Differences in Diabetic Prescription Drug Utilization and Costs Among Patients With Diabetes Enrolled in Colorado Marketplace and Medicaid Plans, 2014-2015.

Importance: Increasing prices of antidiabetic medications in the US have raised substantial concerns about the effects of drug affordability on diabetes care. There has been little rigorous evidence comparing the experiences of patients with diabetes across different types of insurance coverage. Objective: To compare the utilization patterns and costs of prescription drugs to treat diabetes among low-income adults with Medicaid vs those with Marketplace insurance in Colorado during 2014 and 2015. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included diabetic patients enrolled in Colorado Medicaid and Marketplace plans who were aged 19 to 64 years and had incomes between 75% and 200% of the federal poverty level during 2014 and 2015. Data analysis was conducted from September 2020 to April 2021. Exposures: Health insurance through Colorado Medicaid or Colorado's state-based Marketplace. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were drug utilization (prescription drug fills) and drug costs (total costs and out-of-pocket costs). The secondary outcome was months with an active prescription for noninsulin antidiabetic medications. An all payer claims database was combined with income data, and linear models were used to adjust for clinical and demographic confounders. Results: Of 22 788 diabetic patients included in the study, 20 245 were enrolled in Medicaid and 2543 in a Marketplace plan. Marketplace-eligible individuals were older (mean [SD] age, 52.12 [10.60] vs 47.70 [11.33] years), and Medicaid-eligible individuals were more likely to be female (12 429 [61.4%] vs 1413 [55.6%]). Medicaid-eligible patients were significantly more likely than Marketplace-eligible patients to fill prescriptions for dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (adjusted difference, -3.7%; 95% CI, -5.3 to -2.1; P < .001) and sulfonylureas (adjusted difference, -6.6%; 95% CI, -8.9 to -4.3; P < .001). Overall rates of insulin use were similar in the 2 groups (adjusted difference, -2.3%; -5.1 to 0.5; P = .11). Out-of-pocket costs for noninsulin medications were 84.4% to 95.2% lower and total costs were 9.4% to 54.2% lower in Medicaid than in Marketplace plans. Out-of-pocket costs for insulin were 76.7% to 94.7% lower in Medicaid than in Marketplace plans, whereas differences in total insulin costs were mixed. The percentage of months of apparent active medication coverage was similar between the 2 groups for 4 of 5 drug classes examined, with Marketplace-eligible patients having a greater percentage of months than Medicaid-eligible patients for sulfonylureas (adjusted difference, 5.3%; 95% CI, 0.3%-10.4%; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, drug utilization across multiple drug classes was higher and drug costs were significantly lower for adults with diabetes enrolled in Medicaid than for those with subsidized Marketplace plans. Patients with Marketplace coverage had a similar percentage of months with an active prescription as patients with Medicaid coverage.

Strategies to Reduce Out-of-Pocket Medication Costs for Canadians Living with Heart Failure.

INTRODUCTION: Daily medication is the cornerstone of evidence-based therapy to reduce mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure (HF). Up to 20% of Canadian patients pay for medications out of pocket. We sought to identify strategies that patients and prescribers can employ to reduce these costs. METHODS: We collected data from outpatient pharmacies in Hamilton, Ontario. We determined prices for different medications in each of the drug classes recommended for HF with reduced ejection fraction in the Canadian Cardiovascular Society's guidelines. We examined differences in dispensing and delivery fees and inquired about other cost-saving strategies. RESULTS: We collected data from 24 different pharmacies, including a selection of hospital-based, independent, and larger chain pharmacies. In the most extreme scenario (i.e., 90-day prescription instead of a 30-day prescription and the least expensive generic drug instead of the most expensive brand name drug), total medication costs can differ by up to $495.56 per month. Costs were affected by choice of agent within a drug class, generic versus brand-name drug, quantity dispensed, dispensing fee, and delivery cost. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription content, dispensing practice, and pharmacy choice can remarkably impact out-of-pocket costs for HF medications. Prescribers can reduce costs by writing 90-day prescriptions and choosing the lowest-cost generic drugs in each therapeutic class. Patients should consider the services received for their pharmacy dispensing fees, use free delivery services where needed, and request inexpensive generic drugs. Pharmacists can facilitate cost minimization without compromising therapeutic efficacy.

