Health care decision-maker perceptions and trends in the utilization of preapproval information for formulary decision-making

BACKGROUND

Preapproval information exchange (PIE) has increased between biopharma companies and health care decision-makers (HCDMs) over the last several years. However, there still exists a gap in what HCDMs need and what biopharma companies are providing.

OBJECTIVE

To assess trends in the utilization of preapproval information by HCDMs and identify resources that may best support organizations in evaluating product information for formulary coverage prior to US Food and Drug Administration approval.

METHODS

A double-blinded, web-based survey was fielded to a research panel of HCDMs from FormularyDecisions from May 16, 2022, to May 23, 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 30 advisors were invited to take the survey and 17 responded to the survey, with representation largely from health plans (41%), pharmacy benefit managers (24%), and integrated delivery networks (12%) across commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid lines of business. Of the respondents, 47% noted that the availability of preapproval information has shortened the time to make a formulary decision. Almost all respondents (90%) ranked the availability of clinical and economic information in a timely manner to evaluate budget impact as a top benefit for PIE. Respondents noted that Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) preapproval dossiers (88%), AMCP PIE webinars (76%), preapproval presentations/videos (65%), and posters and abstracts of clinical trials results (59%) were the main resources used to facilitate PIE.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of preapproval information for HCDMs (particularly content related to anticipated place in therapy and product pricing) has an impact on shortening formulary decision-making timelines.

A primer on formulary structures and strategies

Formularies are a tool for managing costs, optimizing patient access, and improving overall health outcomes. The general goal of formularies is to provide access to appropriate therapy while promoting effective resource utilization, which allows the managed care pharmacy organization to operate sustainably. Traditional formulary strategies have included open and closed formularies as well as tiered formularies. However, other formulary structures have emerged in support of the focus on product value. The formulary development process is primarily driven by the pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee and value committee within an organization. Key considerations such as member population, regional differences, regulatory/compliance implications, and benefit design strategies may influence payers to create a customized formulary to provide additional value to their members while managing costs. With the rise of high-cost and specialty products, formularies continue to serve as an important tool for managed care pharmacy organizations. Ongoing trends, such as biosimilars, prescription digital therapeutics, and addressing health equity, will shape future strategy and management of formularies.

Payer perceptions and use of value assessment tools in the United States

BACKGROUND: As the United States transitions toward value-based payment, value assessment tools to measure the value of health care interventions are emerging. As the field evolves, it is important to evaluate how these tools are influencing treatment and coverage decisions. OBJECTIVE: To examine payer perceptions and use of US value assessment tools and identify how these tools inform payer decision-making. METHODS: A double-blind, web-based survey was conducted from June to July 2022 to assess health care payers' perceptions and use of value assessment tools developed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Drug Pricing Lab, Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), Innovation and Value Initiative, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network. RESULTS: 51 respondents completed the survey. 86% of payers were familiar with at least 4 of 5 value assessment tools. Both ICER and National Comprehensive Cancer Network tools are perceived as very useful for informing formulary decisions (57% and 49%, respectively). When selecting a value assessment tool, payers identified the inclusion of appropriate metrics and outcomes (92%), comparative clinical effectiveness information (88%), and reliance on rigorous, unbiased methods (86%) to be very/extremely important. Payers reported the inclusion of the patient, provider, and societal perspectives as lower importance (32%, 31%, and 20% identify these elements as very/extremely important, respectively). Payers reported using ICER evidence reports to both expand and restrict coverage decisions. To advance more useful and relevant value assessment tools, payers identified the need for greater stakeholder awareness of existing tools, and some recommended that value assessors increase the volume of assessments conducted. CONCLUSIONS: US health care payers perceive select value assessment tools to be useful for informing health care decisions. As policy momentum behind value assessment builds, additional examination of value assessment tools is needed to inform appropriate application of value assessment in US health care decision-making. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Xcenda/AmerisourceBergen. Ms Buelt, Ms Loo, Ms Westrich, and Drs Hydery and Zheng report employment with Xcenda/AmerisourceBergen. Drs Dharbhamalla and Graff report employment with AMCP.

