scholarly journals Analysis of psychiatrists’ prescription of opioid, benzodiazepine, and buprenorphine in Medicare Part D in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-54
Author(s):  
Kevin Pan ◽  
Shawgi Silver ◽  
Charles Davis
2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. e694-e702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan E.V. Caram ◽  
Tudor Borza ◽  
Hye-Sung Min ◽  
Jennifer J. Griggs ◽  
David C. Miller ◽  
...  

Introduction: Abiraterone and enzalutamide were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011 and 2012 to treat men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Most men with mCRPC are > 65 years of age and thus eligible for Medicare Part D. We conducted a study to better understand the early dissemination of these drugs across the United States using national Medicare Part D data. Methods: We evaluated the number of prescriptions for abiraterone and enzalutamide by provider specialty and hospital referral region (HRR) using Medicare Part D and Dartmouth Atlas data. We categorized HRRs by abiraterone and enzalutamide prescriptions, adjusted for prostate cancer incidence, and examined factors associated with regional variation using multilevel regression models. Results: Among providers who wrote the majority of prescriptions for abiraterone or enzalutamide in 2013 (n = 2,121), 87.5% were medical oncologists, 3.3% were urologists, and 9.2% were other provider specialties. Among prescribers, approximately 30% were responsible for three quarters of the claims for abiraterone and 20% were responsible for more than half the claims for enzalutamide. Some HRRs demonstrated low-prescribing rates despite average medical oncology and urology physician workforce density. Our multilevel model demonstrated that regional factors potentially influenced variation in care. Conclusion: The majority of prescriptions written for abiraterone and enzalutamide through Medicare Part D in 2013 were written by a minority of providers, with marked regional variation across the United States. Better understanding of the early national dissemination of these effective but expensive drugs can help inform strategies to optimize introduction of new, evidence-based mCRPC treatments.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas C. Buchmueller ◽  
Colleen Carey

The misuse of prescription opioids has become a serious epidemic in the United States. In response, states have implemented Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs), which record a patient’s opioid prescribing history. While few providers participated in early systems, states have recently begun to require providers to access the PDMP under certain circumstances. We find that “must access” PDMPs significantly reduce measures of misuse in Medicare Part D. In contrast, we find that PDMPs without such provisions have no effect. We find stronger effects when providers are required to access the PDMP under broad circumstances, not only when they are suspicious. (JEL H75, I11, I12, I18)


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 35-35
Author(s):  
Megan Veresh Caram ◽  
Tudor Borza ◽  
Hye-Sung Min ◽  
Jennifer J. Griggs ◽  
David Christopher Miller ◽  
...  

35 Background: Abiraterone and enzalutamide are oral medications approved by the Food & Drug Administration in 2011 and 2012 to treat men with advanced castration-resistant prostate cancer. Most men with advanced prostate cancer are over age 65 and thus eligible for Medicare Part D. We conducted a study to better understand the early dissemination of these drugs across the United States using national Medicare Part D data. Methods: We evaluated the number of prescriptions for abiraterone and enzalutamide by provider specialty and hospital referral region (HRR) using Medicare Part D and Dartmouth Atlas data. We categorized HRRs by abiraterone and enzalutamide prescriptions, adjusted for prostate cancer incidence, and examined factors associated with regional variation using multilevel regression models. Results: Among all providers who wrote prescriptions for abiraterone or enzalutamide in 2013 (n=2121), 87.5% were medical oncologists, 3.3% urologists, and 9.2% were listed as other provider specialties. Among those who prescribed either drug, 5% of providers were responsible for 75% of the claims for abiraterone, and 7% were responsible for 75% of the claims for enzalutamide. Some HRRs demonstrated low-prescribing rates despite average medical oncology and urology physician workforce density. Conclusions: The majority of prescriptions written for abiraterone and enzalutamide through Medicare Part D in 2013 were written by a minority of providers with marked regional variation across the United States. Better understanding the early national dissemination of these effective but expensive drugs can help inform strategies to optimize introduction of new, evidence-based advanced prostate cancer treatments.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. e0198674 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panayiotis D. Ziakas ◽  
Irene S. Kourbeti ◽  
Loukia S. Poulou ◽  
Georgios S. Vlachogeorgos ◽  
Eleftherios Mylonakis