Part D coverage gap reform: trends in drug use and expenditures.

OBJECTIVES: This study analyzed annual trends in the distribution of beneficiaries entering each benefit phase and the utilization of and expenditures for prescription drugs among Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2008 to 2015. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, repeated cross-sectional analysis using Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data. METHODS: The study population included elderly Part D beneficiaries without a low-income subsidy, with continuous enrollment in a Part D plan, and with at least 1 prescription fill for a given year. We assessed annual trends for 3 outcomes: (1) proportion of beneficiaries entering each benefit phase and the number of days taken to enter these phases, (2) number of 30-day prescription drug fills, and (3) total and out-of-pocket spending on prescription drugs. RESULTS: The proportion of beneficiaries reaching the catastrophic coverage phase increased after the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and they reached the threshold earlier in the year. The overall number of 30-day drug fills increased over the study period, although no statistically significant changes in utilization were seen among those reaching the catastrophic coverage phase. Total drug spending steadily increased over time, particularly after the ACA, with the largest increase seen in those reaching the catastrophic threshold; however, out-of-pocket spending significantly decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study provides support for reductions in financial barriers to prescription drugs under the ACA, substantial increases in both total drug spending and the proportion of high-cost beneficiaries in the Part D program indicate a growing burden of Part D spending on the Medicare program, which is expected to continue to grow in the future.

Development of a method to determine the cost of breast cancer treatment with chemotherapy at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: There has been no comprehensive study determining the financial burden of breast cancer in the South African (SA) public sector. OBJECTIVES: To develop a method to determine the cost of breast cancer treatment with chemotherapy per episode of care and to quantify the associated costs relating to chemotherapy at Groote Schuur Hospital (GSH), a government hospital in SA. These costs included costs associated with the management of adverse events arising from chemotherapy. METHODS: Retrospective patient-level data were collected for 200 patients from electronic databases and patient folders between 2013 and 2015. Direct medical costs were determined from the health funder's perspective. The information collected was categorised into the following cost components: chemotherapy medicines, support medicines, administration of chemotherapy, laboratory tests, radiology scans and imaging, doctor consultations and adverse events. Time-and-motion studies were conducted on a set of new patients and the data obtained were used for the study sample of 200 patients. All the above costs were used to determine the cost of chemotherapy per episode of care. The episode of care was defined as the care provided from 2 months prior to the date of commencing chemotherapy (pre-chemotherapy phase), during chemotherapy (treatment phase) and until 6 months after the date when the last cycle of chemotherapy was administered (follow-up phase). RESULTS: A method was developed to determine the episode-of-care costs for breast cancer at GSH. The total direct medical cost for treatment of breast cancer at GSH for 200 patients was ZAR3 154 877, and the average episode-of-care cost per patient was ZAR15 774. The average cost of management of adverse events arising from the various treatment modalities was ZAR13 133 per patient. It was found that the cost of treating a patient with adverse events was 1.8 times higher than the cost of treating a patient without adverse events. Of the patients, 86.5% managed to complete their prescribed chemotherapy treatment cycles, and the average cost of treatment of these patients was 1.3 times more than the average cost for patients who could not complete their treatment, based on the number of treatment cycles received. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive method to determine the costs associated with breast cancer management per episode of care was developed, and costs were quantified at GSH according to the treatment protocol used at the hospital.

Current treatment patterns and medical costs for multiple myeloma in Japan: a cross-sectional analysis of a health insurance claims database.

