PURPOSE: To calculate the abandonment rate of oral oncolytic medications and identify factors that may affect likelihood of abandonment. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study using administrative claims data. METHODS: We analyzed a nationally representative pharmacy claims database and identified 10,508 patients with Medicare and commercial insurance for whom oral oncolytic therapy was initiated between 2007 and 2009. We calculated the abandonment rate for the initial claim, in which abandonment was defined as reversal of an adjudicated pharmacy claim without a subsequent paid claim for any oncolytic (oral or intravenous) within the ensuing 90 days. We assessed likelihood of abandonment using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses including patient demographics, plan type, drug type, cost sharing, and concurrent prescription activity. RESULTS: The abandonment rate of newly initiated oral oncolytics was 10.0%. Unadjusted bivariate analyses found that high cost sharing, increased prescription activity, lower income, and Medicare coverage were associated with a higher abandonment rate (P < .05). In the logistic regression model, claims with cost sharing greater than $500 were four times more likely to be abandoned than claims with cost sharing of $100 or less (odds ratio [OR], 4.46; P < .001). Patients with five or more prescription claims processed within in the previous month had 50% higher likelihood of abandonment than patients with no other prescription activity (OR, 1.50; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Abandonment of newly prescribed oral oncolytic therapy is not uncommon, and the likelihood increases for patients enrolled in plans with pharmacy benefit designs that require high cost sharing. Increased concurrent prescription activity was also associated with a higher abandonment rate. These factors should be taken into account when considering likely adherence to cancer therapy.
PURPOSE: To calculate the abandonment rate of oral oncolytic medications and identify factors that may affect likelihood of abandonment. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study using administrative claims data. METHODS: We analyzed a nationally representative pharmacy claims database and identified 10,508 patients with Medicare and commercial insurance for whom oral oncolytic therapy was initiated between 2007 and 2009. We calculated the abandonment rate for the initial claim, in which abandonment was defined as reversal of an adjudicated pharmacy claim without a subsequent paid claim for any oncolytic (oral or intravenous) within the ensuing 90 days. We assessed likelihood of abandonment using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses including patient demographics, plan type, drug type, cost sharing, and concurrent prescription activity. RESULTS: The abandonment rate of newly initiated oral oncolytics was 10.0%. Unadjusted bivariate analyses found that high cost sharing, increased prescription activity, lower income, and Medicare coverage were associated with a higher abandonment rate (P < .05). In the logistic regression model, claims with cost sharing greater than $500 were four times more likely to be abandoned than claims with cost sharing of $100 or less (odds ratio [OR], 4.46; P < .001). Patients with five or more prescription claims processed within in the previous month had 50% higher likelihood of abandonment than patients with no other prescription activity (OR, 1.50; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Abandonment of newly prescribed oral oncolytic therapy is not uncommon, and the likelihood increases for patients enrolled in plans with pharmacy benefit designs that require high cost sharing. Increased concurrent prescription activity was also associated with a higher abandonment rate. These factors should be taken into account when considering likely adherence to cancer therapy.
Authors: William H Shrank; Niteesh K Choudhry; Michael A Fischer; Jerry Avorn; Mark Powell; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Joshua N Liberman; Timothy Dollear; Troyen A Brennan; M Alan Brookhart Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-11-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Saul N Weingart; Elizabeth Brown; Peter B Bach; Kirby Eng; Shirley A Johnson; Timothy M Kuzel; Terry S Langbaum; R Donald Leedy; Raymond J Muller; Lee N Newcomer; Susan O'Brien; Denise Reinke; Mark Rubino; Leonard Saltz; Ronald S Walters Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Niteesh K Choudhry; Joy L Lee; Jessica Agnew-Blais; Colleen Corcoran; William H Shrank Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2009 May-Jun Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Matthew P Banegas; John F Dickerson; Nicole L Friedman; David Mosen; Althea X Ender; T Ruth Chang; Tracy A Runge; Mark C Hornbrook Journal: Perm J Date: 2019
Authors: Davendra P S Sohal; Erin B Kennedy; Alok Khorana; Mehmet S Copur; Christopher H Crane; Ignacio Garrido-Laguna; Smitha Krishnamurthi; Cassadie Moravek; Eileen M O'Reilly; Philip A Philip; Ramesh K Ramanathan; Joseph T Ruggiero; Manish A Shah; Susan Urba; Hope E Uronis; Michelle W Lau; Daniel Laheru Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lowell E Schnipper; Nancy E Davidson; Dana S Wollins; Courtney Tyne; Douglas W Blayney; Diane Blum; Adam P Dicker; Patricia A Ganz; J Russell Hoverman; Robert Langdon; Gary H Lyman; Neal J Meropol; Therese Mulvey; Lee Newcomer; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Blase Polite; Derek Raghavan; Gregory Rossi; Leonard Saltz; Deborah Schrag; Thomas J Smith; Peter P Yu; Clifford A Hudis; Richard L Schilsky Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-06-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael Kolodziej; J Russell Hoverman; Jody S Garey; Janet Espirito; Sheetal Sheth; Aimee Ginsburg; Marcus A Neubauer; Debra Patt; Barry Brooks; Charles White; Mark Sitarik; Roger Anderson; Roy Beveridge Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Charles W Given; Barbara A Given; Cathy J Bradley; John C Krauss; Alla Sikorskii; Eric Vachon Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Matthew P Banegas; John F Dickerson; Erin E Kent; Janet S de Moor; Katherine S Virgo; Gery P Guy; Donatus U Ekwueme; Zhiyuan Zheng; Stephanie Nutt; Loyce Pace; Alexandra Varga; Lisa Waiwaiole; Jennifer Schneider; K Robin Yabroff Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 4.442