Changes in the Appropriateness of US Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing After the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis of 2016-2021 Data.

BACKGROUND: No national study has evaluated changes in the appropriateness of US outpatient antibiotic prescribing across all conditions and age groups after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in March 2020. METHODS: This was an interrupted time series analysis of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database, a national commercial and Medicare Advantage claims database. Analyses included prescriptions for antibiotics dispensed to children and adults enrolled during each month during 2017-2021. For each prescription, we applied our previously developed antibiotic appropriateness classification scheme to International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes on medical claims occurring on or during the 3 days prior to dispensing. Outcomes included the monthly proportion of antibiotic prescriptions that were inappropriate and the monthly proportion of enrollees with ≥1 inappropriate prescription. Using segmented regression models, we assessed for level and slope changes in outcomes in March 2020. RESULTS: Analyses included 37 566 581 enrollees, of whom 19 154 059 (51.0%) were female. The proportion of enrollees with ≥1 inappropriate prescription decreased in March 2020 (level decrease: -0.80 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI}, -1.09% to -.51%]) and subsequently increased (slope increase: 0.02 percentage points per month [95% CI, .01%-.03%]), partly because overall antibiotic dispensing rebounded and partly because the proportion of antibiotic prescriptions that were inappropriate increased (slope increase: 0.11 percentage points per month [95% CI, .04%-.18%]). In December 2021, the proportion of enrollees with ≥1 inappropriate prescription equaled the corresponding proportion in December 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an initial decline, the proportion of enrollees exposed to inappropriate antibiotics returned to baseline levels by December 2021. Findings underscore the continued importance of outpatient antibiotic stewardship initiatives.

The impact of different strategies for modeling associations between medications at low doses and health outcomes: a simulation study and practical application to postpartum opioid use.

Pharmacoepidemiological studies commonly examine the association between drug dose and adverse health outcomes. In situations where no safe dose exists, the choice of modeling strategy can lead to identification of an apparent safe low dose range in the presence of a non-linear relationship or due to the modeling strategy forcing a linear relationship through a dose of 0. We conducted a simulation study to assess the performance of several regression approaches to model the drug dose-response curve at low doses in a setting where no safe range exists, including the use of a (1) linear dose term, (2) categorical dose term, and (3) natural cubic spline terms. Additionally, we introduce and apply an expansion of prior work related to modeling dose-response curves at low and infrequently used doses in the setting of no safe dose ("spike-at-zero" and "slab-and-spline"). Furthermore, we demonstrate and empirically assess the use of these regression strategies in a practical scenario examining the association between the dose of the initial postpartum opioid prescribed after vaginal delivery and the subsequent total dose of opioids prescribed in the entire postpartum period among a cohort of opioid-naïve women with a vaginal delivery enrolled in a State Medicaid program (2007-2014).

Interventional Pharmacoepidemiology: Design and evaluation of interventions to improve prescribing.

Despite the value of modern therapeutics, many obstacles prevent their optimal use. Overuse, underuse and misuse are common, resulting in morbidity and mortality impacting billions of individuals across the world. Pharmacoepidemiology provides important insights into drug utilization, safety and effectiveness in large populations, and it is an important method to identify opportunities to improve the value of therapeutics in clinical practice. However, for these opportunities to be realized, interventions to improve prescribing must be developed, evaluated and implemented in the real world. We provide an overview of this process, focusing especially on how such interventions can be designed and deployed to maximize scalability, adoption and impact. Prescribing represents a complex behavior with barriers and enablers, and interventions to improve prescribing will be most successful when developed, piloted and refined to maximize provider and patient acceptability. Carefully developed evaluations of interventions are also critical, and varied methods are available to empirically evaluate the intended and potential unintended consequences of interventions. With illustrative examples from the peer-reviewed literature, we provide readers with an overview of approaches to the essential and growing field of interventional pharmacoepidemiology.

Oncology drug pricing: potential Medicare savings on cancer-directed and supportive care medications through the Mark Cuban cost plus drug model.

Prescription drug costs within oncology remain a challenge for many patients with cancer. The Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC) launched in 2022, aiming to provide transparently priced medications at reduced costs. In this study, we sought to describe the potential impact of MCCPDC on Medicare Part-D oncology spending related to cancer-directed (n = 7) and supportive care (n = 26) drugs. We extracted data for drug-specific Part-D claims and spending for 2021. Using 90-count purchases from MCCPDC, we found potential Part-D savings of $857.8 million (91% savings) across the 7 cancer-directed drugs and $28.7 million (67% savings) across 21/26 (5/26 did not demonstrate savings) supportive care drugs. Collectively, our findings support that alternative purchasing models like MCCPDC may promote substantial health care savings.

