Publications

IMPORTANCE: Most studies that have examined drug prices have focused on list prices, without accounting for manufacturer rebates and other discounts, which have substantially increased in the last decade.

OBJECTIVE: To describe changes in list prices, net prices, and discounts for branded pharmaceutical products for which US sales are reported by publicly traded companies, and to determine the extent to which list price increases were offset by increases in discounts.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective descriptive study using 2007-2018 pricing data from the investment firm SSR Health for branded products available before January 2007 with US sales reported by publicly traded companies (n = 602 drugs). Net prices were estimated by compiling company-reported sales for each product and number of units sold in the US.

EXPOSURES: Calendar year.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Outcomes included list and net prices and discounts in Medicaid and other payers. List prices represent manufacturers' price to wholesalers or direct purchasers but do not account for discounts. Net prices represent revenue per unit of the product after all manufacturer concessions are accounted for (including rebates, coupon cards, and any other discount). Means of outcomes were calculated each year for the overall sample and 6 therapeutic classes, weighting each product by utilization and adjusting for inflation.

RESULTS: From 2007 to 2018, list prices increased by 159% (95% CI, 137%-181%), or 9.1% per year, while net prices increased by 60% (95% CI, 36%-84%), or 4.5% per year, with stable net prices between 2015 and 2018. Discounts increased from 40% to 76% in Medicaid and from 23% to 51% for other payers. Increases in discounts offset 62% of list price increases. There was large variability across classes. Multiple sclerosis treatments (n = 4) had the greatest increases in list (439%) and net (157%) prices. List prices of lipid-lowering agents (n = 11) increased by 278% and net prices by 95%. List prices of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (n = 3) increased by 166% and net prices by 73%. List prices of insulins (n = 7) increased by 262%, and net prices by 51%. List prices of noninsulin antidiabetic agents (n = 10) increased by 165%, and net prices decreased by 1%. List price increases were lowest (59%) for antineoplastic agents (n = 44), but discounts only offset 41% of list price increases, leading to 35% increase in net prices.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this analysis of branded drugs in the US from 2007 to 2018, mean increases in list and net prices were substantial, although discounts offset an estimated 62% of list price increases with substantial variation across classes.

IMPORTANCE: Low-value care is associated with harm among patients and with wasteful health care spending but has not been well characterized in the Veterans Health Administration.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the frequency of and variation in low-value diagnostic testing for 4 common conditions at Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs) and to examine the correlation between receipt of low-value testing for each condition.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study used Veterans Health Administration data from 127 VAMCs from fiscal years 2014 to 2015. Data were analyzed from April 2018 to March 2020.

EXPOSURES: Continuous enrollment in Veterans Health Administration during fiscal year 2015.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Receipt of low-value testing for low back pain, headache, syncope, and sinusitis. For each condition, sensitive and specific criteria were used to evaluate the overall frequency and range of low-value testing, adjusting for sociodemographic and VAMC characteristics. VAMC-level variation was calculated using median adjusted odds ratios. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the degree of correlation between low-value testing for each condition at the VAMC level.

RESULTS: Among 1 022 987 veterans, the mean (SD) age was 60 (16) years, 1 008 336 (92.4%) were male, and 761 485 (69.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 343 024 veterans (31.4%) were diagnosed with low back pain, 79 176 (7.3%) with headache, 23 776 (2.2%) with syncope, and 52 889 (4.8%) with sinusitis. With the sensitive criteria, overall and VAMC-level low-value testing frequency varied substantially across conditions: 4.6% (range, 2.7%-10.1%) for sinusitis, 12.8% (range, 8.6%-22.6%) for headache, 18.2% (range, 10.9%-24.6%) for low back pain, and 20.1% (range, 16.3%-27.7%) for syncope. With the specific criteria, the overall frequency of low-value testing across VAMCs was 2.4% (range, 1.3%-5.1%) for sinusitis, 8.6% (range, 6.2%-14.6%) for headache, 5.6% (range, 3.6%-7.7%) for low back pain, and 13.3% (range, 11.3%-16.8%) for syncope. The median adjusted odds ratio ranged from 1.21 for low back pain to 1.40 for sinusitis. At the VAMC level, low-value testing was most strongly correlated for syncope and headache (ρ = 0.56; P < .001) and low back pain and headache (ρ = 0.48; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, low-value diagnostic testing was common, varied substantially across VAMCs, and was correlated between veterans' receipt of different low-value tests at the VAMC level. The findings suggest a need to address low-value diagnostic testing, even in integrated health systems, with robust utilization management practices.

