Girishanthy Krishnarajah, MPH, MBA/MS
Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, N.J.
Monali Bhosle, PhD
IMS Health Consulting Group, Alexandria, Va.
Richard Chapman, PhD
IMS Health Consulting Group, Alexandria, Va.

A comparison of health care costs in patients with diabetes who do not initially respond to oral therapy suggests that it might be appropriate and clinically beneficial for providers to consider adding another oral agent, rather than up-titrating the current medication, particularly beyond intermediate dose levels

Girishanthy Krishnarajah, MPH, MBA/MS

Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, N.J.

Monali Bhosle, PhD

IMS Health Consulting Group, Alexandria, Va.

Richard Chapman, PhD

IMS Health Consulting Group, Alexandria, Va.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To compare health care costs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who added a new oral anti-diabetes drug (OAD) to an initial regimen with those who up-titrated their initial OAD.

Methods: Insurance claims data were obtained from 94 health plans for patients aged ≥18 years with ICD-9-CM diagnosis of T2DM during the period Jan. 1, 2001–June 30, 2007, and a newly prescribed metformin or sulfonylurea monotherapy. Patients were followed after initiating monotherapy to identify occurrence of first-treatment modification (addition or up-titration). Health care costs were analyzed during 360 days after first treatment modification. Subgroup analyses included comparison of addition cohort with two titration subgroups: 1) titration up to or below intermediate doses and 2) titration to beyond intermediate doses.

Results: During the post-treatment modification period, all-cause medication costs were 9% higher (p <0.0001), while inpatient costs were 14% lower for the addition cohort (p<0.008) as compared to the up-titration cohort. The total risk-adjusted health care costs were slightly lower but statistically insignificant for the addition cohort compared to the up-titration cohort (ratio of cost = 0.99; p = 0.052). These costs patterns remained similar for both the up-titration subgroups.

Conclusions: While addition of another OAD to the initial OAD regimen may result in higher medication costs, the lower inpatient costs and overall offset in the subsequent total costs may indicate clinical benefits with the add-on treatment. When appropriate and clinically beneficial, physicians may want to consider adding an OAD rather than up-titrating the current OAD, particularly beyond intermediate dose levels.

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.