RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Fibrosis Quística , Humanos , Fibrosis Quística/tratamiento farmacológico , Fibrosis Quística/genética , Estudios Retrospectivos , MutaciónRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Farmacia , Humanos , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos , Costos de los Medicamentos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Curriculum , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud , Estudiantes de Farmacia , Adulto , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Masculino , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud/organización & administraciónRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Revisión de la Utilización de Medicamentos/normas , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros/estadística & datos numéricos , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/normas , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Contraindicaciones , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/normas , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare Part D/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Seguro de Costos Compartidos/economía , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos/economía , Negativa del Paciente al Tratamiento , Adulto , Productos Biológicos/economía , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico , Estudios Transversales , Bases de Datos Factuales , Costos de los Medicamentos , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Esclerosis Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Esclerosis Múltiple/economía , Análisis Multivariante , Factor de Necrosis Tumoral alfa/antagonistas & inhibidores , Factor de Necrosis Tumoral alfa/economíaRESUMEN
DISCLOSURES: No funding supported the writing of this commentary. The authors are employed by Prime Therapeutics, a pharmacy benefits management company.
Asunto(s)
Atrofia Muscular Espinal/tratamiento farmacológico , Atrofia Muscular Espinal/economía , Comercio/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/economía , Humanos , Modelos EconómicosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemiantes/efectos adversos , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Tiazolidinedionas/efectos adversos , Tiazolidinedionas/uso terapéutico , Cardiomiopatía Dilatada/inducido químicamente , Cardiomiopatía Dilatada/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/inducido químicamente , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Interacciones Farmacológicas , Utilización de Medicamentos , Humanos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Pioglitazona , Estudios Retrospectivos , Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Rosiglitazona , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients often misuse a combination of prescription drugs including opioids; however, the relationship between a controlled substance (CS) score and health outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between a CS scoring algorithm and health care use, specifically total cost of care, hospitalizations, and emergency room (ER) visits. METHODS: This analysis was a retrospective cohort study using administrative claims data from a large U.S. health insurer. Included in the analysis were 999,852 members with a minimum CS score of 2.5 in the fourth quarter (4Q) of 2012, who were continuously enrolled from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2013, and who were aged 18 years or older. A CS score was calculated using 4Q 2012 (3 months) prescription claims data and divided into 3 components: (1) number of CS claims, (2) number of unique pharmacies and unique prescribers, and (3) evidence of increasing CS use. The primary outcomes were total cost of care (pharmacy and medical costs), all-cause hospitalizations, and ER visits in 2013. We also quantified what a 1-point change in CS score meant for the primary outcomes. RESULTS: 47% of members had a CS score of 2.5, indicating a single CS claim, and 51% of members had a score between 3 and less than 12. The remaining 2% (20,858 members) had a score of 12 or more. There was a statistically significant and consistently increasing association between the 4Q 2012 CS score and hospitalizations, ER visits, and total costs of care in 2013. A 1-point change in CS score was associated with a $1,488 change in total cost of care, 0.9% change in the hospitalization rate, and 1.5% change in the ER visit rate. CONCLUSIONS: There is a linear association between increasing CS score and negative health outcomes. Insurers should consider interventions to lower member CS scores. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded internally by Prime Therapeutics. Starner, Qiu, and Gleason are employees of Prime Therapeutics, a pharmacy benefits management company. Karaca-Mandic is an employee of the University of Minnesota and did not receive any compensation related to this work. The results of this study were presented as a poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy's 27th Annual Meeting and Expo; San Diego, California; April 7-10, 2015. Study concept and design were contributed by Starner, Gleason, and Qiu. Qiu took the lead in data collection, assisted by Starner and Gleason. Data interpretation was performed by all the authors. Starner primarily wrote and revised the manuscript, along with the other authors.
