Association of out-of-pocket costs on adherence to common neurologic medications

Ensuring Access to Neurologic Care: Challenges and Opportunities

Neurologic disorders are prevalent in the United States, with an estimated 60% of Americans experiencing at least one neurologic condition. This volume of neurologic disease requires commensurate care. In this article, we review access to neurologic care and examine challenges and opportunities across several dimensions of access. Long wait times for neurologists and evidence that neurologists see only a fraction of certain neurologic conditions suggest issues with the availability of care; better triage of neurologists' expertise and employment of neurology advanced practice providers may improve the supply of neurologic care. Accessibility of neurologic care is hindered by regional inequities and urban/rural disparities, which may be attenuated through the use of telemedicine. High out-of-pocket costs and excessive pharmaceutical prices inhibit the affordability of neurologic care; these obstacles may be addressed with more appropriate test utilization and more effective drug price negotiation. Lastly, innovative care models facilitated by recent technological advances have the potential to profoundly expand access to neurologic care.

Cost Trends of New-To-Market Neurologic Medications: An Insurance Claims Database Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Costs for neurologic medications have increased considerably in recent years. Since 2014, more than 30 neurologic medications have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for neurologic conditions. This study aims to characterize recent trends in annual costs and aggregate spending from 2012 to 2021 for new-to-market (NTM) medications for 9 neurologic conditions.

METHODS

We used the Merative MarketScan commercial and Medicare supplemental databases to observe patients seen by a neurologist with neurologic diseases with newly FDA-approved medications from 2014 to 2021: amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR), Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), Huntington disease (HD), myasthenia gravis (MG), migraine, orthostatic hypotension (OH), tardive dyskinesia (TD), and spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Patients were included if they had ≥1 disease-related prescription medication fill from 2012 to 2021. NTM (medications approved from 2014 to 2021) and older evidence-based guideline-supported medications were observed annually. Outcomes examined were annual and aggregate out-of-pocket (OOP) and total medication costs.

RESULTS

We identified 2,687 unique individuals with ALS, 38 with ATTR, 69 with DMD, 884 with HD, 9,984 with MG, 441,099 with migraine, 4,723 with OH, 1,266 with TD, and 17 with SMA. The youngest population was DMD (mean = 25 years [SD = 7]), and the oldest was TD (mean = 66 years [SD = 14]). For DMD, the population was 99% male and for migraine, the population was 84% female, and the other conditions had more relatively even sex divides. Collectively, migraine medications had the largest increase in aggregate costs (1993%) and had a substantial increase in OOP costs on average by 234% ($86-$288). Eculizumab for MG was an extreme outlier, with OOP costs increasing by 4,099% ($413-$17,359) and aggregate OOP costs by 7,005% ($5,375-$381,894). OOP costs of edaravone ($304-$5,707) and deutetrabenazine ($670-$7,170) sharply increased by 1,775% and 971%, respectively.

DISCUSSION

NTM medications for neurologic conditions have substantial and increasing individual and societal costs, which was not observed for older generic medications. These data suggest a need for policies to limit the financial burden of NTM medications on patients with neurologic conditions.

Changes in employment status and income and workplace organizational support among cancer survivors: A descriptive study in Iran

PURPOSE

Cancer is the second leading cause of mortality in Iran, significantly impacting patients' lives and the public health system. This study aims to investigate changes in employment status and income and workplace organizational support among Iranian cancer survivors following their diagnosis.

METHODS

This study was conducted at the Cancer Institute of Imam Khomeini Hospital complex in Tehran, Iran, in 2019. A total of 250 cancer survivors who were employed prior to their diagnosis and more than a year had passed since their diagnosis were selected from the IROPICAN study and participated in this research. Data collection was performed through telephone interviews using a validated researcher-made questionnaire. Statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS v.18 software.

RESULTS

Cancer diagnosis led to changes in the employment status of 75 % (N = 188) of participants, with nearly half (N = 122) becoming unemployed. Financial necessity was the primary reason survivors continued working after treatment. Additionally, 76 % experienced income changes, with 85 individuals facing a complete loss of income. Only half of the 115 patients requiring organizational support in the workplace received assistance, while the rest primarily benefited from approved leave applications.

CONCLUSION

Iranian cancer patients face significant socioeconomic challenges, including unemployment, reduced income, and inadequate organizational support in the workplace.