Availability and Cost of Expensive and Common Generic Prescription Drugs: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Direct-to-Consumer Pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: Direct-to-consumer (DTC) pharmacies sell generic prescription drugs, often at lower prices than traditional retail pharmacies; however, not all drugs are available, and prices vary. OBJECTIVE: To determine the availability and cost of generic drugs at DTC pharmacies. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Five national DTC pharmacies in April and May 2023. PARTICIPANTS: Each qualifying form of 100 generic drugs with the highest cost-per-patient (expensive) and the 50 generic drugs with the highest number of patients (common) in Medicare Part D in 2020 MAIN MEASURES: Availability of these drugs and the lowest DTC pharmacy price for a standardized drug strength and supply (e.g., 30 pills), compared to GoodRx retail pharmacy prices. KEY RESULTS: Of the 118 expensive generic dosage forms, 94 (80%) were available at 1 or more DTC pharmacies; out of 52 common generic dosage forms, 51 (98%) were available (p < 0.001). Of the 88 expensive generics available in comparable quantities and strengths across pharmacies, 42 (47%) had the lowest cost at Amazon, 23 (26%) at Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, 13 (14%) at Health Warehouse, and 12 (13%) at Costco; for 51 common generic formulations, 16 (31%) had the lowest cost at Costco, 14 (27%) at Amazon, 10 (20%) at Walmart, 6 (12%) at Health Warehouse, and 5 (10%) at Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company. For the 77 expensive generics with available GoodRx retail pharmacy prices, the median cost savings at DTC pharmacies were $231 (95% CI, $129-$792) or 76% (IQR, 53-91%); for 51 common generics, savings were $19 (95% CI, $10-$34) or 75% (IQR, 67-83%). CONCLUSIONS: Many of the most expensive generic drugs are unavailable at direct-to-consumer pharmacies. Meanwhile, less expensive, commonly used generics are widely available, but drug prices vary by pharmacy and savings are modest, requiring patients to shop around for the lowest cost.

Characteristics of Prescription Drug Fills Using Pharmacy-Pharmacy Benefit Manager Discount Programs: The "GoodRx" Model.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize products using pharmacy-pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) discounts and to estimate the association among such discounts, prescription utilization, and out-of-pocket costs. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using IQVIA's Formulary Impact Analyzer, which contains anonymized, individual-level pharmacy claims representing US retail pharmacy transactions. We focused on 20 products with the greatest number of transactions using a pharmacy-PBM discount. Our unit of analysis was a treatment episode, defined as the length of time from an incident fill to no continuous use for 60 consecutive days after allowing for indefinite stockpiling. Outcome measures included products with greatest pharmacy-PBM discount use, characteristics of treatment episodes, and out-of-pocket costs with and without pharmacy-PBM discount. RESULTS: Across all products, 3.82% of transactions and 7.69% of treatment episodes were accompanied by a pharmacy-PBM discount. Commonly discounted products included generic treatments for chronic disease (lisinopril, levothyroxine, metformin) and neuropsychiatric conditions (alprazolam, amphetamine, buprenorphine, hydrocodone). The median postdiscount out-of-pocket cost was >2.5-fold higher during treatment episodes with a discount than those without ($15.15, interquartile range [IQR] $8.53-32.00, vs $5.88, IQR $1.40-15.00). Median treatment episode duration was 249 days (IQR 132-418) with discount use compared with 236 days (IQR 121-396) without discount use, although treatment episodes that began with a discount had fewer transactions per treatment episode and were shorter (median 212 days, IQR 114-360) than those that did not (313 days, IQR 178-500). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-PBM discounts may foster market competition and improve access for under- and uninsured individuals; however, these programs may not generate savings for many insured individuals.

Why higher copayments for opioids did not reduce use among Medicare beneficiaries.

