马克-库班的成本加成非专利药品计划的药品定价管理。

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS PharmacoEconomics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1007/s40273-024-01426-3
Snigdha Gulati, Mohak Gupta, TingTing Yan, Sneha Yelamanchili, Lucy Qinghua Xu, Tina Bharani, Ali Naji, Divyansh Agarwal
{"title":"马克-库班的成本加成非专利药品计划的药品定价管理。","authors":"Snigdha Gulati, Mohak Gupta, TingTing Yan, Sneha Yelamanchili, Lucy Qinghua Xu, Tina Bharani, Ali Naji, Divyansh Agarwal","doi":"10.1007/s40273-024-01426-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The exceedingly high US spending per capita on prescription medications is mediated, at least in part, by the inefficiencies of existing generic pharmaceutical distribution and reimbursement systems; yet, the extent of potential savings and areas for targeted interventions for generic drug prescribers remains underexplored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to analyze 2021 Medicare Part D spending on generic drugs in comparison with pricing of a low-cost generic drug program, the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC), to gauge the extent of achievable potential savings.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this retrospective, observational study, we performed a systematic analysis of potential Medicare Part D savings when using MCCPDC generic pricing. The 2023 MCCPDC data, as of August 2023, were obtained from the provider's publicly available database. The 2021 Medicare Part D data and prescriber datasets were obtained from the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Outcomes included total prescription volume, proportion of drugs with savings, total US dollar Medicare savings, and average weighted price reduction per unit drug. Results were stratified by medical and surgical subspecialties to identify areas for targeted interventions. Subspecialty-wise contribution to total savings versus contribution to total prescription volume was characterized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total estimated Medicare Part D savings were $8.6 billion using 90-day MCCPDC pricing, with surgical drugs accounting for over $900 million. Nearly 80% of the examined drugs were more price effective through MCCPDC using 90-day supply. Commonly prescribed drugs in cardiology, psychiatry, neurology, transplant surgery, and urology demonstrated the highest estimated absolute savings. The most disproportionate savings relative to prescription volume were observed for drugs in oncology, gynecology, infectious disease, transplant surgery, and colorectal surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This study underscores the significant potential for Medicare Part D savings through strategies that address the systemic overpayment for generic medications. We identified key areas for reform as well as specific medical and surgical subspecialties where targeted interventions could yield substantial savings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19807,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics","volume":" ","pages":"1279-1286"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drug Pricing Stewardship from Mark Cuban's Cost Plus Generic Drug Program.\",\"authors\":\"Snigdha Gulati, Mohak Gupta, TingTing Yan, Sneha Yelamanchili, Lucy Qinghua Xu, Tina Bharani, Ali Naji, Divyansh Agarwal\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40273-024-01426-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The exceedingly high US spending per capita on prescription medications is mediated, at least in part, by the inefficiencies of existing generic pharmaceutical distribution and reimbursement systems; yet, the extent of potential savings and areas for targeted interventions for generic drug prescribers remains underexplored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to analyze 2021 Medicare Part D spending on generic drugs in comparison with pricing of a low-cost generic drug program, the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC), to gauge the extent of achievable potential savings.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this retrospective, observational study, we performed a systematic analysis of potential Medicare Part D savings when using MCCPDC generic pricing. The 2023 MCCPDC data, as of August 2023, were obtained from the provider's publicly available database. The 2021 Medicare Part D data and prescriber datasets were obtained from the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Outcomes included total prescription volume, proportion of drugs with savings, total US dollar Medicare savings, and average weighted price reduction per unit drug. Results were stratified by medical and surgical subspecialties to identify areas for targeted interventions. Subspecialty-wise contribution to total savings versus contribution to total prescription volume was characterized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total estimated Medicare Part D savings were $8.6 billion using 90-day MCCPDC pricing, with surgical drugs accounting for over $900 million. Nearly 80% of the examined drugs were more price effective through MCCPDC using 90-day supply. Commonly prescribed drugs in cardiology, psychiatry, neurology, transplant surgery, and urology demonstrated the highest estimated absolute savings. The most disproportionate savings relative to prescription volume were observed for drugs in oncology, gynecology, infectious disease, transplant surgery, and colorectal surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This study underscores the significant potential for Medicare Part D savings through strategies that address the systemic overpayment for generic medications. We identified key areas for reform as well as specific medical and surgical subspecialties where targeted interventions could yield substantial savings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1279-1286\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01426-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmacoEconomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01426-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:美国人均处方药支出过高,至少部分原因是现有的非专利药品分销和报销系统效率低下;然而,对非专利药品处方者的潜在节约程度和有针对性的干预领域的研究仍然不足:我们旨在分析 2021 年联邦医疗保险 D 部分在仿制药上的支出与低成本仿制药计划--马克-库班成本加成药品公司(MCCPDC)--的定价的对比情况,以衡量可实现的潜在节约程度:在这项回顾性观察研究中,我们对使用 MCCPDC 非专利药定价时医疗保险 D 部分可能节省的费用进行了系统分析。截至 2023 年 8 月的 2023 年 MCCPDC 数据来自供应商的公开数据库。2021 年医疗保险 D 部分数据和处方者数据集来自美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心:主要结果和衡量标准:结果包括处方总量、节省药物的比例、医疗保险节省的美元总额以及每单位药物的平均加权降价幅度。结果按内科和外科亚专科进行分层,以确定有针对性的干预领域。按亚专科划分的总节余与总处方量的对比结果:根据 90 天的 MCCPDC 定价,估计联邦医疗保险 D 部分可节省总额为 86 亿美元,其中外科药物占 9 亿多美元。近 80% 的受检药物通过使用 90 天供应量的 MCCPDC 更具价格效益。心脏科、精神科、神经科、移植手术和泌尿科的常用处方药估计绝对节省额最高。相对于处方量而言,肿瘤科、妇科、传染病科、移植外科和结直肠外科的药物节省的费用最多:本研究强调了通过解决系统性非专利药超额支付问题的策略来节省医疗保险 D 部分费用的巨大潜力。我们确定了改革的关键领域以及特定的内科和外科亚专科,在这些领域采取有针对性的干预措施可以节省大量费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Drug Pricing Stewardship from Mark Cuban's Cost Plus Generic Drug Program.