Costs Are Still on the Rise for Commonly Prescribed Branded Neurologic Medications

OBJECTIVES

To observe medication cost trends for 5 common neurologic conditions.

METHODS

We quantified annual out-of-pocket (OOP) and total medication costs for patients seen by a neurologist with epilepsy, multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson disease (PD), peripheral neuropathy (PN), and dementia/Alzheimer's disease in a commercial claims database cross-sectionally from 2012 to 2021.

RESULTS

We identified 186,144 patients with epilepsy, 54,676 with MS, 45,909 with PD, 169,127 with PN, and 60,861 with dementia/Alzheimer. OOP costs for MS medications increased each year, by 217% on average. Branded epilepsy medications had higher OOP costs than generics. Decreases ranging from 48% to 80% in annual OOP costs of duloxetine, pregabalin, rasagiline, rivastigmine, and memantine were observed in the years after generic introduction.

DISCUSSION

Preferentially selecting generic medications reduces OOP costs, other than for MS where costs continue to increase. Policy solutions, such as cost caps, are needed.

Seven Strategies to Integrate Equity within Translational Research in Neurology

The rapidly accelerating translation of biomedical advances is leading to revolutionary therapies that are often inaccessible to historically marginalized populations. We identified and synthesized recent guidelines and statements to propose 7 strategies to integrate equity within translational research in neurology: (1) learn history; (2) learn about upstream forces; (3) diversify and liberate; (4) change narratives and adopt best communication practices; (5) study social drivers of health and lived experiences; (6) leverage health technologies; and (7) build, sustain, and lead culturally humble teams. We propose that equity should be a major goal of translational research, equally important as safety and efficacy. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:432-441.

The impact of the socioeconomic factor on Parkinson's disease medication adherence: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

 Therapeutic adherence is a decisive issue on chronic disease management in patients requiring long-term pharmacotherapy, such as Parkinson's disease (PD). Although it is well known that socioeconomic factor is a barrier to medication adherence in many chronic diseases, its impacts on PD still need to be investigated.

OBJECTIVE

 Explore what and how socioeconomic factors impact medication adherence in people with PD.

METHODS

 We carried out a scoping review across three databases to identify studies exploring what and how socioeconomic factors impact medication adherence in people with PD considering eight attributes: 1. educational level, 2. disease-related knowledge, 3. income, 4. cost of medication, 5. drug subsidy (meaning presence of subsidies in the cost of medication), 6. employability, and 7. ethnicity (black, indigenous, immigrants).

RESULTS

 Of the 399 identified studies (Embase = 294, Medline = 88, LILACS = 17), eight met inclusion criteria. We identified factors covering the eight attributes of socioeconomic impact, and all of them negatively impacted the medication adherence of people with PD. The most prevalent factor in the studies was low patient educational level (four studies), followed by costs of medications (three studies), income (three studies), and disease-related knowledge (three studies). Distinctly from most of the studies selected, one of them evidenced suboptimal adherence in individuals receiving the medication free of charge, and another one could not find correlation between suboptimal adherence and educational level.

CONCLUSION

 Socioeconomic factors negatively impact medication adherence in PD patients. This review provides basis for developing patient and population-based interventions to improve adherence to treatment in PD.

Instrumental variables in real-world clinical studies of dementia and neurodegenerative disease: Systematic review of the subject-matter argumentation, falsification test, and study design strategies to justify a valid instrument

OBJECTIVES

We systematically reviewed how investigators argued for and justified the validity of their instrumental variables (IV) in clinical studies of dementia and neurodegenerative disease.

METHODS

We included studies using IV analysis with observational data to investigate causal effects in clinical research studies of dementia and neurodegenerative disease. We reported the subject-matter argumentation, falsification test, and study design strategies used to satisfy the three assumptions of a valid IV: relevance, exclusion restriction, and exchangeability.

RESULTS

Justification for the relevance assumption was performed in all 12 included studies, exclusion restriction in seven studies, and exchangeability in nine studies. Two subject-matter argumentation strategies emerged from seven studies on the relevance of their IV. All studies except one provided quantitative evidence for the strength of the association between the IV and exposure variable. Four argumentation strategies emerged for exclusion restriction from six studies. Four falsification tests were performed across three studies. Three argumentation strategies emerged for exchangeability across four studies. Nine falsification tests were performed across nine studies. Two notable study design strategies were reported.

CONCLUSION

Our results reinforce IV analysis as a feasible option for clinical researchers in dementia and neurodegenerative disease by clarifying known strategies used to validate an IV.

