Five Year Analysis Assessing the Trend in Prescribing and Expenditures of Oral Oncolytics for Medicare Part D: 2013-2017

Estimating the economic impact of blister-packaging on medication adherence and health care costs for a Medicare Advantage health plan

BACKGROUND

Medication nonadherence is a persistent challenge in the United States, leading to increased health care resource utilization (HCRU) and health care costs and worsened health outcomes. Medicare Star Ratings is a program developed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to evaluate Medicare health plan quality and performance. Three of the Medicare Part D Star Ratings quality measures assess medication adherence, showing the importance CMS places on improving medication adherence in older adults. Although a variety of medication adherence-enhancing interventions are available to help promote adherence among patients, one intervention that has shown success historically is blister-packaging.

OBJECTIVE

To model the potential impact of blister-packaging chronic medications on HCRU and health care costs in the Medicare population.

METHODS

An economic model was developed to assess the potential impact of blister-packaging the 3 Medicare Star Ratings adherence measure medication classes: renin-angiotensin system antagonists (RASAs), statins, and noninsulin antidiabetics. The model perspective was that of a hypothetical Medicare Advantage health plan with a plan size of 100,000 members. A 12-month time horizon was used in the model. The dichotomous adherence threshold in the model was set at 80% or greater of the proportion of days covered (PDC). Literature-based references were used to inform both the impact of blister-packaging on the number of patients who become adherent as well as the impact of medication adherence on HCRU and health care costs for each of the medication classes. One-way sensitivity analyses and several scenario analyses were conducted to assess model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Owing to increased adherence from the blister-packaging intervention, the hypothetical health plan in the analysis saw 776 additional members adherent to RASAs, 1,651 additional members adherent to statins, and 414 additional members adherent to oral antidiabetics. Although medication expenditure increased for all 3 medication classes (RASAs: $274,963; statins: $730,083; oral antidiabetics: $100,529), medical costs decreased across all classes (RASAs: -$4,098,848; statins: -$5,549,699; oral antidiabetics: -$917,968). Total net health care costs decreased by $3,823,885 for RASAs (-$3.19 per member per month [PMPM]), $4,819,616 for statins (-$4.02 PMPM), and $817,438 for oral antidiabetics (-$0.68 PMPM). The entire Medicare Advantage population scenario analysis saw reductions in total health care costs of $1,081,394,737 for RASAs, $1,362,987,376 for statins, and $231,171,496 for oral antidiabetics.

CONCLUSIONS

Dispensing chronic medications with blister-packaging for Medicare Advantage health plan patients was modeled to reduce HCRU and health care costs. Future studies are needed to assess whether the impact of blister-packaging medications is tied to reductions in HCRU and health care costs in real-world settings.

Assessing the prevalence of Beers medication utilization in the Medicare Part D population in 2020

BACKGROUND

Medication utilization has been increasing in the U.S. year-over-year for several decades. As older adults take more medications, there is a higher risk of them being exposed to drug-drug or drug-disease interactions. The American Geriatrics Society in 2019 updated their Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) Use in Older Adults. The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of utilization of medications included in the 2019 Beers Criteria.

METHODS

An analysis was conducted using the Medicare Part D Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use File for calendar-year 2020. Medications identified in the 2019 Beers Criteria were applied to the analysis. Two categories of medications were assessed: (1) "Avoid" and (2) "Use With Caution."

RESULTS

In 2020, 56 million prescriptions were dispensed to Medicare patients 65 years and older that are recommended to be avoided without exception (4.7% of all prescriptions) totaling $957 million in medication costs. The most utilized medication classes in this category were benzodiazepines (25,949,994 prescriptions), "Z-drugs" (6,204,909 prescriptions), long-acting sulfonylureas (5,306,577 prescriptions), 1st-generation antihistamines (5,049,289 prescriptions), and tricyclic antidepressants (4,190,062 prescriptions). Additionally, 135 million prescriptions were dispensed to Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older for medications which the Beers Criteria states to use caution (11.3% of all prescriptions) exceeding $2.85 billion in medication costs. The most utilized medications for this category were diuretics (74,599,126 prescriptions), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (30,033,121 prescriptions), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (11,858,968 prescriptions), tramadol (11,450,878 prescriptions), and mirtazapine (5,737,304 prescriptions).

CONCLUSION

Even with the existence of the AGS Beers Criteria for PIM Use in Older Adults and its continued updated versions, 16% of medications dispensed to Medicare Part D were potentially inappropriate. Future studies are needed to assess if this has led to worsened outcomes among older adults who utilized these PIM.

