Costs and Utilization of New-to-Market 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.

Impact of pimavanserin on prescribing practices in parkinson disease

Introduction

Parkinson disease psychosis (PDP) is a common complication of PD. Until 2016, the only drugs available to treat PDP in the U.S. were antipsychotics with variable degrees of dopamine-receptor antagonism (DRA) that may worsen PD motor symptoms. We evaluated the impact that pimavanserin, a selective serotonin receptor inverse agonist/antagonist atypical antipsychotic (AAP) with no known DRA, had on PDP treatment practices in a commercially insured population.

Methods

We included adults diagnosed with PD who filled at least one AAP prescription from 2016 to 2022. AAP dispensings were categorized into (1) pimavanserin, (2) clozapine and quetiapine (i.e., PDP-"preferred" mixed receptor antagonist AAPs), and (3) the remaining AAPs (i.e., PDP-"nonpreferred" mixed receptor antagonist AAPs). Trends in quarterly dispensing rates per 1000 persons treated were compared across categories. Secondary analyses focused on the 65+ subpopulations insured by Medicare Advantage programs.

Results

Dispensing rates varied between 4 and 697/1000 persons treated for pimavanserin, 1434-1821 for preferred, and 394-746 for nonpreferred AAPs. Pimavanserin dispensings surpassed the nonpreferred category after quarter 3 of 2018. However, preferred AAPs, particularly quetiapine, remained the most dispensed category in the sixth year after pimavanserin's approval. We observed similar trends among Medicare Advantage enrollees.

Conclusion

The availability of pimavanserin was followed by a decline in the use of the most harmful AAPs in persons living with PD. Quetiapine remained the most prescribed AAP. Comparative safety and effectiveness studies are needed to define the relative risks and benefits of treatment options in PDP.

Awareness and care practices for rare neurologic diseases among senior neurologists: A global survey

OBJECTIVE

Rare neurologic diseases (RNDs) are difficult to diagnose and treat due to their low prevalence and complex nature. This survey evaluated awareness and current care status of RNDs among esteemed neurologists affiliated with the World Federation of Neurology (WFN).

METHODS

A 34-question survey was distributed to renowned neurologists, including delegates from national neurology societies in the WFN Assembly, various WFN committees, and members of the Rare Neurologic Diseases Specialist group. Responses were stratified by geographical regions, including Africa, the Americas, Asia/Oceania, and Europe, and into four income groups based on the World Bank Indicator. Descriptive statistics summarized responses, stratified by geographical regions or income groups, and significant differences were assessed by Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Of 190 invited neurologists, 64 responded (34 % response rate). Among respondents, 89 % agreed that RND patients should receive timely and effective care on par with more common neurological conditions. Additionally, 77 % of respondents overall thought most RNDs could be accurately diagnosed in their country. However, there were significant differences in the perceived ability of respondents' country of practice to diagnose RNDs by region, specifically in Africa (25 %), and by income of country of practice, specifically in the lower-income group (17 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This global survey highlights varying RND diagnosis and care by country socioeconomic status, suggesting potential disparities in resources and preparedness. To improve outcomes and quality-of-life for RND patients, efforts should focus on improving diagnostic capabilities, fostering collaboration among neurology centers, and promoting education on the unique challenges and treatment options of RNDs.

Dissemination of VMAT-2 Inhibitors: A New Class Drug for Tardive Dyskinesia and Huntington Disease

Background and Objectives

In 2017, the FDA approved deutetrabenazine (AUSTEDO) for the treatment of tardive dyskinesia (TD) and chorea associated with Huntington disease (HD). Concurrently, valbenazine (INGREZZA) was approved specifically for TD. The adoption of new medications is influenced by various factors, including patient's medical needs, the prescriber's adoption of new practice, and external environmental factors (e.g., cost). Our analysis aims to examine the dissemination of 2 vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT-2) inhibitors, deutetrabenazine and valbenazine, in the market.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we conducted a descriptive statistical analysis of the 2017-2020 prescription records for deutetrabenazine and valbenazine using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Part D Prescriber public use file. In addition, we linked this data set to the Open Payment database to analyze industry payments.

Results

We identified a total of 3,706 deutetrabenazine prescribers and 4,895 valbenazine prescribers. Prescription volume (standardized 30-day prescription) increased annually across different specialties for both VMAT-2 inhibitors from 2017 to 2020. Neurologists were the highest contributors to deutetrabenazine prescriptions (N = 50,017; 35.2%), and psychiatrists were the highest contributors to valbenazine prescriptions (N = 77,799; 42.3%). A total of 1,217 deutetrabenazine physician prescribers (47.5%) and 1,509 valbenazine physician prescribers (49.7%) received industry payments from TEVA Pharmaceuticals and Neurocrine Biosciences, respectively. Receipt of industry payments was associated with higher prescription volume for both deutetrabenazine (p < 0.001) and valbenazine (p < 0.001). Approximately three-quarters of the industry payments were used in nonconsulting services, with a median payment value per physician of $18,101 for deutetrabenazine and $25,920 for valbenazine.