Asunto(s)
Algoritmos , Sustancias Controladas/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Hospitalización/economía , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Sustancias Controladas/administración & dosificación , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros/economía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To describe rates of sofosbuvir initial medication adherence as a function of the insurer-required member cost (ie, out-of-pocket cost) and to determine how manufacturer coupons affect insurer-required member cost. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional analysis. METHODS: Administrative pharmacy claims data from 13 million commercially insured members were used to identify sofosbuvir new starts between January 2014 and September 2014. Members were categorized as either sofosbuvir initial adherence or as abandoning therapy. A multivariate logistic regression model adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, severity of illness, and total drug costs (health insurer plus member amount) for non-sofosbuvir pharmacy claims in 2014 was used to evaluate the association between insurer-required member cost and initial medication adherence. In a sub-analysis, sofosbuvir index claims with coupon data available were analyzed to determine how coupon use impacted insurer-required member cost. RESULTS: A total of 67.3% of members had a pre-coupon member cost of < $250 for their index sofosbuvir claim. Just 201 (5.0%) members were exposed to a member cost of more than $10,000. The logistic regression model demonstrated an association between member cost and abandonment starting at $2500 to < $5000 (odds ratio: 1.9; 95% CI, 1.01-3.43; P = .0393). The average member sofosbuvir index claim cost was $1349 before coupon was applied, and $28 after. Overall, coupons offset the member amounts paid by 98%: $771,593 of the $787,860 member cost requested by the insurer. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that a 30-day supply sofosbuvir member cost of > $2500 was associated with increased initial therapy abandonment, and that manufacturer coupons substantially reduced sofosbuvir insurer-required member cost. Insurers and policy makers should consider the impact of member cost on medication adherence and the impact coupons have on the actual member cost.
Asunto(s)
Seguro de Costos Compartidos/economía , Hepatitis C Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Hepatitis C Crónica/economía , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos/economía , Cumplimiento de la Medicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Sofosbuvir/economía , Antivirales/economía , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/métodos , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/estadística & datos numéricos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Estudios Transversales , Hepatitis C Crónica/complicaciones , Humanos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Modelos Logísticos , Análisis Multivariante , Honorarios por Prescripción de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Sofosbuvir/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Expenditures for specialty drugs account for more than 25 percent of total US drug spending and have been increasing at more than 13 percent annually. We examined insurers' role in maintaining the affordability and accessibility of specialty drugs while maximizing their value. We conducted two analyses: one using an administrative claims database with information on more than ten million commercially insured patients and another using the same database combined with the drug prescription records from a specialty pharmacy. First, we examined the prevalence of specialty drug coupons and the degree to which these reduced patients' out-of-pocket costs, focusing on 264,801 prescriptions. Second, we quantified the association between the magnitude of out-of-pocket costs for specialty drugs and patients' abandonment of their new or restarted therapy, focusing on a group of nearly 16,000 patients. We found that drug coupons accounted for $21.2 million of patients' $35.3 million annual out-of-pocket costs. In the vast majority of cases, coupons reduced monthly cost sharing to less than $250, a point at which patients were far less likely to abandon therapy with biologic anti-inflammatory drugs or with drugs for multiple sclerosis. However, by reducing cost sharing, coupons may also circumvent efforts to encourage patients to use the most cost-effective drugs.
Asunto(s)
Ahorro de Costo/economía , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/métodos , Costos de los Medicamentos , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Seguro/economía , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción/economía , Antiinflamatorios/economía , Antiinflamatorios/uso terapéutico , Ahorro de Costo/estadística & datos numéricos , Seguro de Costos Compartidos/economía , Costos de los Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Política de Salud/economía , Humanos , Esclerosis Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Esclerosis Múltiple/economía , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción/uso terapéuticoAsunto(s)
Enfermedad de Alzheimer/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de la Colinesterasa/uso terapéutico , Interpretación Estadística de Datos , Anciano , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Utilización de Medicamentos , Humanos , Cooperación del Paciente , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dalfampridine (Ampyra) is indicated to improve walking in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and was found to be effective in 35%-43% of individuals with MS in clinical trials. Dalfampridine may increase seizure risk, particularly in patients with renal impairment. A U.S. managed care expert consensus panel agreed that patient access to dalfampridine is best managed by a prior authorization (PA) in accordance with the FDA-approved labeling. To ensure safe and appropriate dalfampridine use, a health plan developed and implemented a 2-phase point-of-sale PA program. