Low Utilization of Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents in a Large National Cohort of HIV and HCV Coinfected Medicare Patients in the United States: Implications for HCV Elimination.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common in people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). The advent of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has made HCV elimination a realistic goal. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the US Medicare Fee-For-Service claims data and outpatient prescription drug data to assess the HCV DAA initiation and completion among newly diagnosed HIV-HCV-coinfected Medicare patients enrolled in 2014-2016. DAA initiation was defined as filling at least 1 prescription of DAAs during 2014-2016. DAA completion was defined as taking an 8-week or longer DAA treatment course for patients without cirrhosis and a 12-week or longer treatment duration for those with cirrhosis. Among 12 152 HIV-HCV-coinfected Medicare patients, 20.9% received the DAA treatment in 2014-2016. The average time from HCV diagnosis to DAA initiation was 277 days. The overall DAA completion rate was 92% among 2537 patients who used DAAs. Interventions are needed to improve DAA uptake in PLWHA.

Association of Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment With Mortality Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Hepatitis C.

Importance: Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) drugs are highly effective in curing hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Previous simulations showed extended life as a key health advantage of DAA drugs, but real-world evidence on the association between DAA treatment and reduced mortality is limited. Objectives: To examine the association of DAA treatment with mortality among Medicare beneficiaries with hepatitis C. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used Medicare claims data of beneficiaries who sought hepatitis C care for the first time between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016, after at least a 1-year washout period. Medicare Part D files were used in identifying DAA therapy initiation and completion. Death dates, demographic data, and indicators of health risks were obtained from the Master Beneficiary Summary Files. Beneficiaries with hepatitis C were considered as patients with DAA treatment if they initiated DAA therapy during the study period. Beneficiaries with hepatitis C who did not initiate DAA therapy during the study period were considered as patients without DAA treatment. Patients without DAA treatment were selected using 1-to-1 propensity score matching. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Exposures: Completion of DAA treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to death from the index date of seeking hepatitis C care after at least a 1-year washout period. Cox proportional hazards regression models with time-varying exposure were used to compare mortality rates between propensity score-matched cohorts of patients with DAA treatment and those without DAA treatment. Separate analyses were performed for patients with or without cirrhosis. Heterogeneity in the association between DAA treatment and mortality by sex and dual-eligibility status was examined. Results: A propensity score-matched sample of 51 478 Medicare beneficiaries with a mean (SD) age of 59.4 (11.1) years and 30 473 men (59.2%) was assessed. Of this total, 8240 patients (16.0%) had cirrhosis (5224 men [63.4%]; mean [SD] age, 62.3 [9.7] years) and 43 238 patients (84.0%) had no cirrhosis (25 249 men [58.4%]; mean [SD] age, 58.8 [11.3] years). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of dying between patients with DAA treatment and those without DAA treatment in the cirrhosis group was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.46-0.57). The association of DAA treatment with mortality did not differ by sex (women vs men: HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.38-0.56] vs HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.47-0.60]; P = .27) or dual-eligibility status (non-dual-eligible HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.43-0.63] vs dual-eligible HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.44-0.57]; P = .80) in the cirrhosis group. The adjusted HR of dying between patients with DAA treatment and those without DAA treatment among patients without cirrhosis was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.50-0.58). The association of DAA treatment with mortality did not differ by sex (women vs men: HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.46-0.60] vs HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.50-0.60]; P = .66) among patients without cirrhosis. However, the survival advantage associated with DAAs for non-dual-eligible beneficiaries was statistically significantly higher than for dual-eligible beneficiaries among patients without cirrhosis (HR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.41-0.55] vs HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.52-0.62]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, DAA treatment appeared to be associated with a decrease in mortality among Medicare beneficiaries with or without cirrhosis. These findings suggest that increasing access to DAA drugs for all patients with HCV infection, regardless of disease progression, could improve population health.