Discussion

The findings illustrate a yearly increase in Medicare prescription volume for deutetrabenazine and valbenazine after FDA approval, with neurologists and psychiatrists as primary prescribers of deutetrabenazine and valbenazine, respectively. There was a statistical difference in the prescription volume between those who received industry payments and those who did not, suggesting that receipt of payments may be associated with prescription volume. Nonconsulting services constituted the largest sum of industry payments for both medications. Further research exploring the causative factors of new medication uptake is needed to better understand how medications disseminate across the market.

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.

Possible sex and racial disparities in myasthenia gravis care

INTRODUCTION/AIMS

Given the importance of early diagnosis and treatment of myasthenia gravis (MG), it is critical to understand disparities in MG care. We aimed to determine if there are any differences in testing, treatment, and/or access to neurologists for patients of varying sex and race/ethnicity with MG.

METHODS

We used a nationally representative healthcare claims database of privately insured individuals (2001-2018) to identify incident cases of MG using a validated definition. Diagnostic testing, steroid-sparing agents, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), plasma exchange (PLEX), and thymectomy were defined using drug names or CPT codes. Steroid use was defined using AHFS class codes. We also determined whether an individual had a visit to a neurologist and the time between primary care and neurologist visits. Logistic regression determined associations between sex and race/ethnicity and testing, treatments, and access to neurologists.

RESULTS

Female patients were less likely to get a computed tomography (CT) chest (odds ratio (OR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.83), receive steroids (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.75-0.97), steroid-sparing agents (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-0.97), and IVIG or PLEX (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.67-0.95). Black patients were less likely to receive steroids (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.96). No significant disparities were seen in access to neurologists.

DISCUSSION

We found healthcare disparities in MG treatment with female and Black patients receiving less treatment than men and those of other races/ethnicities. Further research and detailed assessments accounting for individual patient factors are needed to confirm these apparent disparities.

Trends in Physiotherapy Interventions and Medical Costs for Parkinson's Disease in South Korea, 2011-2020

OBJECTIVE

Physiotherapy (PT), which is an effective strategy for managing Parkinson's disease (PD), can influence health care utilization. We analyzed trends in health care utilization, PT interventions, and medical costs among patients with PD.

METHODS

Using data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service from 2011 to 2020, we analyzed the number of patients with PD and their health care utilization and assessed the odds ratio (OR) for receiving regular PTs.

RESULTS

Over 10 years, 169,613 patients with PD were included in the analysis. The number of patients with PD increased annually from 49,417 in 2011 to 91,841 in 2020. The number of patients with PD receiving PT increased from 4,847 (9.81%) in 2011 to 13,163 (14.33%) in 2020, and the number of PT prescriptions increased from 81,220 in 2011 to 377,651 in 2019. Medical costs per patient with PD increased from 1,686 United States dollars (USD) in 2011 to 3,202 USD in 2020. The medical expenses for each patient with PD receiving PT increased from 6,582 USD in 2011 to 13,475 USD in 2020. Moreover, regular PTs were administered to 31,782 patients (18.74%) and were administered only through hospitalization. Those patients in their 50s with disabilities demonstrated a high OR for regular PTs, whereas those aged 80 years or older and residing outside of Seoul had a low OR.

CONCLUSION

The PD burden increased in South Korea between 2011 and 2020, as did health care utilization and medical costs. A significant increase in medical expenses can be associated with increased PD incidence and PT interventions. Regular PT applications remain restricted and have barriers to access.

How should newer therapeutic agents be incorporated into the treatment of patients with myasthenia gravis?

Generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) is a postsynaptic neuromuscular junction disorder that results in fatigable muscle weakness. The traditional treatment approach includes the use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, corticosteroids, and steroid-sparing immunosuppressant therapies (ISTs) for chronic management, whereas exacerbations and crises are managed with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) and plasma exchange (PLEX). Over the past 6 years, four new therapeutic agents with novel immunological mechanisms of action-complement and neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) inhibition-were approved as a result of clinically significant improvement in gMG symptoms of those treated with these newer agents in Phase 3 clinical trials. At present, it is unclear when and in whom to initiate these therapeutic agents and how to integrate them into the current treatment paradigm. When selecting a newer therapeutic agent, we use a simple equation: Value = Clinical Improvement/(Cost + Side Effects + Treatment Burden), which guides our decision-making. We consider using these novel therapeutic agents in two specific clinical situations. Firstly, the newer agents are fast-acting, suggesting they can be used in clinically unstable patients as "bridge therapy," and secondly, they provide additional options for those patients considered treatment-refractory. There are downsides, however, including treatment cost, unique side effect profiles, and intravenous and subcutaneous drug administration (though for some, this may be an advantage). As additional drugs enter the marketplace with unique mechanisms of action, routes of administration, and dosing schedules, the placement of the novel therapeutic agents in the gMG treatment algorithm will likely evolve.

