Impact of medicare part D on access to and cost sharing for specialty biologic medications for beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis

Arthritis Care and Research

Volumn 61, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 745-754

  Polinski, Jennifer M ^a   Mohr, Penny E ^b   Johnson, Lorraine ^c  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b Center for Medical Technology Policy   (United States)

^c CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADALIMUMAB; DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUG; ETANERCEPT; RECOMBINANT INTERLEUKIN 1 RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT;

AGED; ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MALE; MEDICARE; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; REIMBURSEMENT; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SELF REPORT; SIMULATION;

AGED; ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL; ANTIRHEUMATIC AGENTS; ARTHRITIS, RHEUMATOID; COST SHARING; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICARE PART D; UNITED STATES;

EID: 66749155915     PISSN: 21514658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/art.24560     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Saag KG, Teng GG, Patkar NM, Anuntiyo J, Finney C, Curtis JR, et al. American College of Rheumatology 2008 recommendations for the use of nonbiologic and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:762-784
2. Chen YF, Jobanputra P, Barton P, Jowett S, Bryan S, Clark W, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in adults and an economic evaluation of their cost-effectiveness. Health Technol Assess 2006;10:1-229. (Pubitemid 44910057)
3. Siddiqui MA. The efficacy and tolerability of newer biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: best current evidence. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2007;19:308-313 (Pubitemid 46597472)
4. Robinson JC. Insurers' strategies for managing the use and cost of biopharmaceuticals. Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25:1205-1217
5. Goldman DP, Joyce GF, Lawless G, Crown WH, Willey V. Benefit design and specialty drug use. Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25:1319-1331
6. Mullins CD, Lavallee DC, Pradel FG, DeVries AR, Caputo N. Health plans' strategies for managing outpatient specialty pharmaceuticals. Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25:1332-1339
7. Leavitt MO, Secretary of Health and Human Services. Report to Congress: evaluation of the Medicare replacement drug demonstration. 2007. URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/Demo-ProjectsEvalRpts/downloads/MMA641-RTC.pdf.
8. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Medicare program: Medicare prescription drug benefit. Final rule: interpretation. Fed Regist 2005;70:13397-13400
9. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Medicare prescription drug benefit manual: chapter 6. Part D drugs and formulary requirements. URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ PrescriptionDrugCovContra/Downloads/R2PDB.pdf.
10. Hoadley J, Hargrave E, Cubanski J, Neuman T. An in-depth examination of formularies and other features of Medicare drug plans. URL: http://www.kff.org/ medicare/7489.cfm.
11. Hargrave E, Hoadley J, Merrell K, Cubanski J. Medicare Part D 2008 data spotlight: specialty tiers. URL: http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/7711.pdf.
12. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The Medicare replacement drug demonstration evaluation report. URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ DemoProjectsEvalRpts/downloads/MMA641-Demo-Evaluation-p.pdf.
13. Pope GC, Kautter J, Ellis RP, Ash AS, Ayanian JZ, Lezzoni LI, et al. Risk adjustment of Medicare capitation payments using the CMS-HCC model. Health Care Financ Rev 2004;25:119-141 (Pubitemid 39201560)
14. Robst J, Levy JM, Ingber MJ. Diagnosis-based risk adjustment for Medicare prescription drug plan payments. Health Care Financ Rev 2007;28:15-30. (Pubitemid 47173624)
15. US Census Bureau. Summary file 1: 2000 census of population and housing. URL:http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf1.pdf.
16. US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration. Area resource file: national county-level health resource information database. URL: http://arfsys.com/index.htm.
17. Kaiser Family Foundation. The Medicare prescription drug benefit. URL: http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/7044-04.pdf.
18. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Prescription drug plan formulary and pharmacy network files and prescription drug coverage files. 2006. URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/nonidentifiabledatafiles/09- prescriptiondrugplanformulary,pharmacynetwork,andpricinginformationfiles.asp.
19. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Prescription drug coverage files. 2006. URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/prescriptiondrugcovgenin/.
20. US Department of Health and Human Services. Over 38 million people with Medicare now receiving prescription drug coverage. 2006. URL: http://hhs.gov/news/press/2006pres/20060614.html.
21. Gillick MR. Molecular medicine, the Medicare drug benefit, and the need for cost control. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54:1442-1446 (Pubitemid 44342897)
22. Kolata G. Co-payments for expensive drugs soar. The New York Times 2008 April 14. URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/us/14drug.html?emc=eta1.
23. Lee TH, Emanuel EJ. Tier 4 drugs and the fraying of the social compact. N Engl J Med 2008;359:333-335
24. Shrank WH, Hoang T, Ettner SL, Glassman PA, Nair K, DeLapp D, et al. The implications of choice: prescribing generic or preferred pharmaceuticals improves medication adherence for chronic conditions. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:332-337 (Pubitemid 43244321)