Promising therapies, prohibitive costs: A qualitative assessment of the effects of the Medicare part d doughnut hole on access to costly cancer medications

Community Oncology

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 111-117

  Conwell, Leslie Jackson ^a   Esposito, Dominick ^a   Colby, Margaret ^a   Ball, Daniel ^b   Meadows, Eric S ^b   Marciniak, Martin ^b  

^a MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH   (United States)

^b ELI LILLY AND COMPANY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ERLOTINIB; IMATINIB; LENALIDOMIDE;

ARTICLE; CANCER THERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; COST OF ILLNESS; DRUG COST; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE FINANCING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MEDICARE; NURSE ATTITUDE; NURSE PRACTITIONER; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PRESCRIPTION; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOCIAL WORKER ATTITUDE;

EID: 79954495384     PISSN: 15485315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1548-5315(12)70058-X     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. National Institutes of Health. Dictionary of Cancer Terms. http://www.cancer.gov/dic-tionary/. Accessed December 2, 2009.
2. Ciardiello F, Tortora G. EGFR antagonists in cancer treatment. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1160-1174.
3. Green MR. Targeting targeted therapy. N Engl J Med 2004;350:2191-2193.
4. Lynch TJ, Adjei AA, Bunn PA, et al. Summary statement: novel agents in the treatment of lung cancer: advances in epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted agents. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:4365s-4371s.
5. Widakowich C, de Castro G Jr, de Azam-buja E, Dinh P, Awada A. Side effects of approved molecular targeted therapies in solid cancers [review]. Oncologist 2007;12:1443-1455.
6. Tigue C, Fitzner K, Alkhatib M, Schmid E, Bennett C. Te value of innovation: the economics of targeted drugs for cancer. Target Oncol 2007;2:113-119.
7. Lee TH, Emanuel EJ. Tier 4 drugs and the fraying of the social compact. N Engl J Med 2008;359:333-335.
8. Potetz L, DeWilde LF. Cancer and Medicare: A Chart book. Washington, DC: American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network; 2009.
9. Bach PB. Limits on Medicare's ability to control rising spending on cancer drugs. N Engl J Med 2009;360:626-633.
10. Stemple C, Cammisa M, Evans S, Fenter TC, Gonzalez J, Lee H. Overview of current Medicare Part D offerings. J Manag Care Pharm 2008;14(6 suppl):S4-S7.
11. Hoadley J, Tompson J, Hargrave E, Mer-rell K, Cubanski J, Neuman T. Medicare Part D 2008 Data Spotlight: The Coverage Gap. Washington, DC: Kaiser Family Foundation; 2007.
12. Zhang Y, Donohue JM, Newhouse JP, Lave JR. Effects of the coverage gap on drug spending: a closer look at Medicare Part D. Health Aff 2009;28:w317-w325.
13. Schneeweiss S, Patrick AR, Pedan A, et al. The effect of Medicare Part D coverage on drug use and cost sharing among seniors without prior drug benefits. Health Aff 2009;28:w305-w316.
14. Cammisa CR, Evans S, Fenter TC, et al. Overview of current Medicare Part D offerings. J Manag Care Pharm 2008;14(6 suppl C):4.
15. Polinski JM, Mohr PE, Johnson L. Impact of Medicare Part D on access to and cost sharing for specialty biologic medications for beneficiaries with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2009;61:745-754.
16. Harrison C, Nguyen K. Cost-sharing for cancer patients in Medicare: Seven case studies. Washington, DC: Avalere Health LLC; 2006.
17. Commission on Cancer. Cancer program accreditation: categories of approval. http://www.facs.org/cancer/coc/categories.html. Accessed September 23, 2008.
18. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Benefits offered to qualified state pharmaceutical assistance programs. http://statehealth-facts.org/comparetable.jsp?ind=642&cat=6. Accessed January 20, 2010.
19. National Conference of State Legislatures. State pharmaceutical assistance programs. http://www.ncsl.org/Default.aspx?TabId=14334#WI. Accessed January 20, 2010.
20. Wagner L, Lacey MD. The hidden costs of cancer care: an overview with implications and referral resources for oncology nurses. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2004;8:279-287.
21. Hsu J, Fung V, Price M, et al. Medicare beneficiaries' knowledge of Part D prescription drug program benefits and responses to drug costs. JAMA 2008;299:1929-1936.
22. Cummings JR, Rice T, Hanoch Y. Who thinks that Part D is too complicated? Survey results on the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Med Care Res Rev 2009;66:97-115.
23. Choudhry NK, Lee JL, Agnew-Blais J, Corcoran C, Shrank WH. Patient assistance programs: information is not our enemy. Health Af 2009;28:843-844.
24. Choudhry NK, Lee JL, Agnew-Blais J, Corcoran C, Shrank WH. Drug company-sponsored patient assistance programs: a viable safety net? Health Aff 2009;28:827-834.
25. Johnson K. Voluntary patient assistance programs: additional federal oversight unwarranted. Health Aff 2009;28:835-838.
26. Weinberg M. Reforming patient assistance programs: perfect world meets real world. Health Af 2009;28:839-842.
27. Office of Inspector General. Publication of OIG Special Advisory Bulletin on Patient Assistance Programs for Medicare Part D En-rollees. In: Department of Health and Human Services, ed. Vol FR Doc. 05-23038. Tuesday, November 22 ed: Federal Register; 2005.
28. Medco Health Solutions I. News alert: cancer drugs emerging as top driver of specialty drug spending; 2009.
29. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. 2010 Part D symposium. Baltimore, MD. 2010.
30. US Government Accountability Office. Medicare Part D: spending, beneficiary cost sharing, and cost-containment efforts for high-cost drugs eligible for a specialty tier. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office; January 29, 2010.
31. Nonnemaker L, Sinclair SA. Medicare benefciaries' out-of-pocket spending for health care services. Washington, DC: AARP Public Policy Institute; 2009.
32. Chauncey D, Mullins CD, Tran BV, McNally D, McEwan RN. Medication access through patient assistance programs. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006;63:1254-1259.
33. Printz C. Cancer Scope: patient assistance programs struggle during tough economic times-programs cannot serve all those who need help. Cancer 2009;115:465-466.
34. Side-by-Side Comparison of Major Health Care Reform Proposals: Focus on Health Reform. Menlo Park, CA: Te Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; 2010.