Understanding cost effectiveness in neurology

The USA spends more in healthcare per capita than any other country in the world, but ranks last among high-income industrialized nations in major markers of healthcare effectiveness such as life expectancy, maternal mortality, neonatal mortality, and infant mortality. Unlike other high-income industrialized nations, the USA does not have a national agency that systematically evaluates the cost-effectiveness of health care interventions and negotiates their price accordingly. This manuscript aims to introduce the rationale, terminology, advantages, and limitations of cost-effectiveness analysis. Cost-effectiveness analysis compares health interventions and evaluates their incremental value and their incremental cost compared with already existing healthcare interventions. Cost-effectiveness analysis integrates the best available evidence with patients' preferences to inform clinical decision making. Patients with neurological conditions are facing increasing challenges to access healthcare and prescription drugs. Cost-effectiveness analysis may help improve access to the most effective healthcare interventions and prescription drugs while containing healthcare costs.

Evolution of antiseizure medication use and cost in the United States of America 2006-2021

OBJECTIVE

To describe the evolution in use and cost of antiseizure medications (ASM) in the United States of America (USA).

METHODS

Retrospective descriptive study using the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database (data of privately-insured patients) for the years 2006 to 2021. We identified patients with epilepsy who were on ASM. We adjusted cost for inflation with the Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator.

RESULTS

We evaluated 347,158 patients (46.9 % males; median (p25-p75) age: 33 (17-49) years; 28 % with pediatric-onset epilepsy and 72 % with adult-onset epilepsy) with a total of 1,385,382 person-years and 588,285,065 ASM prescription days. The most commonly prescribed (as percentage of prescription days) ASMs in 2006 were valproate (18 %) and lamotrigine (17 %) in pediatric-onset epilepsy and phenytoin (21 %) and carbamazepine (17 %) in adult-onset epilepsy, but starting in the 2010s, levetiracetam and lamotrigine became the most commonly prescribed ASMs in both pediatric-onset (in 2021, levetiracetam 25 %, lamotrigine 16 %) and adult-onset (in 2021, levetiracetam 27 %, lamotrigine 20 %) epilepsy. The proportion of generic ASM use increased 3.6-fold: from 23 % of prescription days in 2006 to 83 % of prescription days in 2021. The median (p25-p75) average wholesale price (AWP) per person-year increased by 102 % from $2,684 ($990-$5,509) in 2006 to $5,417 ($2,858-$12,310) in 2021. The increases were greater in absolute terms for brand-name ASMs by 419 %: $3,109 ($1,564-$5,068 in 2006 and $16,149 ($12,950-$23,377) in 2021 than for generic ASMs by 462 %: $699 ($457-$1,678) in 2006 and $3,931 ($2,618-$6,081) in 2021. The costs directly borne by the patient (copay, coinsurance, deductibles, and pharmacy processing fees) increased by 69 % for brand-name ASMs from $393 ($246-$570) in 2006 to $665 ($335-$1,308) in 2021, but decreased by 37 % for generic ASMs from $147 ($98-$213) in 2006 to $92 ($51-$141) in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

The median cost of ASMs per person-year approximately doubled from 2006 to 2021. The increase in use of generic ASMs probably helped buffer the growing costs of ASMs. However, generic ASMs already represent 83 % of prescription days in 2021, with limited room to further contain costs by just increasing the proportion of generics.

Direct Medical Costs of COPD in the USA: An Analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 2017-2018

AIM

In this study, we aimed to provide a nationally representative estimate of the economic burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) by examining direct medical costs among individuals aged 45 years and older in the USA.

METHODS

Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2017-2018) data were used to estimate the direct medical costs associated with COPD. All-cause (unadjusted) cost and COPD-specific (adjusted) cost were determined for the various service categories using a regression-based approach among patients with COPD. We developed a weighted two-part model and adjusted for various demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

The study sample consisted of 23,590 patients, of which 1073 had COPD. Patients with COPD had a mean age of 67.4 years (standard error (SE): 0.41), and the total all-cause mean medical cost per patient per year (PPPY) was 2018 US $19,449 (SE: US $865), of which US $6145 (SE: US $295) was for prescription drugs. Using the regression approach, the mean total COPD-specific cost was US $4322 (SE: US $577) PPPY, with prescription drugs contributing US $1887 (SE: 216) PPPY. These results represented an annual total COPD-specific cost of US $24.0 billion, with prescription drugs contributing US $10.5 billion. The mean annual out-of-pocket spending accounted for 7.5% (mean: US $325) of the total COPD-specific cost; for COPD-specific prescription drug cost, 11.3% (mean: US $212) was out-of-pocket cost.

