomarkers as primary endpoints. Additional information was obtained from the FDA website. RESULTS: Three phase 3 trials are available for ustekinumab. Ustekinumab demonstrated superior efficacy to placebo in 2 trials for the treatment of psoriasis. In a 12-week trial, ustekinumab 45 milligrams (mg) and 90 mg demonstrated significantly higher rates of 75% improvement in the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI 75) (67.5% and 73.8%, respectively) compared with etanercept (56.8%) in the first phase 3 comparative psoriasis trial between autoimmune biologics (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). In a phase 3 trial of RA patients who had failed prior TNF antagonist therapy, a 20% improvement in signs or symptoms according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR 20) at week 24 was achieved by significantly more study participants in the tocilizumab 8 mg per kilogram (kg) (50.0%) and 4 mg per kg (30.4%) groups than the placebo group (10.1%, P < 0.001 for both tocilizumab groups compared with placebo). Safety data for ustekinumab are limited to use for less than 2 years, and the prescribing information contains warnings regarding infection and malignancy. Tocilizumab is associated with neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and elevations in lipids and liver function tests. Tocilizumab has unique adverse events when compared with other autoimmune biologics and requires laboratory testing and careful monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab and tocilizumab are new additions to the treatment of autoinflammatory disease. The majority of safety data for both agents are from trials lasting 3 to 6 months. Published long-term safety data for tocilizumab are limited to less than 143 patients treated longer than 5 years, and safety data for ustekinumab are scant beyond 2 years of use; therefore, clinicians should exercise caution prior to widespread adoption. The comparative efficacy and safety trial of etanercept and ustekinumab brings important clinical information to decision makers. Tocilizumab is indicated after failure or intolerance to a TNF antagonist and has unique safety concerns. Managed care plans will consider the experience and long-term data of these agents along with efficacy data and cost when establishing management programs such as prior authorization or step therapy.

Pharmacy students' views of managed care pharmacy and PBMS: should there be more exposure to managed care in the pharmacy curriculum?

BACKGROUND: New accreditation standards implemented in 2007 have required schools of pharmacy to evaluate their existing curricula. An issue frequently encountered is the limited amount of content in the pharmacy curriculum specific to managed care and the role and function of pharmacy benefit management companies (PBMs). OBJECTIVE: To determine pharmacy student knowledge and opinions about managed care pharmacy, including the function of PBMs in the delivery of health care, in a college of pharmacy, and to explore tendencies in communication between pharmacy interns and patients in the community setting. METHODS: Students from all 4 PharmD years (n = 663) in 1 college of pharmacy were invited to complete an online survey consisting of 19 questions on demographics, students' views and understanding of PBMs, and interest in working at a PBM in their career. Follow-up in-person and online focus group sessions with representatives from each pharmacy class year were conducted to collect information from students regarding views and understanding of managed care pharmacy. Focus group data were analyzed using a constant comparative method by 2 independent researchers. RESULTS: Of 374 respondents, 332 (88.8%) answered all of the survey questions and were included in the analysis. Most students (72.0%) indicated that they understand little or nothing about the functions of PBMs; 84.3% rated the amount that they had been taught about PBMs in pharmacy school as "inadequate" or "very inadequate;" and 45.2% indicated little or no interest in a PBM career. Yet, 34.7% (99 of 285) of students with past or current community pharmacy work experience rated the percentage of time that PBMs directly affected their practice worksite during a shift at 50% or greater. Focus group emerging themes confirmed survey data findings that students feel uninformed about managed care but regularly communicate with patients about managed care issues. Focus group findings also suggest that students may perceive managed care to be a "masculine," "uncaring" field. CONCLUSIONS: In an exploratory survey conducted at 1 pharmacy school, students perceived themselves as generally uninformed about managed care issues, yet more than one-third believed that dealing with PBMs constituted a significant portion of their work day as community-based pharmacy interns. Managed care understanding is necessary for all pharmacy students because most graduates will practice in community settings. Patients are exposed to managed care and their pharmacy benefit primarily at the point of medication procurement and medication counseling. As a result, pharmacists provide many patients with managed care and pharmacy benefit education. Schools of pharmacy may wish to evaluate and consider increasing the amount of curriculum content specific to managed care and PBMs.