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate dalfampridine PA review decisions, utilization, and pharmacy expenditures following the implementation of a dalfampridine safety and clinical PA program compared with a group of dalfampridine utilizers unexposed to a PA program. METHODS: The study utilized retrospective administrative pharmacy claims data from a commercial health plan averaging 1.3 million members per month. The plan implemented a 2-phase dalfampridine safety and effectiveness PA program on August 1, 2010. A comparison group that did not implement the dalfampridine PA program was identified from a commercially insured population with approximately 350,000 members per month. Members in both groups were required to be continuously enrolled from August 1, 2010, through January 31, 2011. A member's earliest paid or rejected claim found from August 1, 2010, through October 31, 2010, was defined as the index claim. Dalfampridine-weighted 30-day supply claims were summed and compared between groups from index date through January 31, 2011. A pharmacy cost avoidance estimate was calculated using the difference in average claims per member from index claim through January 31, 2011, multiplied by dalfampridine wholesale acquisition cost. Overall, dalfampridine utilization was evaluated between the intervention and comparison populations from August 2010 (implementation of PA in intervention group) through December 2011. Linear regression and Poisson models were used to test the trend differences. RESULTS: The 60 PA-exposed dalfampridine members' average follow-up was 157 days. Phase 1 approval was obtained by 32 (53.3%) members; 4 (6.7%) members received a denial because of renal impairment; 8 (13.3%) members received a denial due to inability to obtain walking time; 1 (1.7%) member with relapse-remitting MS was denied a PA due to no concomitant disease-modifying agent; and 15 (25.0%) members did not initiate the PA process. Phase 2 approval was obtained by 23 (38.3%) of the 60 members. The 60 PA members had a total of 126 claims and an average utilization of 2.1 (SD 1.8) claims per member. The 20 non-PA dalfampridine members' average follow-up was 157 days. The comparison group members had a total of 84 claims and an average utilization of 4.2 (SD 2.0) claims per member. The PA program resulted in an average of 2.1 (P less than 0.001) fewer claims per member in the PA group. The total dalfampridine cost avoidance estimate was $143,010 or $0.03 per member per month. The overall measure of a monthly claims utilization difference over time was statistically significantly different at P less than 0.001, using the linear regression slope trend test. The trend line slope was not statistically significantly different, P = 0.841, between the intervention and comparison populations. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates that a dalfampridine PA program potentially improved safety and minimized dalfampridine costs. A PA program is effective in selecting appropriate utilizers for initial therapy. Addition of care management may further optimize use by encouraging adherence and tracking patient response.
Asunto(s)
4-Aminopiridina/uso terapéutico , Esclerosis Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Selección de Paciente , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Potasio/uso terapéutico , 4-Aminopiridina/efectos adversos , 4-Aminopiridina/economía , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Costos de los Medicamentos , Etiquetado de Medicamentos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Cobertura del Seguro/economía , Modelos Lineales , Masculino , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud , Persona de Mediana Edad , Distribución de Poisson , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Potasio/efectos adversos , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Potasio/economía , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Insuficiencia Renal/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Convulsiones/inducido químicamente , Convulsiones/prevención & control , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Drugs are most typically defined as specialty because they are expensive; however, other criteria used to define a drug as specialty include biologic drugs, the need to inject or infuse the drug, the requirement for special handling, or drug availability only via a limited distribution network. Specialty drugs play an increasingly important role in the treatment of chronic conditions such as multiple sclerosis (MS), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), yet little is known regarding the comprehensive medical and pharmacy benefit utilization and cost trends for these conditions. OBJECTIVE: To describe MS, RA, psoriasis, and IBD trends for condition prevalence, treatment with specialty drugs, specialty costs, nonspecialty costs, and total direct costs of care within the medical and pharmacy benefits. METHODS: This was a descriptive analysis of a commercially insured population made up of 1 million members, using integrated medical and pharmacy administrative claims data from 2008 to 2010. Analyses were limited to continuously enrolled commercially insured individuals less than 65 years of age. Condition-specific cohorts for MS, RA, psoriasis, and IBD were defined using standardized criteria. Trends in condition prevalence, specialty drug use for the conditions, and direct total cost of care were analyzed. The direct costs were subcategorized into the following: medical benefit specialty drug costs, medical benefit all other costs, pharmacy benefit specialty drug costs, and pharmacy benefit all other costs. Trends and compound annual growth rates were calculated for the total cost of care and subcategory costs from 2008 through 2010. RESULTS: Condition prevalence ranged from a low of 1,720 per million members for MS to a high of 4,489 per million members for RA. Psoriasis and MS condition prevalence rates were unchanged over the 3 years; however, IBD prevalence increased 7.0%, and RA prevalence increased 9.7%. The rate of specialty drug use was lowest for IBD (13.7%) and highest for MS (71.8%). The lowest total annual cost of care was for psoriasis ($14,815), and the highest total annual cost was for MS ($36,901). The most commonly used specialty drugs for each of the conditions were as follows: glatiramer (MS), etanercept (RA and psoriasis), and infliximab (IBD). The total annual costs were more than double for the specialty drug users for psoriasis compared with all the psoriasis members ($29,565 vs. $14,815). The total costs were only somewhat higher among MS members using specialty drugs ($41,760 vs. $36,901). Among specialty drug users for each of the cohorts, the annual costs of specialty drugs accounted for 50% or more of the total annual costs. The annual spending growth rate for specialty drugs ranged from 4.4% to 18.