Aims: Various drugs have recently been launched for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). This increase in the number of treatment options has potentially changed treatment patterns and medical costs for patients with MM. Japanese public health insurance claims were analyzed to examine the change in the treatment patterns of MM drugs and medical costs per patient.Materials and methods: A claims database provided by Medical Data Vision was used, which includes data from ∼20 million patients from >300 acute care hospitals across Japan. The type of MM drugs prescribed and medical costs for patients with MM between April 2008 and December 2016 were examined using monthly cross-sectional analyses. Patients with an International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis code of C90.0 were classified as having MM. MM drugs were defined by generic names.Results: In total, 19,137 patients with MM (average age at first diagnosis: 69.6 years; percentage of women: 47.9%) were identified from the database. The percentage of patients prescribed each MM drug changed substantially as novel drugs were launched. Total medical costs increased until 2010, then stabilized. MM drug costs increased from approximately 2010, but costs for other care decreased, particularly for hospitalization (including surgery).Limitations: The database contained data from large, acute care hospitals, which may have caused bias in terms of patients' clinical history and disease severity.Conclusions: Total medical costs for MM have remained stable since 2010. MM drug costs increased, but costs for other care decreased after the launch of lenalidomide in 2010 and other drugs in 2015 and later. More detailed research is required to confirm whether the launch of novel drugs caused the changes in medical costs.

The cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole compared to the standard of care in the treatment of patients with invasive fungal infection prior to differential pathogen diagnosis in the United Kingdom.

Aims: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole compared with the standard of care, voriconazole, for the treatment of patients with invasive fungal infection disease when differential diagnosis of the causative pathogen has not yet been achieved at treatment initiation.Materials and methods: The economic model was developed from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) and used a decision-tree approach to reflect real-world treatment of patients with invasive fungal infection (IFI) prior to differential pathogen diagnosis. It was assumed that 7.8% of patients with IFI prior to differential pathogen diagnosis at treatment initiation actually had mucormycosis, and confirmation of pathogen identification was achieved for 50% of all patients during treatment. To extrapolate to a lifetime horizon, the model considered expected survival based on the patients' underlying condition. The model estimated the incremental costs (costs of drugs, laboratory analysis, hospitalization, and management of adverse events) and clinical outcomes (life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)) of first-line treatment with isavuconazole compared with voriconazole. The robustness of the results was assessed by conducting deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Results: Isavuconazole delivered 0.48 more LYs and 0.39 more QALYs per patient at an incremental cost of £3,228, compared with voriconazole in the treatment of patients with IFI prior to differential pathogen diagnosis. This equates to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £8,242 per additional QALY gained and £6,759 per LY gained. These results were driven by a lack of efficacy of voriconazole in mucormycosis. Results were most sensitive to the mortality of IA patients and treatment durations.Conclusions: At a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000 per additional QALY, the use of isavuconazole for the treatment of patients with IFI prior to differential pathogen diagnosis in the UK can be considered a cost-effective allocation of healthcare resources compared with voriconazole.

Impact of brand drug discount cards on private insurer, government and patient expenditures.

BACKGROUND: Brand discount cards have become a popular way for patients to reduce out-of-pocket spending on drugs; however, controversy exists over their potential to increase insurers' costs. We estimated the impact of brand discount cards on Canadian drug expenditures. METHODS: Using national claims-level pharmacy adjudication data, we performed a retrospective comparison of prescriptions filled using a brand discount card matched to equivalent generic prescriptions between September 2014 and September 2017. We investigated the impact on expenditures for 3 groups of prescriptions: those paid only through private insurance, those paid only through public insurance and those paid only out of pocket. RESULTS: We studied 2.82 million prescriptions for 89 different medications for which brand discount cards were used. Use of discount cards resulted in 46% higher private insurance expenditures than comparable generic prescriptions (+$23.09 per prescription, 95% confidence interval [CI] $22.97 to $23.21). Public insurance expenditures were only slightly higher with cards: an increase of 1.3% or $0.37 per prescription (95% CI $0.33 to $0.41). Finally, out-of-pocket transactions using a card resulted in mean patient savings of 7% or $3.49 per prescription (95% CI -$3.55 to -$3.43). The impact varied widely among medicines across all 3 analyses. INTERPRETATION: The use of brand discount cards increased costs to private insurers, had little impact on public insurers and resulted in mixed impacts for patients. These effects likely resulted from private insurers reimbursing brand drug prices even when generics were available and from discount cards being adjudicated after claims were sent to other insurers in most cases. Patients and their clinicians should recognize that discount cards have mixed impacts on out-of-pocket costs.

