Publications

PURPOSE: To report historical patterns of pharmaceutical expenditures, to identify factors that may influence future spending, and to predict growth in drug spending in 2020 in the United States, with a focus on the nonfederal hospital and clinic sectors.

METHODS: Historical patterns were assessed by examining data on drug purchases from manufacturers using the IQVIA National Sales Perspectives database. Factors that may influence drug spending in hospitals and clinics in 2020 were reviewed, including new drug approvals, patent expirations, and potential new policies or legislation. Focused analyses were conducted for specialty drugs, biosimilars, and diabetes medications. For nonfederal hospitals, clinics, and overall (all sectors), estimates of growth of pharmaceutical expenditures in 2020 were based on a combination of quantitative analyses and expert opinion.

RESULTS: In 2019, overall US pharmaceutical expenditures grew 5.4% compared to 2018, for a total of $507.9 billion. This increase was driven to similar degrees by prices, utilization, and new drugs. Adalimumab was the top drug in US expenditures in 2019, followed by apixaban and insulin glargine. Drug expenditures were $36.9 billion (a 1.5% increase from 2018) and $90.3 billion (an 11.8% increase from 2018) in nonfederal hospitals and clinics, respectively. In clinics, growth was driven by new products and increased utilization, whereas in hospitals growth was driven by new products and price increases. Several new drugs that will likely influence spending are expected to be approved in 2020. Specialty and cancer drugs will continue to drive expenditures.

CONCLUSION: For 2020 we expect overall prescription drug spending to rise by 4.0% to 6.0%, whereas in clinics and hospitals we anticipate increases of 9.0% to 11.0% and 2.0% to 4.0%, respectively, compared to 2019. These national estimates of future pharmaceutical expenditure growth may not be representative of any particular health system because of the myriad of local factors that influence actual spending.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the proportions and trends in gender ratios of journal editorial boards in medicine, nursing, and pharmacy from 1995 to 2016.

DESIGN: This was a pooled cross-sectional evaluation of 21 high-impact medical, nursing, and pharmacy journals.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The gender composition of editorial boards for each discipline was obtained. Gender expression was based on the person's name or other information available on the Internet.

OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of all editorial board member positions, including editorial leadership positions, occupied by the underrepresented gender, and trends over time were measured.

RESULTS: A total of 5309 editorial board members and 312 editorial leadership positions were identified. From 1995 to 2016, women remained underrepresented across medicine and pharmacy journal editorial boards, whereas men remained underrepresented across nursing journal editorial boards. However, there were statistically significant increases in the representation of the underrepresented gender on editorial boards across all disciplines. Medicine was the only discipline to experience a statistically significant increase in the underrepresented gender of the editorial board being appointed to a leadership position; the proportion of women increased from 3% in 1995 to 35% in 2016.

CONCLUSION: The gender gap in medicine and pharmacy journals appears to be narrowing. Although men continue to lag behind women in nursing journals, they are and have been overrepresented when considering the proportion of men practicing in the field. Overall, continued efforts are needed to resolve gender inequities in academic health sciences.

Previous studies have suggested an increased risk of cardiac events with azithromycin, but the predictors of such events are unknown. We sought to develop and validate two prediction models to identify such predictors. We used data from Truven Marketscan Database (01/2009 to 06/2015). Using a split-sample approach, we developed two prediction models, which included baseline demographics, clinical conditions (Model 1), concurrent use of any drug (Model 1) and therapeutic class (Model 2) with a risk of QT-prolongation (CQT-Rx). Patients enrolled in a health plan for 365 days before and five days after dispensing of azithromycin (episodes). Cardiac events included syncope, palpitations, ventricular arrhythmias, cardiac arrest as a primary diagnosis for hospitalization including death. For each model, a backward elimination of predictors using logistic regression was applied to identify predictors in 100 random samples of the training cohort. Predictors prevalent in >50% of the models were included in the final model. A score for the Assessment of Cardiac Risk with Azithromycin (ACRA) was generated using the training cohort then tested in the validation cohort. A cohort of 20,134,659 episodes with 0.03% cardiac events were included. Over 60% included females with mean age of 40.1±21.3 years. Age, sex, history of syncope, cardiac dysrhythmias, non-specific chest pain, and presence of a CQT-Rx were included as predictors for Model-1 (c-statistic = 0.68). For Model-2 (c-statistic = 0.64), predictors included age, sex, anti-arrhythmic agents, anti-emetics, antidepressants, loop diuretics, and ACE inhibitors. ACRA score is available online (bit.ly/ACRA_2020). The ACRA score may help identify patients who are at higher risk of cardiac events following treatment with azithromycin. Providers should assess the risk-benefit of using azithromycin and consider alternative antibiotics among high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing by dentists for older patients receiving medications with potential contraindications and the subsequent impact on acute care outcomes is not well described.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective of this paper was to evaluate the use of potentially inappropriate medication combinations (PIMCs) involving opioids prescribed by dentists according to the Beers Criteria and risks of 30-day emergency department (ED) visits and all-cause hospitalization among commercially insured dental patients ages 65 years and older.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 40,800 older dental patient visits in which opioids were prescribed between 2011 and 2015 using the IBM MarketScan databases. Data collection from dental, medical, and pharmacy claims included information on the concurrent use of PIMCs and outcomes of all-cause acute care utilization over the 30-day period after dental encounters.

