Out-of-pocket costs for direct oral anticoagulants and prescription abandonment among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Maryia Zhdanava, Veronica Ashton, Jill Korsiak, Fengyi Jiang, Dominic Pilon, Mark Alberts
{"title":"Out-of-pocket costs for direct oral anticoagulants and prescription abandonment among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism.","authors":"Maryia Zhdanava, Veronica Ashton, Jill Korsiak, Fengyi Jiang, Dominic Pilon, Mark Alberts","doi":"10.18553/jmcp.2025.31.4.366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used to prevent thrombosis in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite their clinical benefits, some patients abandon their DOAC prescription.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To retrospectively evaluate the association between patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and abandonment of the first DOAC prescription among patients with NVAF or VTE in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from Symphony Health, an ICON plc Company, PatientSource (April 1, 2017, to October 31, 2020) were used to select patients with NVAF or VTE with an approved or abandoned claim for a DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban). OOP costs (2021 US dollars) of the index claim were described by abandonment status, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between OOP costs of the index DOAC claim and abandonment. Analyses were performed in patients with NVAF and VTE separately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 753,755 patients with NVAF, 88.5% had an approved index DOAC claim and 11.5% had an abandoned index DOAC claim. Among 308,429 patients with VTE, 91.5% had an approved index DOAC claim and 8.5% had an abandoned index DOAC claim. Mean OOP costs of the index DOAC claim were lower in those with an approved than abandoned claim (NVAF approved vs abandoned: $79 vs $175; VTE approved vs abandoned: $65 vs $133). Among patients with NVAF, 21.4% of those with an approved claim and 9.1% of those with an abandoned claim had no OOP costs, 58.7% (approved) and 49.0% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $100, and 19.9% (approved) and 41.9% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than or equal to $100; among patients with VTE, 27.8% (approved) and 15.6% (abandoned) had no OOP costs, 58.4% (approved) and 54.8% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $100, and 13.8% (approved) and 29.6% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than or equal to $100. In multivariable models, the risk of abandonment increased by 21% (NVAF) and 17% (VTE) for each $100 in OOP costs (both <i>P</i> < 0.001). Relative to patients with no OOP costs, patients with OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $50 were 86% (NVAF) and 55% (VTE) more likely to abandon their index DOAC, patients with OOP costs greater than $50 to less than $100 were 80% (NVAF) and 111% (VTE) more likely to abandon their index DOAC, and patients with OOP costs greater than or equal to $100 were 332% (NVAF) and 244% (VTE) more likely to abandon their index DOAC (all <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among patients with NVAF or VTE, OOP costs of the first DOAC claim greater than or equal to $100 were associated with the highest risk of abandoning the first DOAC prescription.</p>","PeriodicalId":16170,"journal":{"name":"Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy","volume":"31 4","pages":"366-376"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11953867/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2025.31.4.366","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used to prevent thrombosis in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite their clinical benefits, some patients abandon their DOAC prescription.

Objective: To retrospectively evaluate the association between patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and abandonment of the first DOAC prescription among patients with NVAF or VTE in the United States.

Methods: Data from Symphony Health, an ICON plc Company, PatientSource (April 1, 2017, to October 31, 2020) were used to select patients with NVAF or VTE with an approved or abandoned claim for a DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban). OOP costs (2021 US dollars) of the index claim were described by abandonment status, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between OOP costs of the index DOAC claim and abandonment. Analyses were performed in patients with NVAF and VTE separately.

Results: Among 753,755 patients with NVAF, 88.5% had an approved index DOAC claim and 11.5% had an abandoned index DOAC claim. Among 308,429 patients with VTE, 91.5% had an approved index DOAC claim and 8.5% had an abandoned index DOAC claim. Mean OOP costs of the index DOAC claim were lower in those with an approved than abandoned claim (NVAF approved vs abandoned: $79 vs $175; VTE approved vs abandoned: $65 vs $133). Among patients with NVAF, 21.4% of those with an approved claim and 9.1% of those with an abandoned claim had no OOP costs, 58.7% (approved) and 49.0% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $100, and 19.9% (approved) and 41.9% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than or equal to $100; among patients with VTE, 27.8% (approved) and 15.6% (abandoned) had no OOP costs, 58.4% (approved) and 54.8% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $100, and 13.8% (approved) and 29.6% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than or equal to $100. In multivariable models, the risk of abandonment increased by 21% (NVAF) and 17% (VTE) for each $100 in OOP costs (both P < 0.001). Relative to patients with no OOP costs, patients with OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $50 were 86% (NVAF) and 55% (VTE) more likely to abandon their index DOAC, patients with OOP costs greater than $50 to less than $100 were 80% (NVAF) and 111% (VTE) more likely to abandon their index DOAC, and patients with OOP costs greater than or equal to $100 were 332% (NVAF) and 244% (VTE) more likely to abandon their index DOAC (all P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Among patients with NVAF or VTE, OOP costs of the first DOAC claim greater than or equal to $100 were associated with the highest risk of abandoning the first DOAC prescription.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy
Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: JMCP welcomes research studies conducted outside of the United States that are relevant to our readership. Our audience is primarily concerned with designing policies of formulary coverage, health benefit design, and pharmaceutical programs that are based on evidence from large populations of people. Studies of pharmacist interventions conducted outside the United States that have already been extensively studied within the United States and studies of small sample sizes in non-managed care environments outside of the United States (e.g., hospitals or community pharmacies) are generally of low interest to our readership. However, studies of health outcomes and costs assessed in large populations that provide evidence for formulary coverage, health benefit design, and pharmaceutical programs are of high interest to JMCP’s readership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信