To examine whether higher cost-sharing deterred prescription opioid use. Medicare Part D claims from 2007 to 2016 for a 20% random sample of Medicare enrollees. We obtain estimates of the effect of cost-sharing on prescription opioid use using ordinary least squares and instrumental variables methods. In both, we exploit the variation (change) in cost-sharing within plans over time for a sample of beneficiaries who remain in the same plan. Focusing on changes in cost-sharing within a plan for a constant sample of beneficiaries mitigates potential bias from plan selection and using a constant set of weights derived from use in year (t) eliminates changes in the cost-sharing indexes due to (endogenous) consumer choice in year (t+1). Part D plans adopted benefit changes designed to reduce opioid use, including moving opioids to higher cost-sharing tiers. Increasing plan copayments for hydrocodone or oxycodone was associated with reductions in plan-paid claims and offsetting increases in cash claims. Widespread availability of low-cost generics combined with the anti-clawback provision in Part D mediated the effect of higher cost sharing to curb opioid use. As plans moved generic opioids to higher cost-sharing tiers, beneficiaries simply paid cash prices and aggregate use remained largely unchanged. The anti-clawback provision in Part D, intended to protect beneficiaries from price gouging, limited plans' ability to constrain opioid use through typical demand-side measures such as increased cost-sharing.

Prescription opioid dispensing patterns among patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia (SZ) or bipolar disorder (BD) may have increased risk of complications from prescribed opioids, including opioid-induced respiratory depression. We compared prescription opioid pain medication dispensing for patients with SZ or BD versus controls over 5 years to assess dispensing trends. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study analysed US claims data from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases for individuals aged 18-64 years with prevalent SZ or BD for years 2015-2019 compared with age- and sex-matched controls. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, and medication use were assessed. Proportions of individuals dispensed prescription opioids chronically (ie, ≥70 days over a 90-day period or ≥ 6 prescriptions annually) or nonchronically (≥1 prescription, chronic definition not met) were assessed. RESULTS: In 2019, the Commercial and Medicaid databases contained records for 4773 and 30,179 patients with SZ and 52,780 and 63,455 patients with BD, respectively. Patients with SZ or BD had a higher prevalence of comorbidities, including pain, versus controls in each analysis year. From 2015 to 2019, among commercially insured patients with SZ, chronic opioid-dispensing proportions decreased from 6.1% (controls: 2.7%) to 2.3% (controls: 1.2%) and, for patients with BD, from 11.4% (controls: 2.7%) to 6.4% (controls: 1.6%). Chronic opioid dispensing declined in Medicaid-covered patients with SZ from 15.0% (controls: 14.7%) to 6.7% (controls: 6.0%) and, for patients with BD, from 27.4% (controls: 12.0%) to 12.4% (controls: 4.7%). Among commercially insured patients with SZ, nonchronic opioid dispensing decreased from 15.5% (controls: 16.4%) to 10.7% (controls: 11.0%) and, for patients with BD, from 26.1% (controls: 17.5%) to 20.0% (controls: 12.2%). In Medicaid-covered patients with SZ, nonchronic opioid dispensing declined from 22.5% (controls: 24.4%) to 15.1% (controls: 12.7%) and, for patients with BD, from 32.3% (controls: 25.9%) to 24.6% (controls: 13.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The proportions of individuals dispensed chronic or nonchronic opioid medications each year were similar between commercially and Medicaid-insured patients with SZ versus controls and were higher for patients with BD versus controls. From 2015 to 2019, the proportions of individuals who were dispensed prescription opioids chronically or nonchronically decreased for patients with SZ or BD and controls.

Use of medication in pregnancy on the rise: Study on 1.4 million Danish pregnancies from 1998 to 2018.

INTRODUCTION: Maternal demographics have evolved, and more women than ever enter pregnancy with preexisting comorbidity and with potentially complex medication exposure, including polypharmacy (concomitant intake of multiple medications). This study aims to describe the evolution of medication use in pregnancy in Denmark from 1998 to 2018 with special focus on polypharmacy, patterns of use, and underlying demographics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A Danish nationwide historical registry study based on all clinically recognized pregnancies with a gestation ≥10 weeks between 1998 and 2018. Medication use was estimated by redemption of prescriptions during pregnancy. RESULTS: Among a total of 1 402 327 clinically recognized pregnancies, redemption of at least one prescription medication during pregnancy increased from 56.9% in 1998 to 63.3% in 2018, coinciding with an increased use of polypharmacy (from 24.8% in 1998 to 35.2% in 2018). The prevalence of pregnant women who used medications for chronic conditions increased more than the prevalence of women treated for occasional or short-time conditions. Redemption of one or multiple prescription medications during pregnancy was mostly seen among pregnant women ≥35 years of age. However, pregnant women <25 years old exhibited the largest increase in medication use during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Medication use in general, and polypharmacy in particular, increased from 1998 to 2008, possibly as the result of an increased prevalence of pregnant women with chronic conditions requiring pharmacological treatment. Notably, a marked maternal age-based discrepancy in usage pattern was observed, highlighting the need for further research in this area. The rise in the prevalence of polypharmacy during pregnancy underscores the need for pharmacovigilance to monitor adverse effects. Future studies should investigate the patterns of polypharmacy and the accompanying maternal and fetal risks.