Medical Costs and Health Care Utilization Among Self-Insured Members with Carve-In Versus Carve-Out Pharmacy Benefits.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacy benefit can be purchased as part of an integrated medical and pharmacy health package-a carve-in model-or purchased separately and administered by an external pharmacy benefit manager-a carve-out model. Limited peer-reviewed information is available assessing differences in use and medical costs among carve-in versus carve-out populations. OBJECTIVE: To compare total medical costs per member per year (PMPY) and utilization between commercially self-insured members receiving carve-in to those receiving carve-out pharmacy benefits overall and by 7 chronic condition subgroups. METHODS: This study used deidentified data of members continuously enrolled in Cambia Health Solutions self-insured Blue plans without benefit changes from 2017 through 2018. Cambia covers 1.6 million members in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Utah. The medical cost PMPY comparison was performed using multivariable general linear regression with gamma distribution adjusting for age, gender, state, insured group size, case or disease management enrollment, 7 chronic diseases, risk score (illness severity proxy), and plan paid to total paid ratio (benefit richness proxy). Medical event objectives were assessed using multivariable logistic regression comparing odds of hospitalization and emergency department (ED) visit adjusting for the same covariates. Sensitivity analyses repeated the medical cost PMPY comparison excluding high-cost members, greater than $250,000 annually. Chronic condition subgroup analyses were performed using the same methods separately for members having asthma, coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, depression, and rheumatoid arthritis. RESULTS: There were 205,835 carve-in and 125,555 carve-out members meeting study criteria. Average age (SD) was 34.2 years (18.6) and risk score (SD) 1.1 (2.3) for carve-in versus 35.2 years (19.3) and 1.1 (2.4), respectively, for carve-out. Members with carve-in benefits had lower medical costs after adjustment (4%, P < 0.001), translating into an average $148 lower medical cost PMPY ($3,749 carve-out vs. $3,601 carve-in annualized). After adjustment, the carve-in group had an estimated 15% (P < 0.001) lower hospitalization odds and 7% (P < 0.001) lower ED visit odds. Of 7 chronic conditions, significantly lower costs (12%-17% lower), odds of hospitalization (22%-36% lower), and odds of ED visit (16%-20% lower) were found among members with carve-in benefits for 5 conditions (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that integrated, carve-in pharmacy and medical benefits are associated with lower medical costs, fewer hospitalizations, and fewer ED visits. This study focused on associations, and defining causation was not in scope. Possible reasons for these findings include plan access to both medical and pharmacy data and data-informed care management and coordination. Future research should include investigation of integrated data use and its effect across the spectrum of integrated health plan offerings, provider partnerships, and analytic strategies, as well as inclusion of analyzing pharmacy costs to encompass total cost of care. DISCLOSURES: This study received no external funding. The study was jointly conducted by employees of Cambia Health Solutions and Prime Therapeutics, a pharmacy benefit manager servicing Cambia Health Solutions. Smith, Lam, Lockwood, and Pegus are employees of Cambia Health Solutions. Qiu and Gleason are employees of Prime Therapeutics.

An evaluation of the relationship between the implementation of a newly designed prescription drug label at Target pharmacies and health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors represent a major public health concern, and inadequate prescription drug labels have been identified as a root cause of errors. A new prescription medication labeling system was implemented by Target pharmacies in May 2005 and aimed to improve health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the new Target label influenced patient health services utilization. SUBJECTS: Derived from 2 large health plans. RESEARCH DESIGN AND MEASURES: Using administrative claims, we identified patients with 1 of 9 chronic diseases who filled prescriptions at Target pharmacies and a matched sample who filled prescriptions at other community pharmacies. We stratified our cohort into new and prevalent medication users and evaluated the impact of the Target label on outpatient, emergency department and inpatient health services use. We used linear regression and segmented linear regression to evaluate the new-user and prevalent-user analyses, respectively. RESULTS: Our sample included 23,745 Target pharmacy users and 162,369 matched non-Target pharmacy users. In the new-user analysis, we found no significant change in rates of both outpatient (event rate ratio: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.15-1.86) and inpatient and emergency department (Event rate ratio: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.62-1.24) health services utilization in Target users after implementation when compared with non-Target users. Similarly, in the prevalent user analysis, we found no change in the level or slope of outpatient or emergency/inpatient services in Target users after implementation of the new label when compared with non-Target users. CONCLUSIONS: We found no statistically significant change in health services use attributable to the implementation of the new prescription drug label at Target pharmacies. These findings highlight the challenge of influencing health outcomes with interventions to improve health literacy.

