Stefan Varga

A Review of US Drug Costs Relevant to Medicare, Medicaid, and Commercial Insurers Post-Affordable Care Act Enactment, 2010–2016

Since passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, US stakeholders are increasingly being held accountable for the value of healthcare services and drugs administered to patients. Pharmacoeconomic analyses offer one method of demonstrating a product’s value, yet there is a lack of resources specific to US drug costs relevant to each stakeholder. The aim of this study was to review current US drug costs (post-ACA). A literature review aimed at finding evidence on outpatient prescription drug costs was performed using the following sources: PubMed, governmental agencies, news websites, the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) website, and Google Scholar. Articles were limited to those published in the years “2010–2016” and the “English” language, and those that described drug acquisition costs, reimbursement costs, and rebates or discounting for Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial payors. The Drug Cost Focus Group (DCFG) was convened to supplement the literature review; the DCFG provided their expertise on US drug costs and emerging issues affecting drug costs. ACA legislation increased drug rebates for manufacturers participating in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Acquisition costs commonly referred to in the literature include the wholesale acquisition cost and average manufacture price. Drugs reimbursed by Medicaid are currently based on the actual acquisition cost and ACA-Federal Upper Limit. Evidence suggests that reimbursement methods in the public market are varied. Current gaps in the literature regarding commercial insurers’ drug costs (post-ACA) present barriers to the application of relevant drug costs to pharmacoeconomic analyses.

Variation in hospital utilization at the end of life for patients with cancer in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy.

Introduction Despite the preference of many patients to die at home, high proportions of patients with advanced cancer undergo major procedures, receive intensive care, and die in the hospital. The goal of this study is to examine variation in hospital utilization and site of death for patients dying with poor-prognosis cancer in the Regione Emilia-Romagna (RER), Italy. Methods We conducted a retrospective, population-level study using administrative data. Patients were included if they died in 2012 and had at least one hospital admission for metastatic or poor-prognosis cancer within 180 days of death. Variations in the use of the hospital, intensive care, and procedures performed were evaluated. Results 11,470 patients died with metastatic or poor-prognosis cancer in 2012. Seventy-eight percent of patients were hospitalized in the last month of life while 50.7% of patients died in the hospital. Results varied by local health authority from 38.3% to 69.3%. Of patients who had an ICU stay, 55.1% in the community hospitals and 59.8% in the teaching hospitals were admitted to the ICU on the day of death or the day before death. 7.5% of patients underwent a major procedure in the last 30 days of life. Conclusions The overall high rate, and substantial variation, in hospital care at the end of life offers the RER the opportunity to evaluate if increasing availability of palliative care, along with provider and patient education, could reduce utilization of high-cost hospital care and increase patient and family satisfaction.

Cost-Effectiveness of Aspirin Adherence for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events

BackgroundSuboptimal adherence to aspirin therapy for secondary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events is an important public health problem. Prior studies have demonstrated non-adherent patients are at higher risk of experiencing CV events.ObjectivesThis study aimed to estimate the clinical and economic outcomes of aspirin non-adherence in patients with a prior primary CV event.MethodsWe developed a Markov model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of aspirin adherence from a generic US managed care payer perspective over a 5-year time horizon. Costs, utilities and rates of aspirin adherence, CV events and adverse events were gathered from published literature to populate the model. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs (US

The impact of disease-modifying therapy access barriers on multiple sclerosis patients: A mixed methods study. (Preprint)

) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We applied the model separately to a population without type II diabetes as a comorbidity (non-diabetic model) and a population with type II diabetes (type II diabetes model). A one-way sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the model uncertainty.ResultsThe base case showed adherent patients lived 0.25 and 0.36 QALYs longer than non-adherent patients in the non-diabetic model and type II diabetes model, respectively. Adherence to aspirin had an ICER of US

Evaluating Oncology Value-Based Frameworks in the U.S. Marketplace and Challenges in Real-World Application: A Multiple Myeloma Test Case

25/QALY in the non-diabetic population, while it saved US

Patient and Provider Characteristics Associated With Optimal Post-Fracture Osteoporosis Management

297 per patient over a 5-year period in the type II diabetes population. One-way sensitivity analysis showed the models were most sensitive to rates of non-fatal events in non-adherent patients.ConclusionThis study suggests aspirin adherence may improve QALYs for patients with a prior primary CV event. Further, it may decrease costs in patients with type II diabetes. While additional research is needed to validate these results, payers may wish to increase strategies to promote adherence in order to improve population health.Trial RegistrationNot applicable.