RESULTS: For the overall cohort, the median age was 69 years, and 45% were women. The prevalence of PIMCs per Beers Criteria was 10.4%. A total of 947 all-cause acute care events were observed in the 30 days post-dental visit. Patients with PIMCs involving opioids prescribed by dentists according to the Beers Criteria had higher rates of acute care use (3.3% vs 2.2%, p<0.001), which were associated with an increased risk of all-cause acute care utilization (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.48). A dose-response relationship was seen with increasing oral morphine equivalents prescribed and increased acute care utilization (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of older patients receiving opioids at dental visits use psychotropic medications that in combination should be avoided according to the American Geriatric Society Beers Criteria.

OBJECTIVES: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) antivirals have been shown to be highly effective with minimal adverse effects, but they are costly. Little is known about the national spending on this drug class in either Canada or the United States, 2 countries with different drug pricing regulations. Thus the objective of this study was to compare drug expenditure on HCV medications in the United States and Canada.

METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study using the IQVIA National Sales Perspectives (United States) and Geographic Prescription Monitor (Canada) databases, which contains prescription transactions from American and Canadian pharmacies. All prescription claims for the period between January 1, 2014, and June 30, 2018, were used to describe HCV antiviral expenditure in both countries.

RESULTS: The United States and Canada spent $59.7 billion and $2.8 billion on HCV medications, respectively. Population-adjusted HCV medication costs were higher in the United States ($1 million per 100 000 population) compared with Canada ($0.4 million per 100 000 population).

CONCLUSIONS: Although the rates of HCV infection are similar in the 2 countries, these findings highlight the differences in both the reimbursement utilization policy for HCV treatments in the countries and the major differences in drug pricing policies. As policies to reduce drug spending in the United States are explored, this article highlights the potential cost implications of implementing Canadian index pricing.

This study characterizes government, academia, and private funding for gene therapy trials in the United States by technology type and therapeutic and disease area.

INTRODUCTION: Dentists prescribe 1 in 10 opioid prescriptions in the U.S. When opioids are necessary, national guidelines recommend the prescription of low-dose opioids for a short duration. This study assesses the appropriate prescribing of opioids by dentists before guideline implementation.

METHODS: The authors performed a cross-sectional analysis of a population-based sample of 542,958 U.S. commercial dental patient visits between 2011 and 2015 within the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases (data analysis October 2018‒April 2019). Patients with recent hospitalization, active cancer treatment, or chronic pain conditions were excluded. Prescription opioids were ascertained using pharmacy claims data with standardized morphine equivalents and recorded days' supply. Appropriate prescribing was determined from the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for pain management based on a recommended 3 days' supply of opioid medication and anticipated post-procedural pain.

RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of prescribed opioids exceeded the recommended morphine equivalents for appropriate management of acute pain. Approximately half (53%) exceeded the recommended days' supply. Patients aged 18-34 years, men, patients residing in the Southern U.S., and those receiving oxycodone were most likely to have opioids prescribed inappropriately. The proportion of opioids that exceed the recommended morphine equivalents increased over the study period, whereas opioids exceeding the recommended days' supply remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS: Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 2 opioids prescribed to adult dental patients are overprescribed. Judicious opioid-prescribing interventions should be tailored to oral health conditions and dentists.

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires biomedical companies to report payments made to physicians and teaching hospitals to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Despite significant attention paid to industry payments to physicians, little is known about payments to teaching hospitals, which create the potential for both benefits and institutional conflicts of interest. We examined 2018 CMS Open Payments program data to identify all nonresearch payments made by industry to teaching hospitals and determined that 91 percent of teaching hospitals received industry payments totaling $832 million in 2018. We observed substantial royalty payments, which may reflect the downstream benefits of research partnerships, as well as substantial payments for gifts and education, which raise concerns for institutional conflicts of interest. Hospital predictors of receiving payments included large bed size, major medical school affiliation, and inclusion on the U.S. News & World Report Best Hospitals Honor Roll. Financial payments from industry to teaching hospitals are common and previously underrecognized. Hospitals should strengthen policies to prevent the institutional conflicts of interest that may arise from these payments while promoting beneficial industry collaborations. We also suggest that CMS reporting requirements be broadened to all hospitals to meet the Sunshine Act's goals of encouraging transparency and preventing inappropriate industry influence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: High insulin prices and cost-related insulin underuse are increasingly common and vexing problems for healthcare providers. This review highlights several factors that contribute to high prices and limited generic competition in the US insulin market.

RECENT FINDINGS: An opaque and complex pricing and reimbursement system for insulin, allegations of collusive practices by insulin manufacturers, and a lack of generic competition drive and sustain high insulin prices. When combined with increasing insurance deductibles and cost sharing, these factors contribute to cost-related insulin underuse and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Healthcare providers facing patients with type 2 diabetes who struggle to afford insulin should consider initiating or switching from analogue to human insulin as one way to help address the challenges of access and affordability. However, it is also important to support initiatives to advocate for affordable pricing for insulin for patients who can benefit from the flexibility offered by many of the newer insulin preparations.