Can improved prescription medication labeling influence adherence to chronic medications? An evaluation of the Target pharmacy label.

BACKGROUND: Prescription medication labels contain valuable health information, and better labels may enhance patient adherence to chronic medications. A new prescription medication labeling system was implemented by Target pharmacies in May 2005 and aimed to improve readability and understanding. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether the new Target label influenced patient medication adherence. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: Using claims from two large health plans, we identified patients with one of nine chronic diseases who filled prescriptions at Target pharmacies and a matched sample who filled prescriptions at other community pharmacies. MEASUREMENTS: We stratified our cohort into new and prevalent medication users and evaluated the impact of the Target label on medication adherence. We used linear regression and segmented linear regression to evaluate the new-user and prevalent-user analyses, respectively. RESULTS: Our sample included 23,745 Target users and 162,368 matched non-Target pharmacy users. We found no significant change in adherence between new users of medications at Target or other community pharmacies (p = 0.644) after implementing the new label. In prevalent users, we found a 0.0069 percent reduction in level of adherence (95% CI -0.0138-0.0; p < 0.001) and a 0.0007 percent increase in the slope in Target users (the monthly rate of change of adherence) after implementation of the new label (95% CI 0.0001-0.0013; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found no changes in adherence of chronic medication in new users, and small and likely clinically unimportant changes in prevalent users after implementation of the new label. While adherence may not be improved with better labeling, evaluation of the effect of labeling on safety and adverse effects is needed.

Effect of a retrospective drug utilization review on potentially inappropriate prescribing in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Use of potentially inappropriate medications or drugs to be avoided in the elderly (DAE) continues to be widespread. Although the literature suggests DAE are associated with negative health outcomes, educational interventions have had a positive impact on inappropriate prescribing. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to identify those members aged > or =65 years participating in a Medicare Part D Blue Cross and Blue Shield (BCBS) benefit plan who were receiving medications that may be inappropriate for use in older adults and, through a retrospective drug utilization review (RetroDUR), to notify their prcscribers of the possible safety concerns with continued use. METHODS: The analysis used retrospective administrative pharmacy claims data from 3 Medicare Part D BCBS plans across 4 states. Plan members aged > or =65 years who had a claim for > or =1 DAE during a 30-day review period (August 15, 2007-September 14, 2007) with a minimum supply of 7 days of medication were identified. The National Committee for Quality Assurance 2007 Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set measures for Medicare were used to determine DAE. A packet of information was mailed to prescribers identifying patients who had a claim for > or =1 DAE. Members were then assessed for the presence of a drug in the same drug class 6 months after the initial analysis. RESULTS: Of a possible 328,000 eligible members, 16,973 (5.2%) had a claim for > or =1 DAE during the 30-day review period. A total of 7963 intervention prescriber letters were mailed, affecting 13,198 members with 14,267 DAE claims. The final analyzable intervention cohort consisted of 10,364 members with 11,062 DAE claims. Overall, 5403 claims (48.8%) for DAE were defined as discontinued after 6 months. The most common DAE in the study were estrogens, propoxyphene, muscle relaxants, anticholinergics, antihistamines, and nitrofurantoin, accounting for 9682 claims (87.5%). At the 6-month follow-up, reductions in claims for each of the top 6 drug/drug classes ranged from 31.3% to 66.7%. As a class, the anticholinergics had the highest rate of discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: The DAE RetroDUR was associated with a possible reduction in the use of potentially inappropriate prescription medications in these older adults. Further research, using a control population, is needed to show the impact on health care utilization and costs, adverse drug events, and health care and quality-of-life outcomes.

