Can oral chemotherapy parity laws reduce patients’ out-of-pocket (OOP) costs?

Authors

null

Andrea Phillips Sitlinger

Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC

Andrea Phillips Sitlinger, Peter A. Ubel, Tian Zhang, Charlene Wong, Rishi Sachdev, David Anderson, Yousuf Zafar

Organizations

Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, Duke University Fuqua School of Business, Durham, NC, Duke Pediatrics, Durham, NC, Duke University, Durham, NC, Duke Margolis Center for Health Policy, Durham, NC

Research Funding

Other

Background: Insurance plans vary coverage for infusional (IV) vs oral drugs, leading some to suggest that patients on oral drugs pay more OOP than those on IV drugs. 43 states have passed laws requiring insurers to cover oral drugs equivalently to IV drugs. Yet, there is little evidence that these “parity laws” are effective. Our aim was to estimate impact of parity laws on OOP expenses for oral vs IV drugs. Methods: We sought to determine how quickly patients on oral vs IV drugs reach their plan’s annual OOP maximum (max) as a surrogate for OOP expense. We used 2017 data from Healthcare.gov public use files to generate cost-sharing profiles for all 3,092 unique Marketplace plans. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) were chosen as two representative malignancies since both have accepted, first-line, IV and oral treatment options. We created guideline-concordant, first-line treatment regimens for simulated patients with CLL (oral ibrutinib vs IV bendamustine/rituximab) or mHSPC (oral abiraterone vs IV docetaxel). Drug, professional, facility, imaging, and lab claims were simulated to calculate OOP costs. The mean number of days to reach the OOP maximum for each Marketplace plan and treatment regimen were recorded. We assessed variation according to insurance coverage levels (“metal tier”: Catastrophic, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum). Results: For CLL patients, 95% of plans reached OOP max in approximately one month of treatment for both oral and IV drugs (oral: mean 36 days; IV: mean 29 days). 99% of mHSPC patients reached their OOP max for oral treatment in a mean 15 days, but only 57% of plans reached OOP max for IV mHSPC treatment. Metal tier impacts time to reach OOP max (table). Conclusions: Parity laws do not lower patient costs when both IV and oral treatment options are expensive. In these cases, patients reach the OOP max rapidly. The small subset of patients most likely to benefit from parity laws are those on oral therapy for a disease where the comparable IV drug is inexpensive (eg, generic docetaxel for mHSPC).

Days to Reach OOP Maximum

Metal tier
IV
CLL
Prostate
OralIVOral
Catastrophic111901
Bronze282111
Silver283632729
Gold293632729
Platinum1133628529

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2018 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A: Big Data Studies; Projects Relating to Equity, Value, and Policy

Track

Projects Relating to Equity, Value and Policy,Big Data Studies

Sub Track

Measuring Value and Costs

Citation

J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 30; abstr 97)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2018.36.30_suppl.97

Abstract #

97

Poster Bd #

K4

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2018 ASCO Annual Meeting

Can oral chemotherapy parity laws reduce patients’ out-of-pocket (OOP) costs?

First Author: Andrea Phillips Sitlinger

First Author: Ulka N. Vaishampayan

First Author: Ulka N. Vaishampayan