CONCLUSIONS: In 2021, Medicare spending on biologics was $926 million in Part B (FFS) and $1.3 billion in Part D (FFS/MA). Between 2017 and 2021, annual Medicare spending on biologics increased by approximately 200%. Between 2023 and 2025, Medicare Part D OOP costs for biologics will decrease by an estimated 50%-60%.

Prescription drug insurance increasingly imposes prior authorization (requiring providers to request coverage before claim approval) to manage utilization. Prior authorization has been criticized because of its administrative burden on providers. The primary alternative to managing utilization is imposing out-of-pocket (OOP) payment to incentivize beneficiaries to seek lower-cost care, effectively providing beneficiaries with partial insurance. Would beneficiaries prefer indirectly paying for prior authorization through higher premiums; or would they prefer prior authorization was replaced by higher OOP costs? This tradeoff depends on how much OOP costs could be displaced by prior authorization, which depends on their relative impact on demand. I estimate the effect of prior authorization and OOP costs on pharmaceutical demand in Medicare Part D, addressing endogeneity caused by unobserved drug quality and selection into plans. Despite criticism of prior authorization, I find that Medicare beneficiaries would prefer higher premiums to pay for prior authorization, over higher OOP costs.

High out-of-pocket prescription drug costs contribute to financial toxicity, medication nonadherence, and adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Policymakers recently passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which will cap Medicare out-of-pocket drug costs at $2,000/year and expand full low-income subsidies (LIS). It is unclear how these provisions will affect Medicare beneficiaries with CV risk factors and/or conditions.
The authors sought to characterize the population of Medicare beneficiaries with CV risk factors/conditions experiencing out-of-pocket prescription drug costs >$2,000/year and estimate their potential savings under the Inflation Reduction Act\'s spending cap; identify sociodemographic characteristics associated with out-of-pocket costs >$2,000/year; and characterize beneficiaries newly eligible for LIS under the Inflation Reduction Act.
This was a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with ≥1 CV risk factor/condition from 2016 to 2019.
An annual estimated 34,056,335 ± 855,653 Medicare beneficiaries (mean ± SE) had ≥1 CV risk factor/condition, of whom 1,020,484 ± 77,055 experienced out-of-pocket drug costs >$2,000/year. The likelihood of experiencing out-of-pocket drug costs >$2,000/year was lower among adults ≥75 years vs 65 to 74 years (adjusted OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49-0.93) and for low-income vs higher-income adults. Among beneficiaries currently spending >$2,000/year, estimated median out-of-pocket drug savings would be $855/year and total annual savings $1,723,031,307 ± $91,150,609 under the Inflation Reduction Act. An estimated 1,289,861 beneficiaries would also become newly eligible for LIS.
More than 1 million older adults with CV risk factors and/or conditions spend >$2,000/year out-of-pocket on prescription drugs and will likely benefit from the Inflation Reduction Act\'s cap, with estimated total out-of-pocket savings of $1.7 billion/year, while another 1.3 million will also become newly eligible for LIS.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To examine neurotologists\' 2013 to 2016 Medicare Part-D data and evaluate commonly prescribed medications, longitudinal changes in prescribing patterns, presumed associated pathologies, and cost distribution across United States.
METHODS: Comprehensive prescription data of Part-D-participating neurotologists was quiered from the 2013 to 2016 Medicare Part-D database. Outcome variables consisted of the 25 most commonly prescribed + refilled medications, cost distribution per medication, presumed associated pathologies, and standardized prescription cost across United States.
RESULTS: Of the 594 available U.S. neurotologists, 336 (57%) were found in the Medicare Part-D database. In 2016, total prescription costs were $4 483 268 with an averaged $13 343 ± $18 698 per neurotologist. The three most frequently filled drugs were fluticasone propionate, ciprofloxacin, and triamterene-hydrochlorothiazide. From 2013 to 2016, the greatest change in prescription pattern was observed with azelastine (+188%), montelukast sodium (+104%), mupirocin (+63%), and mometasone (-91%), whereas the greatest change in relative drug cost distribution was seen in ofloxacin, (+695.7%) neomycin-polymyxin-hydrocortisone (+262.1%), and mometasone (-83%). Triamterene-hydrochlorothiazide, prednisone, montelukast, amoxicillin-clavulanate, azelastine, spironolactone, and mupirocin had statistically significant increases in average number of prescriptions per physician, whereas ofloxacin and mometasone had significant decreases. Medications presumably treating Eustachian tube dysfunction, Meniere\'s disease, and vestibular migraine had the greatest percent changes across years. Cost distribution of four drugs increased upwards of 100%. Geographic analysis demonstrated that Southern and Midwest regions had higher standardized prescription costs.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to analyze neurotologists\' trends in prescribing patterns, regional prescription cost distributions, and commonly treated pathologies. This can lead to better standardization of prescribing patterns and cost in the future.