Association of Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy for Hepatitis C With After-Treatment Costs Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for hepatitis C is highly effective but expensive. Evidence is scarce on whether DAA therapy reduces downstream medical costs. Objective: To examine the association of DAA therapy with posttreatment medical costs among Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study obtained data from various Medicare claims files for 2013 to 2017. The study population comprised patients with a hepatitis C diagnosis in 2014 who were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare and Part D. Multivariate regression models were used to compare changes in medical costs over a 30-month posttreatment follow-up period between patients who used DAA therapy (treatment group) and a propensity score-matched cohort of patients who did not use DAA (control group). The model was estimated separately for patients with and those without cirrhosis. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Exposures: Completion of DAA therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Two outcomes were established: hepatitis C or liver disease-related costs and total medical costs. Costs were measured by Medicare-allowed payments, which included Medicare reimbursements, patient responsibilities, and third-party payments. Results: A propensity score-matched cohort of 15 198 patients (9038 men [59.5%]; mean [SD] age, 60.2 [10.8] years) was analyzed. During the first 6 months after DAA therapy, hepatitis C or liver disease-related costs decreased by $2498 (95% CI, -$3356 to -$1640) in patients with cirrhosis and by $486 (95% CI, -$603 to -$369) in patients without cirrhosis compared with control or untreated patients. Cumulative reductions in hepatitis C or liver disease-related costs during 30 months after DAA treatment were $15 808 (95% CI, -$22 530 to -$9085) in patients with cirrhosis and $5372 (95% CI, -$6384 to -$4360) in patients without cirrhosis. Among those who used DAA therapy compared with control patients, total medical costs decreased by $2905 (95% CI, -$4832 to -$979) in patients with cirrhosis and by $1287 (95% CI, -$2393 to -$283) in patients without cirrhosis during the first 6 months after DAA therapy. No statistically significant association was found between DAA therapy and total medical cost reductions after 12 months of follow-up. Cumulative reductions in total costs during 30 months after DAA therapy were $7074 (95% CI, -$18 448 to $4298) in patients with cirrhosis and $7497 (95% CI, -$14 287 to -$709) in patients without cirrhosis. Conclusions and Relevance: This study reported that DAA therapy appeared to be associated with a decrease in hepatitis C or liver disease-related costs for 30 months after treatment and with reduction in total medical costs for only 12 months after treatment in patients with or without cirrhosis. Longer-term follow-up studies with diverse outcomes are necessary to assess the value of DAA therapy.

Impact of Length of Hospice on Spending and Utilization Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate differences in spending and utilization between hospice users and non-users with lung cancer by length of hospice enrollment. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using 2009-2013 Medicare claims. METHODS: The study sample was a 10% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with lung cancer who died between 2010 and 2013. We identified different categories of hospice users (hospice enrollment for 1-7 days, 8-14 days, 15-30 days, 31-60 days, 61 days - 6 months) and non-users. We used propensity score matching to match users in each enrollment category with non-users. The outcomes were: a) total Medicare spending, b) number of hospitalizations, c) number of emergency department (ED) visits, d) number of physician-administered chemotherapy claims, and e) number of radiation therapy sessions. Regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between users and non-users by enrollment period. RESULTS: Hospice users had significantly lower spending, fewer hospitalizations, and fewer ED visits than non-users across all categories of hospice enrollment.  Large savings occurred when patients stayed in hospice for at least one month (US$16,566 for those enrolled 61 days - 6 months; US$16,409 for those enrolled 31-60 days). Significant reduction in use of outpatient services including chemotherapy and radiation therapy was observed among patients using hospice for at least 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: Hospice led to cost savings by reducing utilization of aggressive care towards end-of-life among lung cancer patients. While cost savings were realized even when hospice is utilized for a short duration, large savings occurred when hospice is used for at least 1 month.

Impact of Hospice on Spending and Utilization Among Patients With Lung Cancer in Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: To compare patterns and understand drivers of spending and utilization by month in the last 6 months of life between patients with lung cancer who used hospice versus those who did not. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis using 2009 to 2013 Medicare claims. METHODS: We used a 10% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with lung cancer who died between 2010 and 2013 (43 789 beneficiaries). Patients were assigned to 2 groups depending on whether they used hospice care in the last 6 months of life. The following outcomes were constructed by month: (1) all-cause Medicare spending, (2) indicator of hospitalization, (3) indicator of emergency department (ED) visit, (4) number of part B chemotherapy claims, and (5) number of radiation therapy sessions. We used a combination of propensity score matching and regression analysis to compare outcomes between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Patients who used hospice had significantly lower spending in the last month of life compared to nonusers (US$16 907 vs US$26 906, P < .00). The spending differences in the last month of life between the 2 groups were largely driven by lower likelihood of hospitalization (54% vs 80%, P < .01) and ED visits (15% vs 22%, P < .01) and fewer chemotherapy (0.12 vs 0.32, P < .01) and radiation therapy sessions (0.80 vs 1.26, P < .01). During the other months in the 6-month period, spending was similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Timely hospice enrollment of patients with lung cancer-the group suffering from high morbidity and mortality among patients with cancer-may lead to significant cost savings.