Best practices in designing preapproval information engagements for US health care decision makers

As high-cost and innovative therapies continue to enter the market, health care decision makers (HCDMs) are expressing a need for early information on a product's clinical and economic impacts. Preapproval information exchange (PIE) fulfills these data needs by allowing manufacturers to share drug information with HCDMs prior to US Food and Drug Administration approval. With recent regulatory milestones, such as the Pre-approval Information Exchange Act of 2022, HCDMs look to leverage PIE to forecast budgets and inform reimbursement decisions. However, a lack of stakeholder alignment has challenged the evolving applications of PIE. In addition, manufacturers are still seeking regulatory clarity regarding best practices, and many are developing their own policies for content dissemination. Varying practices have led to heterogeneity of preapproval communications across manufacturers, which may not fully align with HCDM needs and interests. However, recently collected survey data from FormularyDecisions, which focused on HCDM perceptions of both PIE webinars and other formats of PIE (eg, PIE decks and dossiers), indicate that HCDMs have strong preferences regarding the timing and content shared in preapproval engagements. Additionally, product indication and clinical trial information are highly valued, and although desired by HCDMs in other studies, in FormularyDecisions survey data, exact pricing data do not currently appear to be a critical component of PIE. Preapproval communications are expected less than 1 year before anticipated product approval, and PIE webinars, specifically, should prioritize therapeutic areas and products anticipated to have a significant impact on organizational budgets. Although HCDMs prefer nonmanufacturer representatives for PIE webinars and virtual presentations, health outcome liaisons or medical science liaisons are ideal among manufacturer representatives for in-person preapproval engagements. The expectations of HCDMs should be considered as manufacturers establish PIE practices to ensure the exchange of quality and relevant information. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Xcenda. Dr Dodda, Dr Bannister, Dr Hydery, Ms Gorey, Ms Dunlap, and Dr Mody report personal fees from Xcenda during the conduct of the study.

Methodology for conducting a comprehensive product review in managed care

The high degree of complexity of the product-review process and differences in procedures between organizations have resulted in a need for best practices and an overall product-review process to create efficiencies for health care decision makers. In an effort to streamline product-review concepts, this article outlines the different components of the review process, including clinical and economic review, formulary placement determination, and evaluation of alternatives within a drug class. The article also details opportunities for the near future, as technology continues to advance and alignment between medical and pharmacy benefits is desired. DISCLOSURES: Drs Linnerooth, Penley, Ha, and Craven report employment with Xcenda, which provided funding for the manuscript. Drs Sauvageau and Hydery report employment Xcenda, which provided funding for the manuscript, and stock holdings with AmerisourceBergen. Dr Feeney reports support for attending meetings and/or travel provided by Highmark, Inc. Dr Thomas reports receipt of consulting fees from ActiveRADAR, board member roles with ActiveRADAR and RoundtableRx, an adjunct professor role with the University of Minnesota, and stock options and pensions with Eli Lilly and Aetna/CVS. Dr Watkins reports payment or honoraria from ISPOR and for articles written for Value and Outcomes Spotlight, and support for attending meetings and/or travel by AMCP.

Effectiveness of Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir and Predictors of Treatment Failure in Members with Hepatitis C Genotype 1 Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Medicaid Population

BACKGROUND

The primary goal of therapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is eradication of HCV ribonucleic acid, which is predicted by achievement of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12). Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir was approved by the FDA in 2014 and 2015 as a once-daily regimen for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 and HCV genotypes 4, 5, and 6, respectively. Although its efficacy has been demonstrated in randomized controlled trials, there is an unmet need for real-world effectiveness data and studies that assess the association of rates of SVR12 with specific clinical and demographic factors in the Medicaid population.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) evaluate the effectiveness of HCV genotype 1 treatment with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir as measured by the rate of SVR12 overall and within the subgroups of 8-, 12-, and 24-week regimens and (b) identify predictors of treatment failure in the Massachusetts Medicaid (MassHealth) population.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated the rate of SVR12 among 796 MassHealth Primary Care Clinician and fee-for-service plan members who completed treatment with at least one 8-, 12-, or 24-week treatment with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir for HCV genotype 1 infection between October 10, 2014, and November 1, 2016. The following variables were evaluated to identify predictors of treatment failure: sex, history of treatment failure, cirrhosis, substance use disorder, human immunodeficiency virus coinfection, and concomitant use of interacting medications. The proportion of members who achieved SVR12 was calculated for the entire study population and stratified by treatment regimen. Chi-square tests were used to compare the proportion of members who achieved SVR12, stratified by clinical and demographic variables.