The introduction of the CGRP monoclonal antibodies and their effect on the prescription patterns of chronic migraine preventive medications in a tertiary headache center: A retrospective, observational analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of the introduction of the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) in 2018 on the prescribing of older medications for the prevention of chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND

Prior to 2018, the preventive treatment of migraine borrowed from medications intended to treat other illnesses with the last medication, onabotulinumtoxinA, receiving Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the prevention of chronic migraine in 2010. The FDA approval of three CGRP mAbs in 2018 provided the ideal natural experiment to assess how the introduction of these medications, and a fourth in 2020, affected the generally stable migraine preventive medications market.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis using the aggregated de-identified data of 6595 patients. The percentage of patients with chronic migraine who had been prescribed one of ten most prescribed oral preventive medications or onabotulinumtoxinA, or any of the four CGRP mAbs, were calculated relative to the total number of patients with chronic migraine who received a prescription for any medication from our clinic during the pre-CGRP mAb years of 2015-2017 and post-approval years of 2019-2021.

RESULTS

We observed a statistically significant decrease in the prescription of the top 10 most prescribed medications after the introduction of the CGRP mAbs overall (1456/3144, 46.3%, to 1995/4629, 43.1%, p = 0.001), as well as with most individual medications, including large decreases in verapamil (230/3144, 7.3%, to 125/4629, 2.7%; p < 0.001), the tricyclic antidepressants (494/3144, 15.7%, to 532/4629, 11.5%; p < 0.001), topiramate (566/3144, 18.0%, to 653/4629, 14.1%; p < 0.001), and onabotulinumtoxinA (861/3144, 27.4%, to 1134/4629, 24.5%; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The introduction of the CGRP mAbs during 2018 resulted in a decrease in utilization of most oral medications and onabotulinumtoxinA for the prevention of migraine. Future work should continue to observe how the prescription patterns of these medications evolve with time.

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.

Lecanemab: Looking Before We Leap

Lecanemab, a novel amyloid-sequestering agent, recently received accelerated Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of mild dementia due to Alzheimer disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Approval was based on a large phase 3 trial, Clarity, which demonstrated reductions in amyloid plaque burden and cognitive decline with lecanemab. Three major concerns should give us pause before adopting this medication: Its beneficial effects are small, its harms are substantial, and its potential costs are unprecedented. Although lecanemab has a clear and statistically significant effect on cognition, its effect size is small and may not be clinically significant. The magnitude of lecanemab's cognitive effect is smaller than independent estimates of the minimally important clinical difference, implying that the effect may be imperceptible to a majority of patients and caregivers. Lecanemab's cognitive effects were numerically smaller than the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors and may be much smaller. The main argument in lecanemab's favor is that it may lead to greater cognitive benefit over time. Although plausible, there is a lack of evidence to support this conclusion. Lecanemab's harms are substantial. In Clarity, it caused symptomatic brain edema in 11% and symptomatic intracranial bleeding in 0.5% of participants. These estimates likely significantly underestimate these risks in general practice for 3 reasons: (1) Lecanemab likely interacts with other medications that increase bleeding, an effect minimized in Clarity. (2) The Clarity population is much younger than the real-world population with mild AD dementia and MCI (age 71 years vs 85 years) and bleeding risk increases with age. (3) Bleeding rates in trials are typically much lower than in clinical practice. Lecanemab's costs are unprecedented. Its proposed price of $26,500 is based on cost-effectiveness analyses with tenuous assumptions. However, even if cost-effective, it is likely to result in higher expenditures than any other medication. If its entire target population were treated, the aggregate medication expenditures would be $120 billion US dollars per year-more than is currently spent on all medications in Medicare Part D. Before adopting lecanemab, we need to know that lecanemab is not less effective, vastly more harmful, and 100× more costly than donepezil.

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.

Breaking the cycle: unraveling the diagnostic, pathophysiological and treatment challenges of refractory migraine

Background

Refractory migraine is a poorly described complication of migraine in which migraine has chronified and become resistant to standard treatments. The true prevalence is unknown, but medication resistance is common in headache clinic patient populations. Given the lack of response to treatment, this patient population is extremely difficult to treat with limited guidance in the literature.

Objective

To review the diagnostic, pathophysiological, and management challenges in the refractory migraine population.

Discussion

There are no accepted, or even ICHD-3 appendix, diagnostic criteria for refractory migraine though several proposed criteria exist. Current proposed criteria often have low bars for refractoriness while also not meeting the needs of pediatrics, lower socioeconomic status, and developing nations. Pathophysiology is unknown but can be hypothesized as a persistent "on" state as a progression from chronic migraine with increasing central sensitization, but there may be heterogeneity in the underlying pathophysiology. No guidelines exist for treatment of refractory migraine; once all guideline-based treatments are tried, treatment consists of n-of-1 treatment trials paired with non-pharmacologic management.

Conclusion

Refractory migraine is poorly described diagnostically, its pathophysiology can only be guessed at by extension of chronic migraine, and treatment is more the art than science of medicine. Navigating care of this refractory population will require multidisciplinary care models and an emphasis on future research to answer these unknowns.