This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective To determine whether there was an increase in payments for neurologist-prescribed drugs, we performed a retrospective analysis of prescription claims in the Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use Files from 2013 to 2017.
Methods We included claims prescribed by providers with the taxonomy “neurology” and included drugs present in all 5 years. Drugs were designated in 2013 as generic (GEN), brand name only (BNO), and brand name prescribed even though a generic equivalent is available (BNGE). To observe payment trends, the percentage change in the per claim payment was compared between drug classes.
Results We included 520 drugs, of which 322 were GEN, 61 were BNO, and 137 were BNGE, representing 90,716,536 claims and generating payments of $26,654,750,720. While the number of claims from 2013 to 2017 increased only 7.6%, the total payment increased 50.4%. Adjusted for inflation, claim payments for GEN drug increased 0.6%, compared to significant increases in BNO and BNGE drugs of 42.4% and 45.0% (ptrend < 0.001). The percentage of overall GEN claims increased from 81.9% to 88.0%, BNO increased from 4.9% to 6.2%, and BNGE decreased from 13.3% to 5.8%. Neuroimmunology/multiple sclerosis drugs represented >50% of the total payments despite being only 4.3% of claims.
Conclusions Payments for neurologist-prescribed brand name, but not generic, drugs in Medicare Part D increased consistently and well above inflation from 2013 to 2017. Unless the overall trend stabilizes or is reversed or high cost-to-claim drugs are addressed, this trend will place an increasing burden on the neurologic Medicare budget.
Glossary
- BNGE=
- brand name with generic equivalent;
- BNO=
- brand name only;
- GEN=
- generic
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
- Received September 3, 2020.
- Accepted in final form January 28, 2021.
- © 2021 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Use of Whole-Genome Sequencing for Mitochondrial Disease Diagnosis
Dr. Robert Pitceathly and Dr. William Macken