RESULTS

SVR12 was achieved in 95% (756/796) of members. High proportions of members who received 8 weeks of treatment or 12 weeks of treatment without concomitant ribavirin achieved SVR12 (96.0% [285/297] and 95.7% [382/399], respectively). A slightly lower proportion of members who received 12 weeks of treatment with concomitant ribavirin or 24 weeks of treatment achieved SVR12 (89.9% [62/69] and 87.1% [27/31], respectively). The proportion of members who achieved SVR12 with each treatment regimen was consistent when stratified by clinical and demographic variables. None of the included variables were found to be associated with statistically significant differences in odds of treatment failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Medicaid population of 1 state, treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir was associated with a high rate of SVR12. The outcomes of treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in the Medicaid population are comparable with outcomes observed in other patient populations.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no financial disclosures. A poster of this manuscript was presented at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2017 Annual Meeting, March 27-30, 2017, in Denver, Colorado.

A systematic review of community-based interventions to improve oral chronic disease medication regimen adherence among individuals with substance use disorder

BACKGROUND

Poor medication adherence has been shown to cause medical complications, death, and increased healthcare costs and may be of particular importance in patients with substance use disorder (SUD). Concerns regarding adherence in this population may influence a healthcare provider's decision to prescribe a medication requiring high adherence. Guidance defining best practices that promote adherence among individuals with SUD is lacking.

METHODS

A review of English articles in Medline and PsycINFO databases, published between October 1, 1994 and October 31, 2017, was conducted in order to identify studies of interventions intended to improve adherence to oral chronic disease medication regimens among patients with SUD. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental study designs, and case series were included. Article quality was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 854 abstracts were retrieved, of which 24 met inclusion criteria. Adherence interventions were categorized as those: 1) addressing the chronic disease state; 2) addressing SUD; or 3) both. Studies varied greatly with respect to intervention length, method of measuring adherence, and quality. Statistically significant improvement in adherence was observed in 12 of 24 studies (50%). Specific interventions that improved adherence included incentive-based interventions, directly observed therapy, and telephonic/home visits. Counseling-based interventions such motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral therapy presented mixed results.

CONCLUSIONS

While effective interventions were identified, heterogeneity of study designs and study quality preclude determination of optimal interventions to promote adherence in this population. Further evaluation with sound study design may inform the development of best practices for treating chronic disease in patients with SUD.

The Effect of a Federal Controlled Substance Act Schedule Change on Hydrocodone Combination Products Claims in a Medicaid Population

BACKGROUND

In 2012, hydrocodone combination products (HCPs) were the most prescribed medications in the United States. Under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970, hydrocodone alone was classified as a Schedule II drug, while HCPs were classified as Schedule III, indicating a lower risk for abuse and misuse. However, according to a Drug Enforcement Agency analysis, the addition of nonopioids has not been shown to diminish abuse potential of hydrocodone. In response to concerns for drug abuse and overdose, the Drug Enforcement Agency rescheduled HCPs to Schedule II in October 2014, with the intent of limiting overprescribing and increasing awareness of their abuse potential. However, it is unknown whether this has affected the overall claims for HCPs in a Medicaid population.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) compare the trend in HCP prescription claims with select non-HCP (opioid and nonopioid) analgesic claims before and after the HCP schedule change in the Massachusetts Medicaid fee-for-service/Primary Care Clinician plan population and (b) identify if there was a change in HCP new start member and claim characteristics before and after the HCP schedule change.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental, retrospective study used enrollment and pharmacy claims data to evaluate all members in the study population 1 year before and after the HCP schedule change. The number of claims for HCPs and select non-HCP analgesics was reported as the monthly rate per total population, and an interrupted time series analysis compared the change in the monthly rate of claims across groups. Members with 1 or more pharmacy claims for a new HCP prescription during a 5-month period before or after the HCP schedule change were analyzed to determine member demographics (age, gender, and number of claims) and claim characteristics (average daily dose, average quantity per claim, and days supply).