Relationships of Self-reported Opioid Use and Misuse and Pain Severity With Probable Major Depression Among Participants With Spinal Cord Injury.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the relations of pain intensity, opioid use, and opioid misuse with depressive symptom severity and probable major depression (PMD) among participants with spinal cord injuries (SCI), controlling for demographic, injury, and socioeconomic characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Medical University in the Southeastern United States (US). PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=918) were identified from 1 of 2 sources including a specialty hospital and a state-based surveillance system in the Southeastern US. Participants were a minimum of 18 years old at enrollment and had SCI with non-complete recovery. Participants were on average 57.5 years old at the time of the study and an average of 24.4 years post SCI onset. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants completed a self-report assessment that included frequency of prescription opioid use and misuse, based on the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), and the PHQ - 9 to measure depressive symptom severity and PMD. RESULTS: Opioid use, opioid misuse, and pain intensity were related to elevated depressive symptom severity and higher odds of PMD. Non-Hispanic Blacks had fewer depressive symptoms and lower odds of PMD, as did those with higher incomes. Veterans had lower risk of PMD, whereas ambulatory participants had a higher risk of PMD. Age at SCI onset had a mixed pattern of significance, whereas years of education and years since injury were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The relation between pain intensity with depressive symptom severity and PMD was profound, consistent with the biopsychosocial model of pain. The greater risk of PMD and higher depressive symptom severity among those using opioids and misusing opioids raises further concern about long-term prescription opioid use. Alternative treatments are needed.

Using a mobile application to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing for older Brazilian adults in primary care: a triple-blind randomised clinical trial.

BACKGOUND: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) has been evaluated in several countries, and several strategies have been devised for deprescribing drugs in older adults. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a mobile application in reducing PIP for older adults in primary care facilities in Brazil. METHODS: This randomised, triple-blind, parallel-group trial was conducted in 22 public primary care facilities in Brazil. During the intervention phase, the general practitioners (GPs) were randomly allocated to the intervention (MPI Brasil app provides information about PIP, therapeutic alternatives and deprescribing) or control (MedSUS app provides general information about medications) group. All GPs were trained on the Clinical Decision-Making Process and how to access an Evidence-Based Health website. The GPs received an Android tablet with an installed mobile application depending on their allocated group, which they used when caring for older patients over at least 3 months. At the end of this period, a sample of older patients aged ≥ 60 years who had been awaiting medical consultation by the participating GPs were interviewed and their prescriptions analysed. The primary outcome was the frequency of PIP in and between the groups. RESULTS: Among 53 GPs who were administered the baseline survey, 14 were included in the clinical trial. At baseline, 146 prescriptions were analysed: the PIP overall was 37.7% (55/146), in the intervention group was 40.6% (28/69), and in the control group was 35.1% (27/77). After the intervention, 284 prescriptions were analysed: the PIP overall was 31.7% (90/284), in the intervention group was 32.2% (46/143), and in the control group was 31.2% (44/141) (RR: 1.16; 95% CI, 0.76-1.76). In the within-group analysis, the PIP reduced from before to after the intervention in both groups-more significantly in the intervention than in the control group (p < 0.001). In the stratified analysis of PIP frequency by GPs, there was a relative risk reduction in 86% (6/7) of GPs in the intervention group compared to 71% (5/7) in the control group. CONCLUSION: We found that the MPI Brasil app effectively reduced PIP, suggesting that it may be useful to incorporate this tool into clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02918643). First registration on 22/09/2016.

A survey on perceived medication guide reading and comprehension ease among US adults.