Strategies Used by Adults Aged 65 and Over to Reduce Their Prescription Drug Costs, 2016-2017.

In 2017, 86% of U.S. adults aged 65 and over reported being prescribed medication in the past 12 months (1). Most adults aged 65 and over have prescription drug coverage through either Medicare Part D or some source such as private health insurance, Medicaid, or Veterans Administration coverage (2). However, previous data indicate that some may still use strategies to reduce prescription drug costs, including not taking their medication as prescribed or asking their doctor for a lower-cost medication (3). This report examines the percentage of adults aged 65 and over who used these strategies to reduce their prescription drug costs in the past 12 months by selected characteristics.

Inpatient, Outpatient, and Pharmacy Costs in Patients With and Without HIV in the US Veteran's Affairs Administration System.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients and medical costs (inpatient, outpatient, pharmacy, total) using a national cohort of HIV-infected Veterans and non-HIV matched controls within the Veteran's Affairs (VA) Administration system. DESIGN: This study used claims (January 2000 to December 2016) extracted from the VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure and VA Health Economics Resource Center. Cases included Veterans with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision/International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision for HIV with at least 1 prescription for a complete antiretroviral therapy regimen (January 2000 to September 2016). Two non-HIV controls were exact matched on race, sex, month, and year of birth. All patients were followed until the earliest of the following: last date of VA activity, death, or December 31, 2016. RESULTS: A total of 79 578 patients (26 526 HIV and 53 052 non-HIV) met all study criteria. The average age was 49.3 years, 38% were black, 32% were white, and 97% were male for both the HIV and control cohorts. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression models demonstrated that HIV was associated with higher odds of incurring a pharmacy cost (odds ratio = 2286.45, 95% confidence interval: 322.79-16 195.82), 4-fold, and 2-fold higher odds of incurring both outpatient and inpatient costs compared to the matched controls, respectively. In adjusted multivariable gamma generalized linear models, HIV-positive patients had an almost 4-fold, 17-fold, and almost 2-fold higher cost than matched controls in total, pharmacy, and outpatient costs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study found an association between HIV-positive patients having higher odds of incurring a medical cost as well as higher medical costs compared to non-HIV controls.

Potential impact of pharmaceutical industry rebates on medication adherence.

Many patients struggle to take their prescription medications as prescribed. Multiple interacting factors influence medication nonadherence. The cost of medications, particularly a patient's out-of-pocket cost, spans several of these domains. One proposed option for reducing a patient's out-of-pocket cost involves directly sharing manufacturer rebates with patients to lower their out-of-pocket costs at the pharmacy counter. Rebates are widely used across industries (eg, pharmaceutical manufacturers, tourism taxes, automobile manufacturers) in negotiations between sellers and buyers for a particular product. Medication rebates play an important role in the current US pharmaceutical marketplace. However, rebate contract terms are not publicly reported, so it is difficult for patients to determine if, and how, a rebate is reflected in their out-of-pocket costs. This commentary addresses the role of rebates in the current US healthcare landscape and their relationship with medication adherence.

Ongoing initiatives within the Scottish National Health Service to affect the prescribing of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and their influence.