CONCLUSION

COPD poses a significant economic burden on healthcare payers and patients 45 years of age and older in the USA. While prescription drugs accounted for almost half of the total cost, more than 10% of the prescription drug cost was out-of-pocket.

Cost and utilization of healthcare services for persons with diabetes

AIMS

Describe and compare healthcare costs and utilization for insured persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D), type 2 diabetes (T2D), and without diabetes in the United States.

METHODS

Using a nationally representative healthcare claims database, we identified matched persons with T1D, T2D, and without diabetes using a propensity score quasi-randomization technique. In each year between 2009 and 2018, we report costs (total and out-of-pocket) and utilization for all healthcare services and those specific to medications, diabetes-related supplies, visits to providers, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits.

RESULTS

In 2018, we found out-of-pocket costs and total costs were highest for persons with T1D (out-of-pocket: $2,037.2, total: $25,652.0), followed by T2D (out-of-pocket: $1,543.3, total: $22,408.1), and without diabetes (out-of-pocket: $1,122.7, total: $14,220.6). From 2009 to 2018, out-of-pocket costs were increasing for persons with T1D(+6.5 %) but decreasing for T2D (-7.5 %) and without diabetes (-2.3 %). Medication costs made up the largest proportion of out-of-pocket costs regardless of diabetes status (T1D: 51.4 %, T2D: 55.4 %,without diabetes: 51.1 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the substantial out-of-pocket costs for people with diabetes, especially for those with T1D, providers should screen all persons with diabetes for financial toxicity (i.e., wide-ranging problems stemming from healthcare costs). In addition, policies that aim to lower out-of-pocket costs of cost-effective diabetes related healthcare are needed with a particular focus on medications.

If the Patient Does Not Take the Medication, It Will Not Work

COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIORAL COMORBIDITIES

AN UNWANTED EFFECT OF ANTIEPILEPTIC DRUGS IN CHILDREN: Adriana Ulate-Campos, Iván Sánchez Fernández Seminars in Pediatric Neurology Volume 24, Issue 4, November 2017, Pages 320-330 Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders and, despite optimally chosen and dosed antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), approximately 20%-30% of patients will continue to have seizures. Behavior and cognition are negatively impacted by seizures, but AEDs are also a major contributor to behavioral and cognitive deficits. However, the cognitive and behavioral effect of AEDs in children is insufficiently emphasized in the literature. This review summarizes the cognitive and behavioral effects of AEDs in the pediatric population with the objective of helping pediatricians and pediatric neurologists to select the AEDs with the best profile for their individual patient's needs.

Recommendations on Social Determinants of Health in Neurologic Disease

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are increasingly recognized as important drivers of inequities in neurologic disease and outcomes. However, our understanding of the biopsychosocial mechanisms by which SDOH affect neurologic disease remains in its infancy. The most robust epidemiologic research has been on the associations between education, schooling, and place-based social determinants on cognition, dementia, and cerebrovascular disease later in life. Further research is needed to more deeply understand the complex interplay of SDOH on neurologic disease. Few SDOH screening tools have been validated in populations with neurologic disease. In addition, comparison across studies and populations is hampered by lack of standardized common data elements. Experiences of populations historically underrepresented in research should be centered in future research studies, and changes should be made in recruitment expectations and measurement choices. For research on inequities, it is critical to support and incentivize institutional infrastructure to foster meaningful engagement with populations affected by research. Finally, it remains to be seen whether individual-level health or behavioral interventions or place-level, systemic or policy interventions to reduce population burden will be most effective in reducing inequities in neurologic disease and outcomes. Although numerous clinical trials have focused on addressing downstream SDOH such as health literacy and health behaviors (e.g., medication adherence, physical activity, diet), few have addressed upstream, structural determinants which may have a more profound impact on addressing inequities in neurologic disease. Ultimately, further research is needed to determine which specific SDOH should be targeted and how, when, and by whom they should be addressed to improve neurologic outcomes.

Costs and Utilization of New-to-Market Neurologic Medications

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare the utilization and costs (total and out-of-pocket) of new-to-market neurologic medications with existing guideline-supported neurologic medications over time.