Medication guides (MGs) provide patients with important information about certain prescription drugs to help them take these drugs safely. We surveyed US residents about their perceptions of MG readability and understandability. We randomly sampled 5204 US residents (age 18+) from Ipsos's KnowledgePanel to complete a two-part survey. Only respondents who reported receiving an MG with their prescription drugs (n = 3852) completed part 2, which included two key items: How easy to [(1)read/(2)understand] are the MGs that you have received from a pharmacy along with your prescription medicines? (1 = Very easy, 5 = Very difficult; reverse-coded). Health literacy (HL) and demographic data were also collected. After weighting our data, we found that 85% of respondents who reported receiving an MG perceived this information as 'very easy' (27.3%), 'somewhat easy' (28.3%) or 'about average' (29.3%) to read. Eighty-seven percent of respondents who reported receiving an MG perceived it as 'very easy' (27.6%), 'somewhat easy' (30.2%) or 'about average' (29.5%) to understand. ANOVAs revealed higher average perceived MG reading and comprehension ease scores among respondents presumed to have adequate versus inadequate HL (ps ≤ 0.0006). Younger or less-educated respondents and non-Hispanic Blacks perceived MGs as easier to read and understand, on average, than their counterparts (ps ≤ 0.0001). Many of these relationships remained intact in models predicting perceived MG reading and comprehension ease (ps ≤ 0.001). Adjusted R2 values across models were small, however (≤0.06). Our findings suggest most US residents (18+) who received MGs perceived them to be 'about average' to 'very easy' to read and understand.

Federal Enforcement of Pharmaceutical Fraud under the False Claims Act, 2006-2022.

CONTEXT: The False Claims Act is the US federal government's primary tool for identifying and penalizing pharmaceutical fraud. The Department of Justice uses the False Claims Act to bring civil cases against drug manufacturers that allegedly obtain improper payment from federal programs. METHODS: The authors searched the Department of Justice website for press releases published between 2006 and 2022 that announced fraud actions brought against drug companies. They then used the World Health Organization's Anatomical Therapeutic Classification index to identify the classes of prescription drugs implicated in fraud actions. FINDINGS: During fiscal years 2006-2022, payments by six manufacturers amounted to more than 28% of total payments made as a result of federal False Claims Act actions. Nervous system and cardiovascular drugs were the classes of medications most commonly implicated in alleged fraud. Federal officials most frequently alleged that companies improperly promoted nervous system drugs and paid kickbacks to increase revenues from cardiovascular, antineoplastic and immunomodulating, and alimentary tract and metabolism drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite frequent pharmaceutical fraud settlements and penalties, incidence of alleged fraud among drug companies remains high. Alternative methods for preventing and deterring fraud could help safeguard our health systems and promote public health, and policy makers should ensure that effective fraud enforcement complements preventive public health regulation.

Prescriptions of psychotropic and somatic medications among patients with severe mental disorders and healthy controls in a naturalistic study.

PURPOSE: Psychotropic and somatic medications are both used in treating severe mental disorders (SMDs). Realistic estimates of the prevalence of use across medication categories are needed. We obtained this in a clinical cohort of patients with SMD and healthy controls (HCs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prescriptions filled at Norwegian pharmacies the year before and after admittance to the Thematically Organized Psychosis (TOP) study were examined in 1406 patients with SMD (mean age 32.5 years, 48.2% women) and 920 HC (34.1 years, 46.2% women). Using data from the Norwegian Prescription Database (NorPD), the number of users in different anatomical therapeutic chemical (ATC) categories was compared using logistic regression. Population estimates were used as reference data. RESULTS: Use of antipsychotics (N05A), antiepileptics (N03A), antidepressants (N06A), anxiolytics (N05B), hypnotics and sedatives (N05C), anticholinergics (N04A), psychostimulants, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and nootropic agents (N06B) and drugs for addiction disorders (N07B) was significantly more prevalent in patients with SMD than HC. Use of diabetes treatment (A10), antithrombotic drugs (B01), beta blockers (C07), lipid modifiers (C10), and thyroid and endocrine therapeutics (H03) was also more prevalent in patients with SMD, but with two exceptions somatic medication use was comparable to the general population. Among HC, there was low prevalence of use for most medication categories. CONCLUSION: Patients were using psychiatric medications, but also several types of somatic medications, more often than HC. Still, somatic medication use was mostly not higher than in the general population. The results indicate that HC had low use of most medication types.

