Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Biologic Drugs After Biosimilar Competition

Author:

Feng Kimberly123,Russo Massimiliano12,Maini Luca4,Kesselheim Aaron S.12,Rome Benjamin N.12

Affiliation:

1. Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts

2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

3. Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

4. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

Abstract

ImportanceBiologic drugs account for a growing share of US pharmaceutical spending. Competition from follow-on biosimilar products (subsequent versions that have no clinically meaningful differences from the original biologic) has led to modest reductions in US health care spending, but these savings may not translate to lower out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for patients.ObjectiveTo investigate whether biosimilar competition is associated with lower OOP spending for patients using biologics.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study used a national commercial claims database (Optum Clinformatics Data Mart) to identify outpatient claims for 1 of 7 clinician-administered biologics (filgrastim, infliximab, pegfilgrastim, epoetin alfa, bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab) from January 2009 through March 2022. Claims by commercially insured patients younger than 65 years were included.ExposureYear relative to first biosimilar availability and use of original or biosimilar version.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPatients’ annual OOP spending on biologics for each calendar year was determined, and OOP spending per claim between reference biologic and biosimilar versions was compared. Two-part regression models assessed for differences in OOP spending, adjusting for patient and clinical characteristics (age, sex, US Census region, health plan type, diagnosis, and place of service) and year relative to initial biosimilar entry.ResultsOver 1.7 million claims from 190 364 individuals (median [IQR] age, 53 [42-59] years; 58.3% females) who used at least 1 of the 7 biologics between 2009 and 2022 were included in the analysis. Over 251 566 patient-years of observation, annual OOP costs increased before and after biosimilar availability. Two years after the start of biosimilar competition, the adjusted odds ratio of nonzero annual OOP spending was 1.08 (95% CI, 1.04-1.12; P < .001) and average nonzero annual spending was 12% higher (95% CI, 10%-14%; P < .001) compared with the year before biosimilar competition. After biosimilars became available, claims for biosimilars were more likely than reference biologics to have nonzero OOP costs (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.11-1.16]; P < .001) but had 8% lower mean nonzero OOP costs (adjusted mean ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.90-0.93; P < .001). Findings varied by drug.Conclusions and RelevanceFindings of this cohort study suggest that biosimilar competition was not consistently associated with lower OOP costs for commercially insured outpatients, highlighting the need for targeted policy interventions to ensure that the savings generated from biosimilar competition translate into increased affordability for patients who need biologics.

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Reference33 articles.

1. Paying for prescription drugs in the new administration.;Kesselheim;JAMA,2021

2. National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2022.;Tichy;Am J Health Syst Pharm,2022

3. Biosimilar cost savings in the United States: initial experience and future potential.;Mulcahy;Rand Health Q,2018

4. Improving prescription drug affordability through regulatory action.;Bush;JAMA Health Forum,2022

5. Biosimilar competition: early learning.;Frank;Health Econ,2022

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Selecting the best-value biosimilar in emerging countries;Exploration of Musculoskeletal Diseases;2024-09-14

2. New Biosimilar Drugs Approved for Wet AMD;AJN, American Journal of Nursing;2024-08-22

3. Stakeholder perspectives on the sustainability of the United States biosimilars market;Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy;2024-07-16

4. Revisiting Expectations of US Biosimilars—Panacea or One Piece of the Puzzle?;JAMA Health Forum;2024-03-29

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3