METHODS

We used a healthcare pharmaceutical claims database (from 2001 to 2019) to identify patients with both a diagnosis of 1 of 11 separate neurologic conditions and either a new-to-market medication or an existing guideline-supported medication for that condition. Neurologic conditions included orthostatic hypotension, spinal muscular atrophy, Duchenne disease, Parkinson disease, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, Huntington disease, tardive dyskinesia, transthyretin amyloidosis, and migraine. New-to-market medications were defined as all neurologic medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2014 and 2018. In each year, we determined the median out-of-pocket and standardized total costs for a 30-day supply of each medication. We also measured the proportion of patients receiving new-to-market medications compared with all medications specific for the relevant condition.

RESULTS

We found that the utilization of most new-to-market medications was small (<20% in all but 1 condition), compared with existing, guideline-supported medications. The out-of-pocket and standardized total costs were substantially larger for new-to-market medications. The median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) out-of-pocket costs for a 30-day supply in 2019 were largest for edaravone ($712.8 [$59.8-$802.0]) and eculizumab ($91.1 [$3.0-$3,216.4]). For new-to-market medications, the distribution of out-of-pocket costs was highly variable and the trends over time were unpredictable compared with existing guideline-supported medications.

DISCUSSION

Despite the increasing number of FDA-approved neurologic medications, utilization of newly approved medications in the privately insured population remains small. Given the high costs and similar efficacy for most of the new medications, limited utilization may be appropriate. However, for new medications with greater efficacy, future studies are needed to determine whether high costs are a barrier to utilization.

Changes in the Use of Brand Name and Generic Medications and Total Prescription Cost Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Epilepsy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To characterize trends in antiseizure medication (ASM) fills and total prescription costs in people with epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of beneficiaries with epilepsy (ASM, plus ICD codes) in a 20% random Medicare sample, with continuous Fee-For-Service coverage (Parts A, B, and D) in 2008-2018. We summed the number of pill days and costs (adjusted to 2018 dollars) per person-year for each ASM. ASMs were categorized into brand vs generic, first vs newer generation, and enzyme inducers vs noninducers.

RESULTS

There were 77,000-133,000 beneficiaries with epilepsy per year. The most common ASM was phenytoin in 2008, which shifted to levetiracetam in 2018 (2008: phenytoin 25%, levetiracetam 14%; 2018: phenytoin 9%, levetiracetam 27%). Brand name (2008: 56%; 2018: 14%), first-generation (2008: 55%; 2018: 32%), and enzyme-inducing ASMs (2008: 44%; 2018: 24%) each decreased over time as a proportion of pill days. The number of brand pill days per person-year initially decreased (e.g., 2008: 250; 2009: 121; 2010: 96) but then plateaued (2013-2018: between 66 and 69) given a notable increase in lacosamide pill days per person (2008: 0; 2018: 20). Total brand name costs per year initially decreased 2008-2010 (2008: $150 million; 2010: $72 million) but then increased after 2010 (2018: $256 million). In 2018, brand name ASMs represented 79% of costs despite representing only 14% of pill days, a 1-year pill supply became 277% more expensive for brand name medications but 42% less expensive for generic medications over time (2008: brand ∼$2,800 vs generic ∼$800; 2018: brand ∼$10,700 vs generic ∼$460), and many common brand name ASMs cost approximately 10-fold more per pill day than their generic equivalents.

DISCUSSION

First-generation and enzyme-inducing ASMs waned from 2008 to 2018. Although brand name ASMs initially waned translating into lower costs and potentially higher value care, after 2010, brand name costs markedly increased because of increasing use of lacosamide plus a 277% increase in per-pill cost of brand name ASMs. Brand name ASMs represented a minority of prescriptions, but the majority of costs.

Ethical Perspectives on Costly Drugs and Health Care

High drug prices have created substantial challenges for patients, physicians, health systems, and payers. High drug prices can affect patient care in many ways, including limiting access to treatment, increasing the burden of administrative tasks, and contributing to physician burnout. Exorbitant drug pricing poses direct challenges for distributive justice, which is concerned with fairly distributing benefits and burdens across society. In this position statement, we discuss ethical concerns raised by high drug costs, primarily focusing on concerns around distributive justice. We consider forms of rationing, approaches to allocation, potential complexities in real-life application, and structural forces contributing to high drug costs. Finally, we consider potential policy solutions and ramifications for individual clinicians.