Aim: Increasing use of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in Scotland, coupled with safety concerns with some SSRIs, and the increasing availability of generic SSRIs, have resulted in multiple initiatives to improve the quality and efficiency of their prescribing in Scotland. Our aim is to assess their influence to provide future direction. Materials & methods: The prescription costs analysis database was used to document utilization and expenditure on SSRIs between 2001 and 2017 alongside documenting the initiatives. Results: Multiple interventions over the years increased international nonproprietary name prescribing up to 99.9% lowering overall costs. This, coupled with initiatives to limit escitalopram prescribing due to concerns with its value, resulted in a 73.7% reduction in SSRI expenditure between 2001 and 2017 despite a 2.34-fold increase in utilization. Safety warnings resulted in a significant reduction in the prescribing of paroxetine, citalopram and escitalopram alongside a significant increase in sertraline Conclusion: Multiple initiatives have increased the quality and efficiency of SSRI prescribing in Scotland providing direction to others.

Effect of a medical subsidy on health service utilization among schoolchildren: A community-based natural experiment in Japan.

Reducing out-of-pocket medical payments for children can reduce financial barriers to healthcare, but may increase health service expenditure. Efficient schemes of patient cost-sharing are needed to address this. We explored the impacts of a medical subsidy for children (MSC), which contained two schemes for cost-sharing of medical expenditure and health service utilization. The first is a monthly stop-loss policy, or caps on out-of-pocket payments, for outpatient/inpatient services; this reduces out-of-pocket payments for those who use greater amounts of health services. The second is a free prescription policy, which eliminates out-of-pocket payments regardless of the amount of drug expenditure. Expansion of the MSC was used as a natural experiment in a Japanese prefecture. We analyzed Japanese National Health Insurance claims data covering April 2013 to January 2017, and found no significant effect of the stop-loss policy on outpatient/inpatient service expenditures, regardless of the children's baseline health status. The free prescription policy, however, significantly increased prescription drug expenditure to 116% in the total sample and 121% among children with good health status, but not among children with poor health status. Increased health expenditure among healthy, low-volume users was found to cause increased overall expenditure. The stop-loss policy for children is potentially efficient because it selectively reduced out-of-pocket payments in high-volume users and did not increase overall expenditure.

Prices, availability and affordability of insulin products: a cross-sectional survey in Shaanxi Province, western China.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate price, availability and affordability of insulin products in Shaanxi Province, western China. METHODS: We used a simplified and adapted WHO/Health Action International method to obtain the availability and prices of insulin products and five oral anti-diabetic medicines as comparators in public general hospitals and private retail outlets. In addition, we investigated the price components of eight selected insulin products by tracing the supply chain. RESULTS: All three kinds of insulin products, prandial, basal and premixed insulin, are 100% available in public hospitals, and have fairly high availability in the private sector (62.5-68.8%). The prices of most insulin products were higher than international reference prices in both sectors (ranging from 0.95 times to 2.33 times). All insulin products were unaffordable as they would cost 3.5-17.1 days' wage of the lowest-paid government workers in Shaanxi. The manufacturer's markup (selling price), which comprised more than 60% of the final price of all insulin products surveyed, was the largest price component. CONCLUSIONS: Although availability of insulin products was high in public general hospitals and private retail pharmacies, their high price made them unaffordable to diabetes patients, especially low-income patients. The government should increase insurance compensation for those who need these life-saving medicines or decrease the cost of insulin products through negotiation with suppliers.

Out-of-Pocket Spending Not Associated with Oral Oncolytic Survival Benefit.

