Dawn L Hershman1, Jennifer Tsui2, Jay Meyer2, Sherry Glied2, Grace Clarke Hillyer2, Jason D Wright2, Alfred I Neugut2. 1. Department of Medicine, Gynecology and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons (DLH, JW, AIN) and Department of Epidemiology (DLH, JT, GCH, JW, AIN), Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY; Wagner School of Public Service, New York University, New York, NY (SG); Optum, Eden Prairie, MN (JM). dlh23@columbia.edu. 2. Department of Medicine, Gynecology and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons (DLH, JW, AIN) and Department of Epidemiology (DLH, JT, GCH, JW, AIN), Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY; Wagner School of Public Service, New York University, New York, NY (SG); Optum, Eden Prairie, MN (JM).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonadherence to hormonal therapy is common and is associated with increased copayment amount. We investigated the change in adherence after the introduction of generic aromatase inhibitors (AIs) in 2010. METHODS: Using deidentified pharmacy and claims data from OptumInsight, we identified women older than 50 years on brand-name AIs (BAIs) and/or generic AIs (GAIs) for early breast cancer between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2012. Clinical, demographic, and financial variables were evaluated. Adherence was defined as a medication possession ratio (MPR) 80% or greater. RESULTS: We identified 5511 women, 2815 (51.1%) on BAI, 1411 (25.6%) on GAI, and 1285 (23.3%) who switched from BAI to GAI. The median 30-day copayment was higher for BAI ($33.3) than for GAI ($9.04). In a multivariable Cox-proportional hazard analysis, women who took GAI were less likely to discontinue therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57 to 0.84) compared with BAI. Discontinuation was positively associated with a higher monthly copayment of $15 to $30 (HR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.44) and more than $30 (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.23 to 1.80) compared with less than $15. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, adherence (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%) was positively associated with GAI use (odds ratio = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.91) compared with BAI and inversely associated with increased monthly copayment. In addition, adherence was associated with a high annual income of more than $100k/year (odds ratio = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17 to 2.11). CONCLUSIONS: Higher prescription copayment amount was associated with nonadherence and discontinuation of AIs. After controlling for copayment, discontinuation was higher and adherence was lower with Brand AIs. Because nonadherence is associated with worse survival, efforts should be directed towards reducing out-of-pocket costs for these life-saving medications.
BACKGROUND: Nonadherence to hormonal therapy is common and is associated with increased copayment amount. We investigated the change in adherence after the introduction of generic aromatase inhibitors (AIs) in 2010. METHODS: Using deidentified pharmacy and claims data from OptumInsight, we identified women older than 50 years on brand-name AIs (BAIs) and/or generic AIs (GAIs) for early breast cancer between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2012. Clinical, demographic, and financial variables were evaluated. Adherence was defined as a medication possession ratio (MPR) 80% or greater. RESULTS: We identified 5511 women, 2815 (51.1%) on BAI, 1411 (25.6%) on GAI, and 1285 (23.3%) who switched from BAI to GAI. The median 30-day copayment was higher for BAI ($33.3) than for GAI ($9.04). In a multivariable Cox-proportional hazard analysis, women who took GAI were less likely to discontinue therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57 to 0.84) compared with BAI. Discontinuation was positively associated with a higher monthly copayment of $15 to $30 (HR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.44) and more than $30 (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.23 to 1.80) compared with less than $15. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, adherence (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%) was positively associated with GAI use (odds ratio = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.91) compared with BAI and inversely associated with increased monthly copayment. In addition, adherence was associated with a high annual income of more than $100k/year (odds ratio = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17 to 2.11). CONCLUSIONS: Higher prescription copayment amount was associated with nonadherence and discontinuation of AIs. After controlling for copayment, discontinuation was higher and adherence was lower with Brand AIs. Because nonadherence is associated with worse survival, efforts should be directed towards reducing out-of-pocket costs for these life-saving medications.
Authors: Alfred I Neugut; Milayna Subar; Elizabeth Ty Wilde; Scott Stratton; Corey H Brouse; Grace Clarke Hillyer; Victor R Grann; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-05-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Dawn L Hershman; Lawrence H Kushi; Theresa Shao; Donna Buono; Aaron Kershenbaum; Wei-Yann Tsai; Louis Fehrenbacher; Scarlett Lin Gomez; Sunita Miles; Alfred I Neugut Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-06-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bruce Stuart; Amy Davidoff; Mujde Erten; Stephen S Gottlieb; Mingliang Dai; Thomas Shaffer; Ilene H Zuckerman; Linda Simoni-Wastila; Lynda Bryant-Comstock; Rahul Shenolikar Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2013-06-06 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Alfred I Neugut; Grace Clarke Hillyer; Lawrence H Kushi; Lois Lamerato; Nicole Leoce; S David Nathanson; Christine B Ambrosone; Dana H Bovbjerg; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Carol Magai; Wei-Yann Tsai; Judith S Jacobson; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-04-22 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Dana P Goldman; Geoffrey F Joyce; Jose J Escarce; Jennifer E Pace; Matthew D Solomon; Marianne Laouri; Pamela B Landsman; Steven M Teutsch Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-05-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Yihang Liu; Jennifer L Malin; Allison L Diamant; Amardeep Thind; Rose C Maly Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-12-23 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Joan M Neuner; Sailaja Kamaraju; John A Charlson; Erica M Wozniak; Elizabeth C Smith; Alana Biggers; Alicia J Smallwood; Purushottam W Laud; Liliana E Pezzin Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Joseph A Greer; Nicole Amoyal; Lauren Nisotel; Joel N Fishbein; James MacDonald; Jamie Stagl; Inga Lennes; Jennifer S Temel; Steven A Safren; William F Pirl Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-02-26
Authors: Elizabeth M Jaffee; Chi Van Dang; David B Agus; Brian M Alexander; Kenneth C Anderson; Alan Ashworth; Anna D Barker; Roshan Bastani; Sangeeta Bhatia; Jeffrey A Bluestone; Otis Brawley; Atul J Butte; Daniel G Coit; Nancy E Davidson; Mark Davis; Ronald A DePinho; Robert B Diasio; Giulio Draetta; A Lindsay Frazier; Andrew Futreal; Sam S Gambhir; Patricia A Ganz; Levi Garraway; Stanton Gerson; Sumit Gupta; James Heath; Ruth I Hoffman; Cliff Hudis; Chanita Hughes-Halbert; Ramy Ibrahim; Hossein Jadvar; Brian Kavanagh; Rick Kittles; Quynh-Thu Le; Scott M Lippman; David Mankoff; Elaine R Mardis; Deborah K Mayer; Kelly McMasters; Neal J Meropol; Beverly Mitchell; Peter Naredi; Dean Ornish; Timothy M Pawlik; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Martin G Pomper; Derek Raghavan; Christine Ritchie; Sally W Schwarz; Richard Sullivan; Richard Wahl; Jedd D Wolchok; Sandra L Wong; Alfred Yung Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Albert J Farias; Ryan N Hansen; Steven B Zeliadt; India J Ornelas; Christopher I Li; Beti Thompson Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Dawn L Hershman; Lawrence H Kushi; Grace Clarke Hillyer; Ellie Coromilas; Donna Buono; Lois Lamerato; Dana H Bovbjerg; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Wei-Yann Tsai; Xiaobo Zhong; Judith S Jacobson; Jason D Wright; Alfred I Neugut Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-04-16 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Joan M Neuner; Nicole M Fergestrom; Purushottam W Laud; Ann B Nattinger; Kirsten M M Beyer; Kathryn E Flynn; Liliana E Pezzin Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 6.860