Financial impact of integrated specialty pharmacy efforts to avoid oral anticancer medication waste

BACKGROUND

The growing number of oral anticancer medications represents a significant portion of pharmacy spending and can be costly for patients. Patients taking oral anticancer medications may experience frequent treatment changes following necessary safety and effectiveness monitoring, often resulting in medication waste. Strategies to avoid medication waste could alleviate the financial burden of these costly therapies on the payer and the patient.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact on waste and cost avoidance of reviewing the amount of medication patients have on hand and the presence of upcoming follow-up (ie, provider visit, laboratory testing, or imaging) before requesting a prescription refill renewal for patients taking oral anticancer medications through an integrated health system specialty pharmacy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients filling oral anticancer medications prescribed by a Vanderbilt University Medical Center provider and dispensed by Vanderbilt Specialty Pharmacy between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020. Specialty pharmacists received a system-generated refill renewal request for oral anticancer medications when the final prescription refill was dispensed, prompting the pharmacist to review the patient's medical record for continued therapy appropriateness and to request a new prescription. If the patient had a sufficient supply on hand to last until an upcoming follow-up (ie, provider visit, imaging, or laboratory assessment), the pharmacist postponed the renewal until after the scheduled follow-up. Patients were included in the analysis if the refill renewal request was postponed after review of the amount of medication on hand and the presence of an upcoming follow-up. Medication outcomes (ie, continued, dose changed, held, medication changed to a different oral anticancer medication, or discontinued) resulting from the follow-up were collected. Cost avoidance in US dollars was assigned based on the outcome of follow-up by calculating the price per unit times the number of units that would have been unused or in excess of what was needed if the medication had been dispensed before the scheduled follow-up. The average wholesale price minus 20% (AWP-20%) and wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) were used to report a range of costs avoided over 12 months.

RESULTS

The total cost avoidance over 12 months associated with postponing refill renewal requests in a large academic health system with an integrated specialty pharmacy ranged from $549,187.03 using WAC pricing to $751,994.99 using AWP-20% pricing, with a median cost avoidance per fill of $366.04 (WAC) to $1,931.18 (AWP-20%). Refill renewal requests were postponed in 159 instances for 135 unique patients. After follow-up, medications were continued unchanged in only 2% of postponed renewals, 56% of follow-ups resulted in medication discontinuations, 32% in dose changes, 5% in medication changes, and 5% in medication holds.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated health system specialty pharmacist postponement of refill requests after review of the amount of medication on hand and upcoming follow-up proved effective in avoiding waste and unnecessary medication costs in patients treated with oral anticancer medications at a large academic health system.

Impact of oral chemotherapy pharmacists on cost avoidance of oral oncolytics in an integrated health system

BACKGROUND

While the impact of oncology pharmacist interventions on patient outcomes has been well-documented in previous studies, there is a scarcity of articles relating to oncology pharmacists' impact on cost avoidance of oral oncolytics within an integrated health care system. Cost savings and cost avoidance studies are needed to help promote the expansion of clinical services provided by the oncology pharmacy department.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to analyze interventions made by oncology pharmacists in the Oral Chemotherapy Treatment Program (OCTP) at the Kaiser Permanente-San Diego Service Area and determine the direct cost avoidance effects over one year. A secondary objective was to evaluate oncologists' satisfaction with OCTP.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, single-arm study where the drug cost avoidance impact resulting from oncology pharmacists' interventions was calculated. A report containing all documented oncology pharmacist interventions made in OCTP from 1 January to 31 December 2021 were reviewed for study inclusion. A retrospective chart review was conducted to verify that the interventions were made by the oncology pharmacists. The average wholesale price of drugs listed on Lexicomp as of 1 November 2021 was used to calculate drug cost avoidance values.

RESULTS

A total of 238 OCTP oncology pharmacist interventions associated with direct drug cost avoidance values were identified, amounting to a total cost avoidance of $2,521,844 and an annual return on investment of 440%.

Impact of a pharmacist-led telehealth oral chemotherapy clinic

Disclaimer

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Purpose

Oral oncolytics come with significant concerns of noncompliance due to complex regimens, adverse effects, and high overall costs. The Geisinger Oral Chemotherapy Clinic is a fully telephone-based medication therapy disease management (MTDM) program designed to integrate pharmacists as advanced practitioners in hematology/oncology clinics for comanagement of oral chemotherapy.

Summary

To date, Geisinger has 11 oncology clinics and 3 full-time pharmacists designated to the management of oral chemotherapy. Pharmacists receive referrals for comanagement of patients starting oral oncolytics. Under a collaborative practice agreement, they can order laboratory tests as well as supportive care medications and refills. Pharmacists review planned therapies, perform medication reconciliations, and provide medication counseling. Once treatment has been initiated, pharmacists contact patients for laboratory and toxicity assessments. The clinic incorporates the use of customized smart data elements within the electronic medical record to collect data regarding pharmacist interventions and time allocations in the clinic. As of March 31, 2021, the clinic was actively following approximately 1,100 patients, resulting in an average of 80 to 90 encounters per day for new referrals, chemotherapy education, and laboratory and toxicity assessments. Approximately 2,113 patients were followed from December 1, 2019, to March 31, 2021, with 46,929 interventions documented.

Conclusion

By obtaining provider buy-in for pharmacy services, acquiring enough personnel resources to meet the needs of the growing patient population and respective therapies, and proper utilization of technology, the program has thrived, allowing for increased provider and patient satisfaction. Future goals include expanding collection of pharmacist intervention metrics and analysis of patient perceptions of services provided by the clinic.