RESULTS

The rate of HCP claims increased before and decreased after the HCP schedule change. Controlling for the trend during the period before the HCP schedule change, the rate of HCP claims per 1,000 members per month decreased at a greater rate than non-HCP analgesics in the period after the HCP schedule change (P < 0.001). The percentage of HCP claims for new start members decreased after the HCP schedule change (44.9% vs. 34.1% of all HCP claims pre- to post-schedule change; P < 0.001). In the group of new starts, there was not a significant difference in the average daily dose (26.3 mg vs. 26.4 mg; P = 0.69), while there was a decrease in average number of tablets dispensed per claim (from 37.1 to 20.3 tablets; P < 0.001) and an increase in the percentage of claims for a shorter days supply (from 57.7% to 81.6%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that the HCP schedule change may have contributed to the decrease in claims for HCPs in a Medicaid population. After the HCP schedule change, there was a trend towards decreased HCP use among new starts.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by all authors except for Arnold and Clements. Tran, Arnold, and Clements took the lead in data collection, along with Peristere, and data interpretation was performed by all the authors, except Arnold. The manuscript was written primarily by Tran, along with Lavitas, Stevens, and Greenwood, and revised by all the authors except Arnold and Peristere. A poster of this research project was presented at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy's 2016 Annual Meeting in San Francisco, California, April 2016.

Dapagliflozin/Saxagliptin Fixed-Dose Tablets: A New Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 and Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Combination for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes

Objective: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety, and place in therapy of the fixed-dose combination (FDC) product, QTERN (dapagliflozin/saxagliptin) tablets. Data Sources: Searches of MEDLINE (1946 to July 1, 2017) were conducted using the keywords QTERN, saxagliptin, and dapagliflozin. Additional data were obtained from the prescribing information, the product dossier, and Clinicaltrials.gov . Study Selection and Data Extraction: All English language articles related to pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, or safety of the combination therapy in human subjects were reviewed. Data Synthesis: The pharmacokinetics of saxagliptin and dapagliflozin were not affected significantly when administered as an FDC product. Saxagliptin may suppress the increased secretion of glucagon associated with dapagliflozin. The combination dapagliflozin/saxagliptin has been studied as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The difference in hemoglobin A1C (A1C) between saxagliptin + dapagliflozin + metformin (triple therapy) and saxagliptin + metformin was −0.59 (95% CI = −0.81 to −0.37, P < 0.0001), and the difference between triple therapy and dapagliflozin + metformin was −0.27 (95% CI = −0.48 to −0.05, P = 0.0166). The combination was well tolerated when added to metformin. Conclusion: QTERN (dapagliflozin/saxagliptin) tablets are a reasonable option for patients with T2DM not controlled on metformin, but cost, insurance coverage, and a lackluster reduction in A1C will likely limit its use until more data regarding its effects on complications of diabetes and cardiovascular outcomes become available.

Overview of Comprehensive Hepatitis C Virus Medication Management in a State Medicaid Program

BACKGROUND

Breakthrough direct-acting antivirals set a new standard in the management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) with regard to cure rates and improved tolerability; however, the health care system is challenged by the cost of these medications.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the effect of a comprehensive HCV medication management program on optimized regimen use, prior authorization (PA) modifications, and medication cost avoidance in a state Medicaid program.