BACKGROUND: With total and out-of-pocket spending for oral oncolytics rising, there is increased interest in choosing oncology treatments based on their clinical value relative to cost. OBJECTIVE: To determine if out-of-pocket spending varied for higher versus lower benefit oral oncology drugs reimbursed by commercial insurers. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of commercial insurer prescription drug claims filed between 2007 and 2014 for 13 oral oncolytics approved before 2009. We calculated mean monthly out-of-pocket payment for each fill by patient. We then categorized oral oncolytics by their overall and progression-free survival benefits for each FDA-approved indication, using evidence from published studies. We assessed the relationship of survival benefit with mean monthly out-of-pocket payment, adjusting for demographic and plan characteristics. RESULTS: Our population included 44,113 patients aged 18-65 years (mean 52.5 [SD 9.4]) with a cancer diagnosis who filled 731,354 prescriptions. The most commonly represented oncolytics were imatinib (37.4% of fills), lenalidomide (17.7% of fills), and dasatinib (10.0% of fills). Approximately 32.3% of fills were for drug-indication pairs with an overall survival benefit of 4+ years. In adjusted analyses, there was no clear pattern to suggest that out-of-pocket payments differed with drug indication-specific survival benefits. Drugs for indications providing > 0 to 1 year of overall survival benefit were significantly more likely to have a lower out-of-pocket payment versus those prescribed off-label, but there were no significant differences in out-of-pocket payments between drugs and associated indications in any other survival category versus drugs used off-label. CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-pocket payments for oral oncolytics were not clearly related to indication-specific value in commercially insured patients. This finding suggests that despite increased attention to value- and indication-based drug pricing, cost sharing for oral oncolytics does not currently reflect these goals. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by Research Scholar Grant RSGI-14-030-01-CPHPS from the American Cancer Society; the NIH Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) K12 Program; the North Carolina Translational and Clinical Sciences Institute (UL1TR001111) Grant; and K24CA181510 from the National Cancer Institute. The authors have no disclosures. Data from this study were presented at the 2017 American Society for Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting on June 5, 2017, in Chicago, Illinois.

Costs of medication in older patients: before and after comprehensive geriatric assessment.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy and inappropriate drug use cause numerous complications, such as cognitive impairment, frailty, falls, and functional dependence. The present study aimed to determine the effect of the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) on polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), and to evaluate the economic reflections of medication changes. METHODS: One thousand five hundred and seventy-nine older patients, who had undergone CGA, were retrospectively evaluated. The drugs, drug groups, and number of drugs that the patients used were recorded. Appropriate drug therapy was identified by both CGA and STOPP/START criteria. Based on these criteria, PIMs were discontinued and PPOs were started. The monthly cost of these drugs was calculated separately for PIMs and PPOs by using the drugstore records. RESULTS: After CGA, while the prevalence of non-polypharmacy was increased from 43.3% to 65.6%, the prevalence of polypharmacy and hyperpolypharmacy was decreased from 56.7% to 34.4% and 12.0% to 3.6%, respectively. The three most common PIMs discontinued were proton pump inhibitors, anti-dementia drugs, and antipsychotics, respectively. However, the most common PPOs started were vitamin D and B12 supplements, and anti-depressants. After CGA, monthly saved total per capita cost of PIMs was US$12.8 and monthly increased total per capita cost of PPOs was $5.6. CONCLUSION: It was demonstrated that prevalence of polypharmacy, PIM, and PPO could be decreased by CGA including START/STOPP criteria in older adults. Furthermore, this will have beneficial effects on economical parameters due to decreasing drug-related health care costs.

How does retirement affect healthcare expenditures? Evidence from a change in the retirement age.

Using individual-level administrative panel data from Hungary, we estimate causal effects of retirement on outpatient and inpatient care expenditures and pharmaceutical expenditures. Our identification strategy is based on an increase in the official early retirement age of women, using that the majority of women retire upon reaching that age. According to our descriptive results, people who are working before the early retirement age have substantially lower healthcare expenditures than nonworkers, but the expenditure gap declines after retirement. Our causal estimates from a two-part (hurdle) model show that the shares of women with positive outpatient care, inpatient care, and pharmaceutical expenditures, respectively, decrease by 3.0, 1.4, and 1.3 percentage points in the short run due to retirement. These results are driven by the relatively healthy, by those who spent some time on sick leave and by the less educated. The effect of retirement on the size of positive healthcare expenditures is generally not significant.