OBJECTIVES: Many older adults with limited life expectancy and/or advanced dementia (LLE/AD) are potentially overtreated for diabetes and may benefit from deintensification. Our aim was to examine the incidence and predictors of diabetes medication deintensification in older Veterans with LLE/AD who were potentially overtreated at admission to Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes (community living centers [CLCs]).

DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using linked VA and Medicare clinical/administrative data and Minimum Data Set assessments.

SETTING: VA CLCs.

PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6960 Veterans with diabetes and LLE/AD admitted to VA CLCs in fiscal years 2009 to 2015 with hemoglobin (Hb)A1c measured within 90 days of admission.

MEASUREMENTS: We evaluated treatment deintensification (discontinuation or dose reduction for a consecutive 7-day period) among residents who were potentially overtreated (HbA1c ≤7.5% and receiving hypoglycemic medications). Competing risk models assessed 90-day cumulative incidence of deintensification.

RESULTS: More than 40% (n = 3056) of Veteran CLC residents with diabetes were potentially overtreated. The cumulative incidence of deintensification at 90 days was 45.5%. Higher baseline HbA1c values were associated with a lower likelihood of deintensification (e.g., HbA1c 7.0-7.5% vs <6.0%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] = .57; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .50-.66). Compared with non-sulfonylurea oral agents (e.g., metformin), other treatment regimens were more likely to be deintensified (aRR = 1.31-1.88), except for basal insulin (aRR = .59; 95% CI = .52-.66). The only resident factor associated with increased likelihood of deintensification was documented end-of-life status (aRR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.01-1.25). Admission from home/assisted living (aRR = .85; 95% CI = .75-.96), obesity (aRR = .88; 95% CI = .78-.99), and peripheral vascular disease (aRR = .90; 95% CI = .81-.99) were associated with decreased likelihood of deintensification.

CONCLUSION: Deintensification of treatment regimens occurred in less than one-half of potentially overtreated Veterans and was more strongly associated with low HbA1c values and use of medications with high risk for hypoglycemia, rather than other resident characteristics. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:736-745, 2020.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Geriatric guidelines recommend against statin use in older adults with limited life expectancy (LLE) or advanced dementia (AD). This study examined resident and facility factors predicting statin discontinuation after nursing home (NH) admission in veterans with LLE/AD taking statins for secondary prevention.

DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of Veterans Affairs (VA) bar code medication administration records, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments, and utilization records linked to Medicare claims.

SETTING: VA NHs, known as community living centers (CLCs).

PARTICIPANTS: Veterans aged 65 and older with coronary artery disease, stroke, or diabetes mellitus, type II, admitted in fiscal years 2009 to 2015, who met criteria for LLE/AD on their admission MDS and received statins in the week after admission (n = 13,110).

MEASUREMENTS: Residents were followed until statin discontinuation (ie, gap in statin use ≥14 days), death, or censoring due to discharge, day 91 of the stay, or end of the study period. Competing risk models assessed cumulative incidence and predictors of discontinuation, stratified by whether the resident had their end-of-life (EOL) status designated or used hospice at admission.

RESULTS: Overall cumulative incidence of statin discontinuation was 31% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30%-32%) by day 91, and it was markedly higher in those with (52%; 95% CI = 50%-55%) vs without (25%; 95% CI = 24%-26%) EOL designation/hospice. In patients with EOL designation/hospice (n = 2,374), obesity, congestive heart failure, and admission from nonhospital settings predicted decreased likelihood of discontinuation; AD, dependency in activities of daily living, greater number of medications, and geographic region predicted increased likelihood of discontinuation. In patients without EOL designation/hospice (n = 10,736), older age and several specific markers of poor prognosis predicted greater discontinuation, whereas obesity/overweight predicted decreased discontinuation.

CONCLUSION: Most veterans with LLE/AD taking statins for secondary prevention do not discontinue statins following CLC admission. Designating residents as EOL status, hospice use, and individual clinical factors indicating poor prognosis may prompt deprescribing.

OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between opioid prescriber specialty and patient likelihood of opioid use disorder (OUD), opioid misuse, and opioid overdose.

DESIGN: Longitudinal retrospective study using Pennsylvania Medicaid data (2007-2015).

METHODS: We constructed an incident cohort of 432,110 enrollees initiating prescription opioid use without a history of OUD or overdose six months before opioid initiation. We attributed patients to one of 10 specialties using the first opioid prescriber's specialty or, alternatively, the specialty of the dominant prescriber writing the majority of the patient's opioid prescriptions. We estimated adjusted rates for OUD, misuse, and overdose, adjusting for demographic variables and medical (including pain) and psychiatric comorbidities.