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Although specialty drug utilization varied widely across the 4 chronic conditions analyzed, when specialty drugs were used they accounted for the majority of the annual total direct cost of care. Because specialty drugs are accounting for a growing portion of chronic disease total cost of care, health insurers will need to become more vigilant regarding specialty drug use and focus on 4 cost saving management opportunities: drug distribution channel, utilization management, contracting activities, and care coordination.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Crónica/economía , Atención a la Salud/economía , Costos de los Medicamentos , Utilización de Medicamentos/economía , Planificación en Salud/economía , Adolescente , Adulto , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros/economía , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos/economía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Farmacias/economía , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Prior authorizations (PA) are intended to promote safe and cost-effective medication use. Unwanted outcomes may occur, however, such as a patient forgoing drug therapy after a PA. The label for rosiglitazone was revised in November 2007 to include the warning of contraindicated use with nitrates or insulin, creating an opportunity for a PA directed at safe use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antidiabetic drug utilization after the implementation of an electronic PA that denied a claim for rosiglitazone if the patient had a history of either insulin or nitrate supply in the previous 60 days. METHODS: This quasi-experimental study used pharmacy claims for 1.4 million commercially insured members who were exposed to a rosiglitazone PA beginning on January 1, 2009, compared with a group of approximately 2 million commercially insured members who did not have this safety PA intervention. Continuously enrolled members were identified who had a rejected (intervention group) or paid (comparison group) claim for rosiglitazone during the period from January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2009. Pharmacy claims were assessed for the presence of nitrates, insulin, rosiglitazone, other antidiabetic therapy, or no antidiabetic therapy supply on days 30, 60, 90, and 180 after the rejected/paid claim. A time-series analysis using rosiglitazone claims for all health plan members from January 2008 through December 2009 was used to evaluate the impact of the PA on rosiglitazone utilization overall. RESULTS: At 30 days, there were 134 patients (60.4% of 222) in the comparison group with concurrent supply of rosiglitazone with insulin and/or nitrates versus 4 patients (2.4% of 168, P less than 0.001) in the PA intervention group, and the utilization rate remained significantly higher at 180 days in the comparison group (37.8%, n = 84) versus the PA group (2.4%, n = 4, P less than 0.001). Beginning at 60 days, there was no significant difference in the percentage of members with no antidiabetic therapy in the comparison and PA intervention groups (9.9% vs. 15.5%, respectively, P = 0.133), and the rates remained similar through 180 days (15.3% vs. 13.7%, respectively, P = 0.760). The PA was associated with an absolute decrease of 5.1 average monthly rosiglitazone claims per day per million members (P less than 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This PA, intended to reduce known cardiovascular event risks among health plan members with type 2 diabetes, was associated with a significant reduction in concurrent use of rosiglitazone with nitrates or insulin.
Asunto(s)
Planes de Seguros y Protección Cruz Azul/normas , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Tiazolidinedionas/uso terapéutico , Planes de Seguros y Protección Cruz Azul/economía , Estudios de Cohortes , Contraindicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Revisión de la Utilización de Medicamentos , Femenino , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/economía , Insulina/uso terapéutico , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nitratos/uso terapéutico , Rosiglitazona , Tiazolidinedionas/economíaRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND: In 2006, pharmacies began offering select generic prescription drugs at discount prices (e.g., $4 for a 30-day supply) through nonmembership and membership programs. As part of the contract in membership generic drug discount programs, the member agrees to forgo submission of the claim to the insurance company. Claims not submitted for insurance adjudication may result in incomplete pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) and health plan data, which could negatively influence adherence reporting and clinical programs. To address potentially missing claims data, the Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services (CMS) encourages Medicare Part D sponsors to incentivize network pharmacies to submit claims directly to the plan for drugs dispensed outside of a member's Part D benefit, unless a member refuses. The extent of PBM and health plan claims capture loss due to generic drug discount programs is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To identify changes in levothyroxine utilizers' prescription claims capture rate following the advent of generic drug discount membership and nonmembership programs. METHODS: This retrospective concurrent cohort study used claims data from 3.5 million commercially insured members enrolled in health plans located in the central and southern United States with Prime Therapeutics pharmacy benefit coverage. Members were required to be 18 years or older and younger than 60 years as of January 1, 2006, and continuously enrolled from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010. Members