Critical review of prasugrel for formulary decision makers.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease, including acute coronary syndromes (ACS) comprising ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI/NSTEMI) and unstable angina (UA), remains the leading cause of death in the United States. The direct and indirect costs of cardiovascular disease are estimated to surpass $165 billion in 2009. Antiplatelet pharmacotherapy has been shown to reduce ACS-related death and is part of the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the American College of Cardiology /American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) treatment guideline recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To provide formulary decision makers with information on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the thienopyridine antiplatelet agent prasugrel as well as an analysis of available efficacy and safety data and its risk-benefit profile in comparison with clopidogrel. METHODS: Literature search for information on prasugrel with a focus on (a) the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition with Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TRITON-TIMI) 38 trial, (b) briefing documents from the FDA available as of March 1, 2009, and (c) ongoing phase III studies of prasugrel. RESULTS: TRITON-TIMI 38 was a double blind, randomized superiority study involving 13,608 patients with moderate-to high-risk acute coronary syndromes with scheduled percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). TRITON-TIMI 38 data were available in a published manuscript and in an FDA review. Study patients were randomized to either prasugrel or clopidogrel once daily. The primary end point (composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) occurred in 643 patients (9.9%) in the prasugrel group and 781 patients (12.1%) in the clopidogrel group (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.73-0.93, P = 0.002). Non-coronary artery bypass graft (non-CABG) TIMI major hemorrhage occurred in 146 patients (2.4%) in the prasugrel group compared with 111 patients (1.8%) in the clopidogrel group (HR=1.32, 95% CI=1.03-1.68, P = 0.03). A subanalysis of the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial data revealed a net harm for patients with a prior history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) when treated with prasugrel (HR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.02-2.32, P = 0.04). Combination prasugrel and aspirin is currently being studied in comparison with clopidogrel and aspirin for the treatment of UA/NSTEMI patients that are medically managed. CONCLUSIONS: For every 1,000 patients treated with prasugrel instead of clopidogrel, a total of 24 end points would be prevented at the cost of 10 additional bleeding events. On February 3, 2009, the FDA Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee deemed this to be an acceptable riskbenefit profile. The committee recommended a label contraindication for patients with prior history of transient ischemic attack or stroke. Treatment versus time analyses demonstrated both early and sustained benefit for prasugrel compared with clopidogrel. However, prasugrel was associated with fewer cardiovascular events prevented per bleeding case the longer the duration of therapy. The study population of TRITON-TIMI 38 was limited to patients undergoing PCI. Managed care decision makers should consider specific criteria limiting prasugrel use to health plan members with characteristics similar to the study population in TRITON-TIMI 38 that benefited from treatment and avoiding use in patients with prior history of stroke or TIA. More data are needed before prasugrel can be recommended in patient groups not addressed by TRITON-TIMI 38.