Hospitalization rates during potentially inappropriate medication use in a large population-based cohort of older adults

Background In the United States, people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) can face difficulty accessing disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) because of insurance, pharmacy, or provider policies. These barriers have been associated with poor adherence and negative health outcomes. Objective The goals of this study were to describe the overall occurrence of difficulties and delays associated with gaining access to DMTs among people with RRMS, to assess DMT adherence during periods of reduced access, and to contextualize the patients’ journey from receipt of a prescription for DMT to obtaining and taking their medication when faced with access barriers. Methods We recruited US-based adults self-reporting RRMS from a Web-based health data-sharing social network, PatientsLikeMe. Individuals were invited to complete a Web-based survey if they reported a diagnosis of RRMS and were prescribed a DMT for MS. Follow-up phone interviews were conducted with 10 respondents who reported experiencing an MS-related relapse during the time they had experienced challenges accessing DMTs. Results Among 507 survey completers, nearly half were either currently experiencing an issue related to DMT assess or had difficulty accessing a DMT in the past (233/507, 46.0%). The most frequently reported reasons for access difficulty were authorization requirements by insurance companies (past issues: 78/182, 42.9%; current issues: 9/42, 21%) and high out-of-pocket costs (past issues: 54/182, 29.7%; current issues: 13/42, 31%). About half (20/39, 51%) of participants with current access issues and over a third (68/165, 41.2%) of those with past issues went without their medication until they could access their prescribed DMT. Relapses were reported during periods of reduced DMT access for almost half (56/118, 47.5%) of those with past issues and nearly half (22/45, 49%) of those with current issues. Resolving access issues involved multiple stakeholder agents often coordinated in a patient-led effort. Among those who had resolved issues, about half (57/119, 47.9%) reported that doctors or office staff were involved, under half (48/119, 40.3%) were involved themselves, and about a third (39/119, 32.8%) reported the drug manufacturer was involved in resolving the issue. Follow-up interviews revealed that the financial burden associated with obtaining a prescribed DMT led to nonadherence. Additionally, participants felt that DMT treatment delays and stress associated with obtaining the DMT triggered relapses or worsened their MS. Conclusions This study expands current research by using a patient-centered, mixed-methods approach to describe barriers to MS treatment, the process to resolve barriers, and the perceived impact of treatment barriers on outcomes. Issues related to DMT access occur frequently, with individuals often serving as their own agents when navigating access difficulties to obtain their medication(s). Support for resolution of DMT access is needed to prevent undue stress and nonadherence.

Health Economic Models

BACKGROUND With the continuous rise in costs for oncology drugs, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centers Drug Abacus (DrugAbacus), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have developed value-based frameworks (VBFs) to assist stakeholders in formulary and treatment decision-making processes. Since emerging VBFs have the potential to affect available treatment options for patients, it is important to understand the differences associated with these VBFs within various therapeutic areas. OBJECTIVES To (a) compare VBFs across 3 therapeutic options for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and (b) identify challenges and limitations associated with real-world decision making using VBFs in the U.S. marketplace. METHODS The values of regimens carfilzomib (CFZ), elotuzumab (ELO), and ixazomib (IX) were generated using the ASCO, NCCN, ICER, and DrugAbacus VBFs. These regimens, used for second- or third-line treatment of RRMM, shared a common comparator in clinical trials: lenalidomide + dexamethasone (LEN + DEX). ASCOs 2016 VBF, which incorporated clinical benefit, toxicity, and bonus points, was used to generate a net health benefit score, along with the drug wholesale acquisition cost, for each regimen compared with LEN + DEX. Results of the 2016 NCCN Evidence Blocks for multiple myeloma and the ICER 2016 report of treatment options for RRMM were extracted to generate the value of CFZ, ELO, and IX. No output was generated from DrugAbacus because of the lack of regimens included in the test case. Shortcomings associated with running the test case in RRMM for each VBF were also identified. RESULTS Among the 3 therapeutic agents, CFZ, in combination with LEN + DEX, was the most valued. ASCO and ICER VBFs suggested that CFZ + LEN + DEX may be the most valued, followed by ELO + LEN + DEX and IX + LEN + DEX. NCCN suggested that LEN + DEX may be the most valued followed by CFZ + LEN + DEX, IX + LEN + DEX, and ELO + LEN + DEX. A number of shortcomings were noted across each VBF, such as complexities of drug evidence evaluation with the ASCO VBF, the inability to adjust the ICER and NCCN VBFs to specific populations, and subjectivity associated with the NCCN VBF and DrugAbacus. CONCLUSIONS Although the test case provided some consensus on treatment decisions, there is much nuance and limitations with the VBFs available for RRMM. Clearer objectivity and better adaptability to specific treatment decisions are warranted. DISCLOSURES No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. All authors contributed to study concept and design, as well data collection and interpretation. Djatche and Goble wrote and revised the manuscript, along with Chun and Varga. Portions of this work have previously been presented at the AMCP Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2017 in Denver, Colorado, March 27-30, 2017, and at the ISPOR 22nd Annual International Meeting in Boston, Massachusetts, May 20-24, 2017.

Multiple sclerosis patient experiences with access to disease-modifying therapies: A qualitative analysis on the patient impact of medication access barriers (P3.333)

Despite an estimated 2 million osteoporosis (OP)-related fractures annually, quality of care for post-fracture OP management remains low. This study aimed to identify patient and provider characteristics associated with achieving or not achieving optimal post-fracture OP management, as defined by the current HEDIS quality measure. The study included women 67 to 85 years of age, with ≥1 fracture, and continuous enrollment in a Humana insurance plan. The study identified a higher percentage of black women in the not achieved group (6.2% vs 5.4%; P < .0001) and Hispanic women in the achieved group (3.0% vs 1.3%; P < .0001). The not achieved group largely included patients residing in the South and urban and suburban areas. The majority of providers were primary care or OP-related specialty, and 66% did not achieve the 4-star OP rating. The study findings can guide development of predictive models to identify at-risk women to improve post-fracture OP management.