Importance: The exceedingly high US spending per capita on prescription medications is mediated, at least in part, by the inefficiencies of existing generic pharmaceutical distribution and reimbursement systems; yet, the extent of potential savings and areas for targeted interventions for generic drug prescribers remains underexplored.

Objective: We aimed to analyze 2021 Medicare Part D spending on generic drugs in comparison with pricing of a low-cost generic drug program, the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC), to gauge the extent of achievable potential savings.

Design, setting, and participants: In this retrospective, observational study, we performed a systematic analysis of potential Medicare Part D savings when using MCCPDC generic pricing. The 2023 MCCPDC data, as of August 2023, were obtained from the provider's publicly available database. The 2021 Medicare Part D data and prescriber datasets were obtained from the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Main outcomes and measures: Outcomes included total prescription volume, proportion of drugs with savings, total US dollar Medicare savings, and average weighted price reduction per unit drug. Results were stratified by medical and surgical subspecialties to identify areas for targeted interventions. Subspecialty-wise contribution to total savings versus contribution to total prescription volume was characterized.

Results: Total estimated Medicare Part D savings were $8.6 billion using 90-day MCCPDC pricing, with surgical drugs accounting for over $900 million. Nearly 80% of the examined drugs were more price effective through MCCPDC using 90-day supply. Commonly prescribed drugs in cardiology, psychiatry, neurology, transplant surgery, and urology demonstrated the highest estimated absolute savings. The most disproportionate savings relative to prescription volume were observed for drugs in oncology, gynecology, infectious disease, transplant surgery, and colorectal surgery.

Conclusions and relevance: This study underscores the significant potential for Medicare Part D savings through strategies that address the systemic overpayment for generic medications. We identified key areas for reform as well as specific medical and surgical subspecialties where targeted interventions could yield substantial savings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PharmacoEconomics
PharmacoEconomics 医学-药学
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: PharmacoEconomics is the benchmark journal for peer-reviewed, authoritative and practical articles on the application of pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life assessment to optimum drug therapy and health outcomes. An invaluable source of applied pharmacoeconomic original research and educational material for the healthcare decision maker. PharmacoEconomics is dedicated to the clear communication of complex pharmacoeconomic issues related to patient care and drug utilization. PharmacoEconomics offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article.
期刊最新文献
Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Psoriatic Arthritis: An Updated Systematic Literature Review. Effects and Costs of Hepatitis C Virus Elimination for the Whole Population in China: A Modelling Study. MPES-R: Multi-Parameter Evidence Synthesis in R for Survival Extrapolation-A Tutorial. Different Models, Same Results: Considerations When Choosing Between Approaches to Model Cost Effectiveness of Chimeric-Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy Versus Standard of Care. Evidence Following Conditional NICE Technology Appraisal Recommendations: A Critical Analysis of Methods, Quality and Risk of Bias.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1