Association of prescription abandonment with cost share for high-cost specialty pharmacy medications.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, specialty medications accounted for 15.1% of total pharmacy benefit medication spending, and per member expenditures have increased by 11.1% annually from 2004 to 2008 within a commercially insured population of 8 million members. Insurers face increasing pressure to control specialty medication expenditures and to rely on increasing member cost share through creation of a fourth copayment tier within the incentive-based formulary pharmacy benefit system. Data are needed on the influence that member out-of-pocket (OOP) expense may have on prescription abandonment (defined as the patient never actually taking possession of the medication despite evidence of a written prescription generated by a prescriber). OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between prescription abandonment and OOP expense among individuals newly initiating high-cost medication therapy with a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker or multiple sclerosis (MS) biologic agent. METHODS: This observational cross-sectional study queried a midwestern and southern U.S. database of 13,172,480 commercially insured individuals to find members with a pharmacy benefit-adjudicated claim for a TNF blocker or MS specialty medication during the period from July 2006 through June 2008. Prescription abandonment was assessed among continuously enrolled members newly initiating TNF blocker or MS therapy. Prescription abandonment was defined as reversal of the adjudicated claim with no evidence of a subsequent additional adjudicated paid claim in the ensuing 90 days. Separate analyses for MS and TNF blocker therapy were performed to assess the association between member OOP expense and abandonment rate using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend and multivariate logistic regression. Members were placed into 1 of the 7 following OOP expense groups per claim: $0-$100, $101-$150, $151-$200, $201-$250, $251-$350, $351-$500, or more than $500. The association of MS or TNF blocker abandonment rate with OOP expense was tested with logistic regression models using the $0-$100 OOP as the reference group and adjusting for age, gender, formulary status, ZIP code-level income and education, earliest specialty medication claim, and methotrexate use for the TNF blocker analysis. RESULTS: Of 2,791 members presenting a prescription to newly initiate high-cost MS therapy, 1,985 (71.1%) of the claims were for a 1-month supply with most of the remainder for a 3-month supply; 2,303 (82.5%) had an OOP expense of $0-$100, and 5.4% had an OOP expense greater than $500. The abandonment rate increased as OOP increased (test for trend, P < 0.001). Members with an OOP expense of $100 or less had an abandonment rate of 5.7%. Among members in all OOP expense groups greater than $200, the abandonment rate was significantly higher, with more than 1 in 4 members abandoning their MS claims (P < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the abandonment rate became significantly higher at OOP expenses of $201 to $250 compared with an OOP expense of $100 or less (odds ratio [OR] = 7.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.3- 16.2). The odds ratios ranged between 6.1 and 7.3 for OOP expense groups greater than $200. Of 7,313 members presenting a prescription to newly initiate TNF blocker therapy, 5,809 (79.4%) of claims were for a 1-month supply with most of the remainder for a 3-month supply; 6,123 (83.7%) had an OOP expense of $0-$100 and 5.7% had an OOP expense greater than $500. The abandonment rate increased as OOP expense increased (test for trend, P < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the TNF blocker medication abandonment rate was significantly higher for all OOP expense groups greater than $100, with abandonment odds ratios of 2.3 to 4.4 for OOP expense between $101 and $500 compared with OOP expense of $0-$100. The odds of abandonment at OOP expense of greater than $500 were 7-fold higher (OR = 7.0, 95% CI = 5.4-9.1). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to perform a focused assessment of an association between specialty medication OOP expense and new therapy prescription abandonment. The study found that per claim OOP expenses greater than $100 for TNF blocker medication and greater than $200 for MS medication were associated with increased prescription abandonment. These findings coupled with previous research identifying a negative relationship between OOP expense above $100 per month and adherence, and the commercial insurance market response to fourth-tier OOP expenses, suggests that insurers should consider the impact that specialty OOP expense may have on adherence and member satisfaction. Further prospective research should be performed to confirm these findings and assess the clinical outcomes associated with prescription abandonment.

Spinal Muscular Atrophy Therapies: ICER Grounds the Price to Value Conversation in Facts.

DISCLOSURES: No funding supported the writing of this commentary. The authors are employed by Prime Therapeutics, a pharmacy benefits management company.

Rosiglitazone and pioglitazone utilization from January 2007 through May 2008 associated with five risk-warning events.