Medicare Part D plans provide prescription drug coverage to 45 million seniors. The recent past has seen significant consolidation amongst plan providers, notable CVS\'s 2018 acquisition of Aetna and Cigna\'s 2018 acquisition of Express Scripts. In this paper, we analyze the effect of consolidation of standalone Part D plan providers on premiums using plausibly exogenous variation in concentration induced by the 2011 merger between CVS and Universal American. We find that the increase in concentration for standalone Medicare Part D plans that resulted from this merger led to higher average premiums, a total of nearly $170 million per year. We find further that, consistent with the assumptions behind standard antitrust practice, the effects of the increase in concentration were heterogeneous: moderately (or more) concentrated markets that saw a meaningful increase in concentration saw significant increases in premiums, while premiums in other markets did not change significantly.

To examine whether prescription fills of opioids and central nervous system (CNS) depressants are lower in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, which aim to provide more coordinated and integrated care, than fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare.
Data from the 2015 National Health and Aging Trends Study linked with Medicare claims. Community-dwelling adults ≥65 enrolled in Medicare Part D were included (n = 5,652). Prescription fills of opioids, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, gabapentinoids, and co-prescriptions of opioids with the other medications in MA versus FFS Medicare were examined using multivariate logistic models. Propensity score weighting was applied to account for differences in characteristics between MA and FFS beneficiaries.
MA enrollees were less likely to fill prescriptions for benzodiazepines (15.6% versus 19.0%; marginal difference: -3.4%, t = -2.54, df = 56, p = 0.01), and co-prescriptions of opioids and gabapentinoids (5.1% versus 6.7%; marginal difference: -1.6%, t = -2.07, df = 56, p = 0.04) than FFS beneficiaries. There were no significant differences among the other prescription outcomes.
MA was associated with slightly lower likelihood of receiving opioids and some CNS depressants.

The efficiency of publicly-subsidized, privately-provisioned social insurance programs depends on the interaction between strategic insurers and the subsidy mechanism. We study this interaction in the context of Medicare\'s prescription drug coverage program. We find that the observed mechanism is successful in keeping \"raise-the-subsidy\" incentives relatively low, acts much like a flat voucher, and obtains a level of welfare close to the optimal voucher. Across a range of counterfactuals, we find that more efficient subsidy mechanisms share three features: they retain the marginal elasticity of demand, limit the exercise of market power, and preserve the link between prices and marginal costs.

BACKGROUND: Medicare Part D was implemented as a prescription drug benefit in 2006. Since then, high-cost new therapies have emerged, resulting in large increases in prices for pharmaceutical products, share of government spending from pharmaceutical products, and patient out of pocket costs.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to: 1) evaluate the role of pharmacy benefit managers who are intermediaries in the processing and payment of prescription drug plans, and 2) to analyze the formulary selections of Medicare Part D plans in the context of differing wholesale acquisition costs, list prices and potential rebates, while building on prior work on the out of pocket costs associated with rebates.
METHODS: Hepatitis C was used as a case study to compare the list prices, clinical merits, and preferred drug coverage frequency of select pan-genotypic direct acting agent Hepatitis C treatments. The treatments were then put through a hypothetical 2018 Medicare Part D standard cost structure to illustrate differences in out-of-pocket costs to consumers at various list prices among treatments.
RESULTS: Hepatitis C treatments with lower list prices were offered as covered benefit less frequently than high list price treatments, despite being clinically superior and lower out-of-pocket cost.
CONCLUSIONS: Consumers, regulators and policy advocates need to work to limit the impact of financial conflicts of interest and perverse incentives of pharmaceutical rebates in drug selection. This is especially true for high-cost treatments with substantial out-of-pocket cost implications for consumers, which also prevent widespread access, hindering public health goals.

Little is known about how Medicare Part D Comprehensive Medication Review (CMR) affects quality of medication use and management. In this study, changes of plan level CMR completion rates over time were examined and their associations with medication use and management related (MUMR) quality measures.
Using Medicare Part D plan Star Rating and contract information data, a longitudinal data set was developed with CMR completion rate and 17 MUMR measures. T-tests and one-way Analysis of Variance were used to examine the variation of CMR rates between contracts and over time, respectively, as well as the regression adjusted associations using fixed-effects and ordinary least squares models, verified by Generalized Estimating Equations.
CMR completion rates increased substantially from contract year 2013-2016, with a larger increase among Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug Plans than stand-alone Prescription Drug Plans. Prior year\'s CMR completion rates had marginally positive effects on 4 of the 17 MUMR measures: medication adherence with statin drugs, continuous beta blocker treatment, and pharmacotherapy management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation (systemic corticosteroid or bronchodilator). Increasing CMR completion also was associated with increased chronic use of atypical antipsychotics by elderly beneficiaries in nursing homes, an unintended outcome and a reflection of poor quality of care. CMR completion rates in the same year had even more limited associations with other MUMR measures.
At plan level, CMR completion rates had limited and inconsistent association with other MUMR measures. Although our research used an observational study design, the associations observed have policy implications to the Center for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) Star Ratings program and quality bonus payments, as well as implications for plans\' quality improvement.