METHODS

This program consists of a 2-tiered prescriber outreach: (1) regimen outreach to promote optimized regimen selection and (2) refill outreach to support medication adherence. PA criteria were developed to identify optimized regimens, taking into account member- and virus-specific factors as well as cost. Prescriber outreach was conducted to recommend the use of an optimized regimen as applicable. Successful regimen outreach was defined as the number of members for whom a recommendation was accepted. A refill report identified members without a subsequent paid HCV medication claim within 25 days of the previous claim and outreach to the prescriber's office was performed. The outcome measure for refill outreach was the number and type of PA modifications made secondary to outreach (closure or extension). Cost avoidance was calculated for members who completed treatment with an optimized regimen. Return on investment (ROI) was calculated for the program.

RESULTS

Between December 18, 2013, and January 31, 2015, 911 members had PA requests approved for simeprevir, sofosbuvir, or ledipasvir/ sofosbuvir. Of these members, 223 (24.5%) met the criteria for regimen outreach. Pharmacist interventions to treat with an optimized regimen were accepted for 135 members (60.5%). Following implementation of prescriber outreach to promote refills, between March 10, 2014, and January 31, 2015, offices were informed of an upcoming refill for 515 members. As a result of outreach, 19.6% of members had a subsequent PA modification. Sixty-nine approved PAs (for 68 members) were closed after correspondence with the prescriber, and 33 approved PAs (for 33 members) were extended. The total projected cost avoidance was $3,770,097. The comprehensive HCV medication management program demonstrated an ROI of $10.28 for every $1 spent.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive HCV medication management program can help contain costs while ensuring that members have access to most clinically appropriate regimens.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. Lavitas reports personal fees and nonfinancial support from University of Tennessee, Advanced Studies in Medicine and grant funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no conflicts of interest. The poster "Overview of a Hepatitis C Medication Monitoring Program in a State Medicaid Program" was presented October 8, 2014, by Lavitas at the AMCP Nexus 2014 meeting in Boston, Massachusetts. A program update was presented at the 2015 American Drug Utilization Review Society Meeting on February 27, 2015. Study concept and design were contributed by Price, Lenz, and Jeffrey, with assistance from Lavitas, Tesell, and Hydery. Lavitas, Tesell, and Hydery collected the data, assisted by Price, Lenz, and Jeffrey, and data interpretation was performed by all authors. The manuscript was written by Greenwood, Lavitas, Tesell, and Hydery, with assistance from the other authors, and was revised by all authors.

The beneficial effect of coenzyme Q10 and lipoic acid on obstructive bladder dysfunction in the rabbit

PURPOSE

Recent evidence indicates that ischemia and reperfusion are major etiological factors in the bladder dysfunction that occurs after partial bladder outlet obstruction. Coenzyme Q10 and alpha-lipoic acid are found naturally in mitochondria and act as potent antioxidants. We investigated the beneficial effects of coenzyme Q10 plus alpha-lipoic acid in a rabbit model of bladder outlet obstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty male rabbits were divided into 5 groups. Group 1 served as control and group 2 received three weeks of coenzyme Q10 plus alpha-lipoic acid supplementation. Rabbits in group 3 underwent surgical partial bladder outlet obstruction for duration of four weeks and groups 4 and 5 were obstructed for seven weeks. In group 5, coenzyme Q10 plus alpha-lipoic acid supplementation was given following 4 weeks obstruction and continued till the end of the seven weeks. The contractile responses to various agents were determined. The protein nitration and carbonylation levels were studied by immunoblotting. Nerve function was determined by choline acetyltransferase activity and nerve density.

RESULTS

The contractile responses to different forms of stimulations, including field stimulation, ATP, carbachol and KCl all showed decreases following 4 and 7 weeks obstruction. Treatment with coenzyme Q10 plus alpha-lipoic acid significantly restored contractile responses to all forms of stimulation. Treatment also had mitochondrial and neuronal effects and reduced protein nitration and carbonylation. Histologically there was less detrusor muscle hypertrophy.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study clearly demonstrates that coenzyme Q10 and alpha-lipoic acid supplementation can improve bladder function after outlet obstruction.