BACKGROUND: Rosiglitazone was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for type 2 diabetes in 1999. The unique mechanism of action and low risk of hypoglycemia contributed to rapid market uptake of rosiglitazone, but safety concerns became more prominent in 2007. There were 5 major events on 4 calendar days in 2007 regarding safety concerns related to rosiglitazone in certain patients: (1) the May 21, 2007, online release of the rosiglitazone meta-analysis performed by Nissen and Wolski and the FDA safety warning on the same day; (2) the July 30, 2007, conclusion of an FDA advisory committee meeting that rosiglitazone increased cardiac ischemic risk; (3) the August 14, 2007, update of thiazolidinedione (TZD) labels with a black-box warning for heart failure; and (4) the November 14, 2007, update to the warnings and precautions section of the rosiglitazone label for coadministration of nitrate or insulin. OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe TZD (rosiglitazone and pioglitazone) utilization trends from January 1, 2007, continuing through May 2008 amid public announcements of safety concerns and (2) determine the percentage of TZD users who had medical claims indicating increased cardiovascular (CV) risk before and after release (May 21, 2007) of the FDA safety warning and online release of the meta-analysis performed by Nissen and Wolski. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of pharmacy claims was performed from 9 commercial plans with a combined 9 million eligible members, including a 1.4 million-member cohort from 1 of the plans for which medical claims data were available. We evaluated trends in TZD use for each month for the 17-month period from January 1, 2007, through May 31, 2008, including the percentage of TZD users at increased CV risk. In the trend analysis, for each calendar month of 2007, we calculated mean pharmacy claim counts per day per million members for each of the 2 TZD drugs and for a comparison drug, sitagliptin, a new oral hypoglycemic agent in a different class (dipeptidyl-peptidase-IV inhibitors). For the CV risk analysis, we used the database of integrated medical and pharmacy claims for the 1.4 million-member cohort to identify patients with a current days supply of a TZD on May 20, 2007, December 7, 2007, or May 20, 2008. The medical claims for all identified patients were queried back 2 years from May 20, 2007, December 7, 2007, or May 20, 2008, respectively. Rosiglitazone users at increased CV rsk were defined as those with a medical claim with a primary diagnosis for congestive heart failure (CHF; International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 428.xx or 398.91), those with a current supply of nitrate or insulin therapy, or those with ischemic heart disease, including myocardial infarction (MI; ICD-9-CM codes 410.xx through 414.xx, or surgical procedure codes [36.0x through 36.3x for removal of obstruction and insertion of stents, bypass surgery, and revascularization] in the primary diagnosis field). Pioglitazone users at increased risk were identified from medical claims with a CHF diagnosis code. RESULTS: The average number of claims per day per million members in January 2007 was 97.3 for rosiglitazone and 107.2 for pioglitazone. The average number of claims for rosiglitazone per day per million members began to decrease in May 2007, falling to 41.0 in December 2007, for a total decrease of 58.6% from the February 2007 peak (99.1), and fell further to 31.8 in May 2008. Pioglitazone use increased 8.0% from January to June 2007 (107.2 to 115.8) and remained relatively flat through December 2007 (114.6) and through May 2008 (108.9). Sitagliptin claims increased 5-fold, at a consistent rate, from an average of 8.6 claims per day per million members in January 2007 to 43.4 in December 2007, and continued to increase to 48.7, in May 2008. Of the 5,117 rosiglitazone users on May 20, 2007, 1,296 (25.3%) were identified at increased CV risk versus 590 (22.5%) of 2,621 users on December 7, 2007 (P = 0.006), and 336 (21.8%) of 1,541 users in May 2008 (P = 0.005). Of 6,056 pioglitazone users on May 20, 2007, 170 (2.8%) had a CHF diagnosis versus 160 (2.5%) of 6,275 users on December 7, 2007 (P = 0.376), and 122 of 5,998 users in May 2008 (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Although rosiglitazone utilization per million members declined by more than half in 2007, when CV safety concerns started to emerge, about 1 in 5 rosiglitazone users had elevated CV risk at year-end 2007 and in May 2008. About 3% of pioglitazone users in May 2007 had a diagnosis of CHF in claims history, which declined to 2% in May 2008. Insurers should consider the impact of persistent utilization of TZDs among members with CV risk factors when making formulary decisions.