Substance Use Screening in Geriatric Primary Care: Cultural Issues and Alcohol Consumption in the Deep South.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate indicators of potentially hazardous alcohol use among older adults living in a region with high substance use stigma. METHODS: Patients at a university-affiliated geriatrics clinic in the Deep South of theUS completed behavioral health screenings including self-reported alcohol use, symptoms of depression or anxiety, and cognitive functioning between 2018 and 2022. RESULTS: Participants (N = 278) averaged 76.04 years of age (SD = 9.25), were predominantly female (70.9%), and non-Hispanic white (84.5%), with an averageof 6.08 comorbid diagnoses (SD = 2.86). Race/ethnicity, age, and symptoms of anxiety were associated with alcohol use and hazardous alcohol use, with non-Hispanic whites, younger individuals, and those with more anxiety symptoms reporting more alcohol use. Notably, alcohol use and hazardous alcohol use were associated with cognitive functioning in the dementia range. CONCLUSION: Self-reported alcohol use is low in geriatric primary care in the Deep South, US, differs by race/ethnicity, and is predictive of cognitive impairment when alcohol use is hazardous. Issues of trust and stigma may play a role in self-report ofstigmatized behaviors. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Self-reported alcohol intake must be considered within the cultural context of regional stigma. Recommendations to address this are provided.

Medicaid Spending on Antiretrovirals From 2007 Through 2019.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral (ARV) medications to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are a major contributor to Medicaid prescription drug spending. Despite having been used for over 3 decades, the first generic ARVs only recently became available, and many newer versions continue to be sold at high prices despite within-class competition. We estimated Medicaid spending on ARVs from 2007 through 2019. METHODS: Using public Medicaid State Drug Utilization data, we identified trends in ARV spending and use from 2007 through 2019. We estimated net spending and average prices (spending per 30-day supply), accounting for statutory Medicaid rebates, including a 15%-23% base rebate plus additional rebates if a drug's price increased faster than inflation. RESULTS: Among 48 ARVs, estimated net Medicaid spending from 2007 through 2019 was $25 billion for 17 million 30-day supplies. Annual use increased 118%, from 0.7 million 30-day supplies in 2007 to 1.6 million in 2019. During this time, estimated annual net spending increased 178%, from $1.1 billion to $3.0 billion, and average net prices increased 28%, from $1432 to $1830 per 30-day supply. CONCLUSIONS: Annual Medicaid net spending on ARVs nearly tripled from 2007 to 2019, due to a combination of expanded use and rising prices. Medicaid did not extract expected benefits from its mandatory inflationary rebates because they were offset by use of newer, more expensive ARVs. To better control spending related to products with incremental innovation, the US government should be authorized to assure that launch prices for new drugs are aligned with the added benefit they offer over existing therapies.

Patient Understanding of Oncology Clinical Trial Endpoints in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertising.

BACKGROUND: This study examined how people interpret overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS) endpoints in the context of direct-to-consumer television ads. Although there is little research on this topic, initial evidence suggests that people can misinterpret these endpoints. We hypothesized that understanding of ORR and PFS would be improved by adding a disclosure ("We currently do not know if [Drug] helps patients live longer") to ORR and PFS claims. METHODS: We conducted 2 online studies with US adults examining television ads for fictional prescription drugs indicated to treat lung cancer (N = 385) or multiple myeloma (N = 406). The ads included claims about OS, ORR with and without a disclosure, or PFS with and without a disclosure. In each experiment, we randomized participants to view 1 of 5 versions of a television ad. After viewing the ad twice, participants completed a questionnaire that measured understanding, perceptions, and other outcomes. RESULTS: In both studies, participants correctly differentiated between OS, ORR, and PFS via open-ended responses; however, participants in the PFS conditions (versus ORR conditions) were more likely to make incorrect inferences about OS. Supporting the hypothesis, adding a disclosure made expectations around living longer and quality-of-life improvements more accurate. CONCLUSION: Disclosures could help reduce the extent to which people misinterpret endpoints like ORR and PFS. More research is needed to establish best-practice recommendations for using disclosures to improve patient understanding of drug efficacy without changing their perception of the drug in unintended ways.

Improving Food and Drug Administration-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coordination for Drugs Granted Accelerated Approval.