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 67-67
Author(s):  
Syed Hussaini ◽  
Arjun Gupta ◽  
Kelly E. Anderson ◽  
Jeromie M. Ballreich ◽  
Lauren H. Nicholas ◽  
...  

67 Background: The introduction of a filgrastim biosimilar in 2014 was associated with substantial cost savings in Medicare Part B and Medicaid programs. However, Medicare Part D is unique since it is unable to directly negotiate prices with drug manufacturers. We sought to investigate the uptake of filgrastim biosimilars and impact on spending among Part D beneficiaries. Methods: We evaluated utilization trends for filgrastim (Neupogen), filgrastim-sndz (Zarxio), and tbo-filgrastim (Granix) using the 2015-2019 Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Event data. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional review of annual spending, number of beneficiaries, number of claims, spending per beneficiary, and spending per dosage unit. We excluded filgrastim-aafi (Nivestym) due to recent approval and adjusted for inflation using 2019 dollars. Results: In 2019, total aggregate Part D spending on filgrastim products was $78 million. From 2015 to 2019, the biosimilar share of total aggregate spending increased from $1.8 million (2%) to $44 million (56%), with combined biosimilar spending (Zarxio and Granix) eclipsing originator Neupogen in 2018 (within 4 years of FDA approval of Zarxio). Total spending on Neupogen reduced 58% from 2015 to 2019. While biosimilar uptake progressively increased every year, total aggregate spending on all filgrastim forms reduced only 7% from 2015 to 2019 ($84 million to $78 million). For all 3 forms, from 2015 to 2019, trends in spending were: average spending per claim ($3193 to $2549, -20%), average spending per beneficiary ($5880 to $6722, +15%), and average spending per dosage unit of filgrastim ($583 vs $571, -2%). Detailed results in Table. Conclusions: We demonstrate that the significant uptake of biosimilar filgrastim products in Medicare Part D from 2015 to 2019 was associated with a small decrease in aggregate spending, essentially unchanged per unit spending, and increased spending per beneficiary on filgrastim products. Our findings contrast with experiences across Medicare Part B and Medicaid, that demonstrated significant cost savings with biosimilar filgrastim uptake. This may be due to inability of Medicare Part D to directly negotiate prices with manufacturers (in contrast to Medicare Part B and Medicaid), supporting ongoing Congressional policy being debated in the United States Senate (H.R. 3).[Table: see text]


2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gigi Moreno ◽  
Emma van Eijndhoven ◽  
Jennifer Benner ◽  
Jeffrey Sullivan

Abstract Price controls for prescription drugs are once again at the forefront of policy discussions in the United States. Much of the focus has been on the potential short-term savings – in terms of lower spending – although evidence suggests price controls can dampen innovation and adversely affect long-term population health. This paper applies the Health Economics Medical Innovation Simulation, a microsimulation of older Americans, to estimate the long-term impacts of government price setting in Medicare Part D, using pricing in the Federal Veterans Health Administration program as a proxy. We find that VA-style pricing policies would save between $0.1 trillion and $0.3 trillion (US$2015) in lifetime drug spending for people born in 1949–2005. However, such savings come with social costs. After accounting for innovation spillovers, we find that price setting in Part D reduces the number of new drug introductions by as much as 25% relative to the status quo. As a result, life expectancy for the cohort born in 1991–1995 is reduced by almost 2 years relative to the status quo. Overall, we find that price controls would reduce lifetime welfare by $5.7 to $13.3 trillion (US$2015) for the US population born in 1949–2005.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document