Telithromycin: the perils of hasty adoption and persistence of off-label prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Telithromycin (Ketek) was approved in April 2004 for the treatment of acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (ABECB), bacterial sinusitis, and community-acquired pneumonia. The approval of telithromycin was controversial due to trial irregularities, noninferiority study designs, and use of foreign safety data. Safety concerns involving hepatotoxicity, myasthenia gravis exacerbation, and visual disturbances were increasingly documented in the literature after approval. On February 12, 2007, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) removed the bacterial sinusitis and ABECB indications and strengthened safety warnings for telithromycin. OBJECTIVE: To (1) assess the prevalence and distribution of on-label telithromycin utilization before and after the revisions of the product label and (2) assess the association of pivotal events in the life cycle of telithromycin with its use as reflected in pharmacy and medical claims. METHODS: Using retrospective administrative medical and pharmacy claims from a large midwestern commercial insurer with an eligible membership of 1.8 million members, individuals with a telithromycin claim during January 1, 2007, through April 13, 2007, were identified. Their medical claims within 30 days prior to or on the initial telithromycin claim were analyzed for the presence of an on-label diagnosis code. Monthly telithromycin and clarithromycin claim totals per million members from January 2004 through March 2007 were calculated. Claim totals were plotted to identify utilization trends in relation to the FDA health advisory for telithromycin on January 20, 2006, and the telithromycin label changes on February 12, 2007. RESULTS: The medical diagnosis analysis consisted of 507 members with 1 or more medical claims with dates of service within 30 days of at least 1 pharmacy claim for telithromycin. Using the original approved telithromycin indications, 52.3% (256 of 507) of telithromycin use was on-label. The most common on-label diagnoses were sinusitis (33.9%) and bronchitis (14.4%). A diagnosis of pneumonia was present for 3.9% of telithromycin utilizers. After the February 12, 2007, label change limiting telithromycin to community-acquired pneumonia, on-label use was 6.7% (12 of 179) of utilizers. Telithromycin claims were first detected in August 2004 and overtook the clarithromycin rate of 729 claims per million members in January 2005, reaching a peak rate of 940 claims per million members in January 2006. Telithromycin monthly claims remained higher than clarithromycin until April 2006, 3 months after the liver toxicity health advisory. In comparison with January 2006, the January 2007 telithromycin claims were 186 claims per million members, a decrease of 80%. CONCLUSION: Despite revised FDA indications and safety warnings, fewer than 1 in 15 active telithromycin users have a medical claim consistent with the only currently approved indication (pneumonia). Pharmacy claims for telithromycin dropped substantially following reports of severe hepatotoxicity and strengthened safety warnings. The high prevalence of telithromycin off-label use despite hepatotoxicity and other safety risks is cause for continued concern.

Utilization, cost trends, and member cost-share for self-injectable multiple sclerosis drugs--pharmacy and medical benefit spending from 2004 through 2007.

BACKGROUND: In 1993, interferon beta-1b became the first of 4 self-injectable multiple sclerosis (MS) drugs to be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Initially covered as a medical expense, self-injectable MS drugs are increasingly considered specialty pharmaceuticals and are often covered under the pharmacy benefit. Self-injectable MS drugs are expensive, costing approximately $2,000 per month per patient in 2007. OBJECTIVES: To (1) determine the trends for price and utilization of self-injectable MS drugs, (2) meld medical and pharmacy claims data to capture total health care spending on self-injectable MS drugs, and (3) calculate the out-of-pocket cost-share for members with pharmacy benefits. METHODS: A pharmacy benefits manager with integrated medical claims for approximately 1.8 million commercial members, about 20% of its total of 9 million commercial members, analyzed self-injectable MS pharmacy claims for a 45-month period beginning in January 2004 and ending in September 2007 and integrated medical and pharmacy claims for a 42-month period beginning in January 2004 and ending in June 2007. The 9 million members are beneficiaries of 10 Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) health plans distributed throughout the United States, and the subset of 1.8 million members are enrolled in 1 BCBS health plan in the Northern Plains states. Self-injectable MS drugs were identified using Generic Product Identifier (GPI) codes for the National Drug Code (NDC) numbers on pharmacy claims. Mail order pharmacy claims with up to a 90-day supply were counted as 3 claims, and community pharmacy claims dispensed with up to a 34-day supply were counted as 1 claim. Self-injectable MS drugs were identified from medical claims using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes: J1595 for glatiramer, J1830 for subcutaneous interferon beta-1b, Q3026 for subcutaneous interferon beta-1a, and Q3025 and J1825 for intramuscular interferon beta-1a. RESULTS: For the approximately 9 million members with data from pharmacy claims only, these 4 self-injectable MS drugs accounted for approximately 1.8% of total pharmacy benefit spending in 2004, 1.9% in 2005, 2.3% in 2006, and 2.4% in 2007. The mean average wholesale price (AWP) per member per month (PMPM) increased by 56.8%, from $1.11 PMPM in the first quarter of 2004 to $1.74 PMPM in the third quarter of 2007. Utilization was flat at about 82-83 claims per 100,000 members per month during the 45-month measurement period. The average annual price increase per unit ranged from 8.9% for interferon beta-1a to 13.3% per year for interferon beta-1b. Members paid a median out-of-pocket cost per pharmacy claim of $15 in 2004, $20 in 2005 and 2006, and $25 in the first 9 months of 2007. For the 1.8 million members with both pharmacy and medical benefit claims, the medical benefit accounted for 2.5% of total spending on MS self-injectables in 2004, 2.0% in 2005 and 2006, and 1.2% in 2007. CONCLUSION: The percentage of all pharmacy expenditures that was attributable to self-injectable MS drugs increased from 1.8% in 2004 to 2.5% in 2007. Nearly all of the increase in spending on self-injectable MS drugs over the nearly 4-year period was attributable to drug price increases because PMPM utilization was essentially unchanged. The median member cost-share was approximately 1% of the total cost of self-injectable MS drugs.