Cancer care spending and use by site of provider-administered chemotherapy in Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: To compare cancer care spending and utilization by site of provider-administered chemotherapy in Medicare. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis using 2010-2013 Medicare claims. METHODS: The study population was a random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer who initiated provider-administered chemotherapy in a hospital outpatient department (HOPD) or physician office (PO). We assessed the following outcomes during the 6-month follow-up period: (1) spending on cancer-related outpatient services excluding chemotherapy, (2) spending on cancer-related inpatient services, (3) utilization of select cancer-related outpatient services (evaluation and management, commonly used expensive billing codes, and radiation therapy sessions), and (4) the number of cancer-related hospitalizations. We used regression analyses to adjust for patient health risk factors and market characteristics. RESULTS: During the 6-month follow-up period, risk-adjusted spending on nonchemotherapy outpatient services was slightly lower among patients receiving chemotherapy in HOPDs than in POs ($12,183 [95% CI, $12,008-$12,358] vs $12,444 [95% CI, $12,313-$12,575]; P <.05). Risk-adjusted cancer-related inpatient spending was higher in the HOPD group than in the PO group ($3996 [95% CI, $3837-$4156] vs $3168 [95% CI, $3067-$3268]; P <.01). The HOPD group had fewer visits in all select outpatient services but had a higher number of hospitalizations than the PO group. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in cancer care spending by site of chemotherapy (HOPDs vs POs) vary by service type. Those differences are partially driven by utilization differences. As the site of chemotherapy shifts from POs to HOPDs, spending and utilization patterns in both settings need to be monitored.

The impact of integration on outpatient chemotherapy use and spending in Medicare.

Hospital-physician integration has substantially grown in the United States for the past decade, particularly in certain medical specialties, such as oncology. Yet evidence is scarce on the relation between integration and outpatient specialty care use and spending. We analyzed the impact of oncologist integration on outpatient provider-administered chemotherapy use and spending in Medicare, where prices do not depend on providers' integration status or negotiating power. We addressed oncologists' selective integration and patients' nonrandom choice of oncologists using an instrumental variables method. We found that integrated oncologists reduced the quantity of outpatient chemotherapy drugs but used more expensive treatments. This led to an increase in chemotherapy-drug spending after integration. These findings suggest that changes in treatment patterns-treatment mix and quantity-may be an important mechanism by which integration increases spending. We also found that integration increased spending on chemotherapy administration (the act of injection). This is because integration shifted billing of chemotherapy to hospital outpatient departments, where Medicare payments for chemotherapy administration are higher than those in physician offices. As integration increases, efforts should continue to assess how integration influences patient care and explore policy options to ensure desirable outcomes from integration.

The authors respond and stand behind their findings.

Our study provides the first evidence on site-specific Medicare spending on chemotherapy adjusting for patient comorbid illnesses, cancer type, and other cancer-related risks.

Differences in spending on provider-administered chemotherapy by site of care in Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: To compare Medicare spending on provider-administered chemotherapy in hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) and physician offices after controlling for cancer type. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary data analysis. METHODS: We used 2010-2013 claims data for a random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who had cancer and received chemotherapy services either in physician offices or in HOPDs. We constructed 2 spending measures: (1) spending on chemotherapy drugs and (2) spending on chemotherapy administration. Each spending measure was the allowed payment, which includes both Medicare reimbursement and patient out-of-pocket spending. We compared the spending measures in the 2 care settings using regression analysis to control for certain patient risk factors, including cancer type. We also compared the number of chemotherapy and administration claims per beneficiary and spending per claim by cancer type to understand differences in utilization patterns in the 2 care settings. RESULTS: Risk-adjusted chemotherapy drug spending per beneficiary was $2451 lower in HOPDs compared with physician offices. Risk-adjusted chemotherapy administration spending was $322 higher in HOPDs than in physician offices. Patients in physician offices received chemotherapy drugs more frequently than those in HOPDs. However, the chemotherapy spending per claim line was higher in HOPDs than physician offices. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy drug spending per Medicare beneficiary was lower in HOPDs than in physician offices, driven by less frequent use of chemotherapy in HOPDs. As the site of provider-administered chemotherapy shifts from physician offices to HOPDs, continuing assessment of cancer care spending by site of care is necessary.

Impact of the 340B Drug Pricing Program on Cancer Care Site and Spending in Medicare.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of the 340B drug discount program on the site of cancer drug administration and cancer care spending in Medicare. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: 2010-2013 Medicare claims data for a random sample of Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries with cancer. STUDY DESIGN: We identified the 340B effect using variation in the availability of 340B hospitals across markets. We considered beneficiaries from markets that newly gained a 340B hospital during the study period (new 340B markets) as the treatment group. Beneficiaries in markets with no 340B hospital were the control group. We used a difference-in-differences approach with market fixed effects. DATA COLLECTION: Secondary data analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The probability of a patient receiving cancer drug administration in hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) versus physician offices increased 7.8 percentage points more in new 340B markets than in markets with no 340B hospital. Per-patient spending on other cancer care increased $1,162 more in new 340B markets than in markets with no 340B hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The 340B program shifted the site of cancer drug administration to HOPDs and increased spending on other cancer care. As the program expands, continuing assessment of its impact on service utilization and spending would be needed.