Amy J Davidoff1, Franklin B Hendrick2, Amer M Zeidan1, Maria R Baer1, Bruce C Stuart1, Rahul A Shenolikar1, Steven D Gore1. 1. Yale School of Public Health, Yale University; Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; University of Maryland School of Pharmacy; Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; and US Health Outcomes and Medical Policy, GlaxoSmithKline, Durham, NC. 2. Yale School of Public Health, Yale University; Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; University of Maryland School of Pharmacy; Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; and US Health Outcomes and Medical Policy, GlaxoSmithKline, Durham, NC fhend001@umaryland.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Medicare Part D prescription benefits cover injected medications, normally covered under Part B, when administered outside of physician offices. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) used for chronic anemia management in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are commonly injected in a physician office but can be administered safely at home. In this study, we explored out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and receipt of Part D-covered ESAs in Medicare beneficiaries with MDS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with MDS enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and D were identified using diagnosis codes from 100% claims from 2006 to 2008. OOP costs for the mean erythropoietin alfa claim were compared for Parts B and D. Multivariable models examined the effect of low-income subsidy (LIS) and other Part D cost sharing on receipt of any ESA and any Part D-covered ESA. RESULTS: A total of 13,117 (62.9%) of 20,848 patients received ESAs, but only 1,436 (6.9%) had any Part D claim. OOP payment was $348 under Part D versus $161 under Part B. Among patients with ESA use, those with LIS were 4× more likely to receive Part D ESAs (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Few patients with MDS received ESAs through Part D. OOP payments required under Part D were substantially higher than under Part B. Cost sharing, as reflected by LIS receipt, likely affected decisions to prescribe ESAs outside of the physician office. Improved coordination between Part B and D benefits regarding issues of home injection of medications may create incentives that improve patient access and convenience and reduce costs associated with administration.
PURPOSE: Medicare Part D prescription benefits cover injected medications, normally covered under Part B, when administered outside of physician offices. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) used for chronic anemia management in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are commonly injected in a physician office but can be administered safely at home. In this study, we explored out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and receipt of Part D-covered ESAs in Medicare beneficiaries with MDS. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with MDS enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and D were identified using diagnosis codes from 100% claims from 2006 to 2008. OOP costs for the mean erythropoietin alfa claim were compared for Parts B and D. Multivariable models examined the effect of low-income subsidy (LIS) and other Part D cost sharing on receipt of any ESA and any Part D-covered ESA. RESULTS: A total of 13,117 (62.9%) of 20,848 patients received ESAs, but only 1,436 (6.9%) had any Part D claim. OOP payment was $348 under Part D versus $161 under Part B. Among patients with ESA use, those with LIS were 4× more likely to receive Part D ESAs (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Few patients with MDS received ESAs through Part D. OOP payments required under Part D were substantially higher than under Part B. Cost sharing, as reflected by LIS receipt, likely affected decisions to prescribe ESAs outside of the physician office. Improved coordination between Part B and D benefits regarding issues of home injection of medications may create incentives that improve patient access and convenience and reduce costs associated with administration.
Authors: Dana P Goldman; Geoffrey F Joyce; Grant Lawless; William H Crown; Vincent Willey Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2006 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Mireille Jacobson; A James O'Malley; Craig C Earle; Juliana Pakes; Peter Gaccione; Joseph P Newhouse Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2006 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Peter J Neumann; Jennifer A Palmer; Eric Nadler; Chihui Fang; Peter Ubel Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Amy J Davidoff; Sheila Weiss Smith; Maria R Baer; Xuehua Ke; Jason M Bierenbaum; Franklin Hendrick; Diane L McNally; Steven D Gore Journal: Haematologica Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Amy J Davidoff; Sheila R Weiss; Maria R Baer; Xuehua Ke; Franklin Hendrick; Amer Zeidan; Steven D Gore Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Dana P Goldman; Anupam B Jena; Darius N Lakdawalla; Jennifer L Malin; Jesse D Malkin; Eric Sun Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2009-10-29 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Adam J Olszewski; Stacie B Dusetzina; Charles B Eaton; Amy J Davidoff; Amal N Trivedi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 50.717