utilizing generic levothyroxine for at least 120 days during January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006 (baseline period) from the same pharmacy group with supply on July 1, 2006, were placed into 1 of 3 pharmacy groups: (1) nonmembership (Walmart, Sam's Club, Target, Kroger, City Market, and King Soopers pharmacies), (2) membership (Walgreens, CVS, Albertsons, and Savon pharmacies), or (3) the reference group of all other pharmacies. The index date was defined as July 1, 2006. The levothyroxine claim providing supply on July 1, 2006, was the index claim. Members with a Kmart pharmacy index claim were excluded, since the Kmart membership drug discount program began prior to July 1, 2006. Levothyroxine claims capture nonpersistency, defined as the occurrence of a claim supply end date prior to a 180-day gap, was the primary outcome variable and was assessed from July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2010 (follow-up period). The odds of levothyroxine claims capture nonpersistency by pharmacy group were assessed using a logistic regression analysis adjusted for the following covariates: age, gender, median income in the ZIP code of residence (binomial for ≤ $50,000 vs. greater than $50,000), switch to a brand levothyroxine product during the follow-up period, index levothyroxine claim supply of 90 days or more, and index levothyroxine claim member cost share per 30-day supply in tertiles (≤ $5.00, $5.01-$7.99, ≥ $8.00). RESULTS: Of 2,632,855 eligible members aged 18 years or older, 13,427 met all study eligibility criteria. The baseline pharmacy groups were membership with 3,595 (26.8%), nonmembership with 1,919 (14.3%), and all other pharmacies with 7,913 (58.9%) members. The rates of levothyroxine claims capture persistency throughout the 4-year follow-up period were 85.4% for nonmembership (P = 0.593 vs. all other pharmacies), 77.7% for the membership group (P less than 0.001 vs. all other pharmacies), and 85.9% for all other pharmacies. The Kaplan-Meier comparison of claims capture persistency found nearly identical claims capture loss for the nonmembership compared with all other pharmacies group, and when compared in a multivariate logistic regression model, there was no difference in the odds of levothyroxine claims capture over 4 years follow-up (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.88-1.16, P = 0.900). The membership generic drug discount programs (Walgreens, CVS, Alberstons, and Savon pharmacies) had a statistically significant 61% higher odds (OR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.45-1.79, P less than 0.001) of levothyroxine claims capture nonpersistency. The onset of the difference between the membership group and the all other pharmacies group was temporally associated with the launch of the membership programs. In comparison to index levothyroxine member cost of ≤ $5.00 per 30-day supply, higher cost shares were associated with higher levothyroxine claims capture nonpersistency ($5.01 to $7.99 OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.19-1.52 and ≥ $8.00 OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.40-1.82). CONCLUSIONS: Among levothyroxine utilizers in 2006 (prior to the advent of drug discount programs), those with claims from a pharmacy that subsequently implemented a nonmembership generic drug discount program did not appear to have a different rate of levothyroxine claims capture than members from the reference group when followed through June 2010. Utilizers with claims from a pharmacy that subsequently implemented a membership program had a significantly lower levothyroxine claims capture rate. Increasing index levothyroxine member cost was associated with higher levothyroxine claims capture loss. Because the analysis could not directly measure claims capture loss associated with members who switched to a new pharmacy group without presenting their insurance information (e.g., membership discount programs), further research is needed to confirm these findings.
Asunto(s)
Medicamentos Genéricos/economía , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos , Adolescente , Adulto , Intervalos de Confianza , Femenino , Humanos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Masculino , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud , Cadenas de Markov , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tiroxina/economía , Tiroxina/uso terapéutico , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To identify prevalence and risk factors for exposure to drug-disease interactions included in the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) Drug-Disease Interaction (Rx-DIS) measure. DESIGN: Cross-sectional retrospective database analysis. SETTING: Outpatient clinics within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 and older who received VA outpatient care between October 1, 2003, and September 30, 2006. MEASUREMENTS: Rx-DIS exposure based on the HEDIS measure was identified in VA patients with dementia, falls, and chronic renal failure using VA pharmacy and administrative databases. Factors associated with Rx-DIS exposure were examined, including demographic, health status, and access-to-care factors, including VA outpatient health services use and copayment status. RESULTS: Of the 305,041 older veterans who met criteria for inclusion, the 1-year prevalence of Rx-DIS exposure was 15.2%; prevalence was 20.2% for dementia, 16.2% for falls, and 8.5% for chronic renal failure. Patients with high disease burden (physical, psychiatric, number of medications) were significantly more likely to have Rx-DIS exposure, regardless of condition. Hispanics and individuals with no copayments were more likely to have Rx-DIS exposure than whites or those with required copayments. There was variation in other predictors based on the type of Rx-DIS. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of Rx-DIS was common in older VA outpatients. Future studies should examine the risk of Rx-DIS exposure on health outcomes using separate analyses for each type of Rx-DIS separately before combining all Rx-DIS into a single measure of exposure. Studies that examine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce Rx-DIS exposure will also be helpful in improving the quality of care for older adults.