RESULTS: The unadjusted incidence rates of OUD, misuse, and overdose were 7.13, 4.73, and 0.69 per 100,000 person-days, respectively. Patients initiating a new episode of opioid treatment with Pain Medicine/Anesthesiology (6.7 events, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.5 to 8.2) or Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R; 6.1 events, 95% CI = 5.1 to 7.2) had higher adjusted rates for OUD per 100,000 person-days compared with Primary Care practitioners (PCPs; 4.4 events, 95% CI = 4.1 to 4.7). Patients with index prescriptions from Pain Medicine/Anesthesiology (15.9 events, 95% CI = 13.2 to 19.3) or PM&R (15.8 events, 95% CI = 13.5 to 18.4) had higher adjusted rates for misuse per 100,000 person-days compared with PCPs (9.6 events, 95% CI = 8.8 to 10.6). Findings were largely similar when patients were attributed to specialty based on dominant prescriber.

CONCLUSIONS: Differences in opioid-related risks by specialty of opioid prescriber may arise from differences in patient risk factors, provider behavior, or both. Our findings inform targeting of opioid risk mitigation strategies to specific practitioner specialties.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision making is essential to deprescribing unnecessary or harmful medications in older adults, yet patients' and caregivers' perspectives on medication value and how this affects their willingness to discontinue a medication are poorly understood. We sought to identify the most significant factors that impact the perceived value of a medication from the perspective of patients and caregivers.

DESIGN: Qualitative study using focus groups conducted in September and October 2018.

SETTING: Participants from the Pepper Geriatric Research Registry (patients) and the Pitt+Me Registry (caregivers) maintained by the University of Pittsburgh.

PARTICIPANTS: Six focus groups of community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older, or their caregivers, prescribed five or more medications in the preceding 12 months.

MEASUREMENTS: We sought to identify (1) general views on medication value and what makes medication worth taking; (2) how specific features such as cost or side effects impact perceived value; and (3) reactions to clinical scenarios related to deprescribing.

RESULTS: We identified four themes. Perceived effectiveness was the primary factor that caused participants to consider a medication to be of high value. Participants considered a medication to be of low value if it adversely affected quality of life. Participants also cited cost when determining value, especially if it resulted in material sacrifices. Participants valued medications prescribed by providers with whom they had good relationships rather than valuing level of training. When presented with clinical scenarios, participants ably weighed these factors when determining the value of a medication and indicated whether they would adhere to a deprescribing recommendation.

CONCLUSION: We identified that perceived effectiveness, adverse effects on quality of life, cost, and a strong relationship with the prescriber influenced patients' and caregivers' views on medication value. These findings will enable prescribers to engage older patients in shared decision making when deprescribing unnecessary medications and will allow health systems to incorporate patient-centered assessment of value into systems-based deprescribing interventions. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:746-753, 2020.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite the significant medical and economic consequences of coexisting alcohol use disorder (AUD) in patients with cirrhosis, little is known about AUD treatment patterns and their impact on clinical outcomes in this population. We aimed to characterize the use of and outcomes associated with AUD treatment in patients with cirrhosis.

APPROACH AND RESULTS: This retrospective cohort study included Veterans with cirrhosis who received Veterans Health Administration care and had an index diagnosis of AUD between 2011 and 2015. We assessed the baseline factors associated with AUD treatment (pharmacotherapy or behavioral therapy) and clinical outcomes for 180 days following the first AUD diagnosis code within the study time frame. Among 93,612 Veterans with cirrhosis, we identified 35,682 with AUD, after excluding 2,671 who had prior diagnoses of AUD and recent treatment. Over 180 days following the index diagnosis of AUD, 5,088 (14%) received AUD treatment, including 4,461 (12%) who received behavioral therapy alone, 159 (0.4%) who received pharmacotherapy alone, and 468 (1%) who received both behavioral therapy and pharmacotherapy. In adjusted analyses, behavioral and/or pharmacotherapy-based AUD treatment was associated with a significant reduction in incident hepatic decompensation (6.5% vs. 11.6%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52, 0.76), a nonsignificant decrease in short-term all-cause mortality (2.6% vs. 3.9%, AOR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.57, 1.08), and a significant decrease in long-term all-cause mortality (51% vs. 58%, AOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80, 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS: Most Veterans with cirrhosis and coexisting AUD did not receive behavioral therapy or pharmacotherapy treatment for AUD over a 6-month follow-up. The reductions in hepatic decompensation and mortality suggest that future studies should focus on delivering evidence-based AUD treatments to patients with coexisting AUD and cirrhosis.

This economic evaluation reviews the trends in list and net price data from SSR Health for the 2007 to 2019 period of self-administered systemic psoriasis medications manufactured in the United States.