Relationship of the magnitude of member cost-share and medication persistence with newly initiated renin angiotensin system blockers.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment for chronic diseases often requires medication refill persistence. Health plans have frequently increased the amount of member cost-sharing by implementing tier-copayment pharmacy benefit designs and raising copayments. However, increased member costshare may present a barrier to the management of chronic conditions. Little is known about the relationship between the magnitude of member cost-sharing and antihypertensive persistence among members newly initiating therapy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate and quantify the relationship between amount of prescription cost-sharing and medication refill persistence among members newly initiating therapy with a single-agent angiotensin system blocker--either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB). METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of pharmacy and medical claims data for 29 employers with approximately 310,000 beneficiaries that did not have a change in pharmacy benefits including the amount of member cost-share in 2004. The claims data were supplemented with census data for household income and race at the Zip Code level. Selected patients were new users of single-agent ACEIs or ARBs (i.e., excluding ACEI or ARB in combination with hydrochlorothiazide or amlopdipine) between January 1 and June 30, 2004, without a pharmacy claim for an ACEI or an ARB in the 6 months prior to the index claim for either drug type. Medication refill persistence was measured in 3 ways: (1) total number of days without ACEIs or ARBs during 6 months follow-up, (2) proportion of days covered (PDC) with less than 80% defined as nonpersistent during 6 months follow-up, and (3) number of days to the first gap of more than 30 days in medication coverage from the index date to end of 2004 (mean [SD] follow-up=9.2 [1.8] months). Three statistical models were fit: Tobit model, examining the association between cost-sharing and total number of medication gap days; logistic regression, testing the association between cost-sharing and odds of being nonpersistent; and Cox proportional hazards model, assessing the association between cost-sharing and time to a 30-day gap. RESULTS: Among the eligible population, a study cohort of 1,351 members newly initiating a single-agent ACEI or ARB was identified. These members were 41.8% female and had a mean age of 55.9 (SD=13.1) years. On average, their member cost-share was $12.42 (SD=$8.50) per 30-day supply. Each $1 increment in per 30-day cost-share was associated with a 1.9% increase in total gap (beta=0.019, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.007-0.030, P=0.001), a 2.8% increase in the odds of being nonpersistent (odds ratio [OR]=1.028, 95% CI,1.011-1.045, P=0.001), and a 1.0% increase in the risk of having a gap of more than 30 days (hazard ratio [HR]=1.010, 95% CI, 1.001-1.019, P=0.034). Following transformation of the cost-sharing coefficient in each model, a $10 increment in cost-share had a consistent negative influence; 18.9% greater total gap days (beta=0.189, 95% CI, 0.073-0.304), 31.9% greater odds of being nonpersistent (OR=1.319, 95% CI, 1.120-1.553), and 10.2% larger hazard of having a gap of more than 30 days (HR=1.102, 95% CI, 1.007-1.205). CONCLUSION: For members newly initiating single-agent angiotensin system blocking medication, the amount of prescription cost-sharing was associated with a negative impact on refill persistence.