Policy Points The increasing number of drugs granted accelerated approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has challenged the Medicare program, which often pays for expensive therapies despite substantial uncertainty about benefits and risks to Medicare beneficiaries. We recommend several administrative and legislative approaches for improving FDA-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) coordination around accelerated-approval drugs, including promoting earlier discussions among the FDA, the CMS, and drug companies; strengthening Medicare's coverage with evidence development program; linking Medicare payment to evidence generation milestones; and ensuring that the CMS has adequate staffing and resources to evaluate new therapies. These activities can help improve the integrity; transparency; and efficiency of approval, coverage, and payment processes for drugs granted accelerated approval. CONTEXT: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s accelerated-approval pathway expedites patient access to promising treatments. However, increasing use of this pathway has challenged the Medicare program, which often pays for expensive therapies despite substantial uncertainty about benefits and risks to Medicare beneficiaries. We examined approaches to improve coordination between the FDA and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for drugs granted accelerated approval. METHODS: We argue that policymakers have focused on expedited pathways at the FDA without sufficient attention to complementary policies at the CMS. Although differences between the FDA and CMS decisions are to be expected given the agencies' different missions and statutory obligations, procedural improvements can ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have timely access to novel therapies that are likely to improve health outcomes. To inform policy options and recommendations, we conducted semistructured interviews with stakeholders to capture diverse perspectives on the topic. FINDINGS: We recommend ten areas for consideration: clarifying the FDA's evidentiary standards; strengthening FDA authorities; promoting earlier discussions among the FDA, the CMS, and drug companies; improving Medicare's coverage with evidence development program; tying Medicare payment for accelerated-approval drugs to evidence generation milestones; issuing CMS guidance on real-world evidence; clarifying Medicare's "reasonable and necessary" criteria; adopting lessons from international regulatory-reimbursement harmonization efforts; ensuring that the CMS has adequate staffing and expertise; and emphasizing equity. CONCLUSIONS: Better coordination between the FDA and CMS could improve the transparency and predictability of drug approval and coverage around accelerated-approval drugs, with important implications for patient outcomes, health spending, and evidence generation processes. Improved coordination will require reforms at both the FDA and CMS, with special attention to honoring the agencies' distinct authorities. It will require administrative and legislative actions, new resources, and strong leadership at both agencies.

Drug shortages. Part 1. Definitions and harms.

Drug shortages are repeatedly in the news. The earliest drug shortages were reported during the First World War, but the numbers of shortages have increased in recent years. In the first part of this two-part review, we discuss definitions of drug shortages and so-called stockouts, which are localized shortages, and the harms that they can cause. Drug shortages make it difficult or impossible to meet the therapeutic needs of individual patients or populations, but we lack an adequate definition. The problems are too complicated to be encompassed in a brief intensional dictionary-style definition, and that is reflected in the many different attempts at definition that have been proposed. We therefore propose an extensional operational definition that incorporates the processes by which products are manufactured, the causes of shortages and the contributory factors. A definition of this sort allows one to identify the main causes of a particular drug shortage and therefore the remedies that might prevent, mitigate or manage it. In the second part of the review we discuss the causes and solutions in more detail. Adverse drug reactions and medication errors attributable to shortages occur but are not often reported. Adverse reactions to substitute medicines are possible, and errors can occur because of unfamiliarity or unnecessary treatment with replacement medicines. Other harmful outcomes include withdrawal reactions, undertreatment, treatment delays and cancellations, failure of alternatives and disruption of clinical trials.

Drug shortages. Part 2: Trends, causes and solutions.

Drug shortages make it difficult or impossible to meet the therapeutic needs of individual patients or populations. In the first part of this review we proposed an operational definition that incorporates the processes by which products are manufactured, the causes of shortages and stock-outs (local shortages), and the contributory factors. Here we discuss causes and possible solutions. Drug shortages have complex causes, and a single cause cannot always be identified. Reasons include lack or shortage of raw materials, manufacturing difficulties, regulatory and political actions, voluntary recalls, just-in-time inventory systems, halts in production for financial or other business reasons, low demand (eg, orphan products, reduced usage), mergers, market shifts (eg, diversion to home markets) and unexpected increases in demand (eg, improved diagnosis, new trial information, epidemics and pandemics, inappropriate use, off-label use). Potential solutions are as diverse as the potential causes. Prevention is hard, because shortages are not easily predicted. Everyone in the supply chain is involved in anticipating and managing shortages, with responsibilities for preventing them or at least trying to mitigate their effects. This includes manufacturers and suppliers, particularly of generic formulations, pharmacists, prescribers, patients and governments. Solutions can therefore be linked to the causes and classified according to where the responsibility for implementing them lies.