Dataset Information

The Association Between Medicare Low-Income Subsidy and Anticancer Treatment Uptake in Advanced Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:High out-of-pocket costs may impact anticancer treatment uptake. The Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) program can reduce patient out-of-pocket cost for Medicare Part D-covered treatments. We examined whether the LIS increased uptake and reduced time to initiate orally administered anticancer drugs in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS:Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, we identified older adults (aged 65 years and older) diagnosed with advanced NSCLC from 2007 through 2013 and categorized them as full LIS, partial LIS, or non-LIS. We used propensity-score weighted (IPTW) Cox proportional hazards regression to assess the likelihood of and time to initiate Part D treatments. Part B medication uptake was our negative control because supplemental insurance reduces out-of-pocket costs for those drugs. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS:Among 19 746 advanced NSCLC patients, approximately 10% initiated Part D treatments. Patients with partial or no LIS were less likely to initiate Part D treatments than were those with full subsidies (partial LIS vs full LIS HRIPTW = 0.77, 95% confidence interval?=?0.62 to 0.97; non-LIS vs full LIS HRIPTW = 0.87, 95% confidence interval ?=?0.79 to 0.95). Time to initiate Part D treatments was also slightly shorter among full-LIS patients (full LIS mean [SD] = 10.8 [0.04] months; partial LIS mean [SD] = 11.3 [0.08] months; and non-LIS mean [SD] = 11.1 [0.03] months, P < .001). Conversely, patients with partial or no LIS had shorter time to initiation of Part B drugs. CONCLUSIONS:Patients receiving the full LIS had higher orally administered anticancer treatment uptake than patients without LIS. Notably, patients with partial LIS had the lowest treatment uptake, likely because of their low incomes combined with high expected out-of-pocket spending. High out-of-pocket costs for Part D medications may be a barrier to treatment use for patients without full LIS.

SUBMITTER: Chou YT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7301149 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Association Between Medicare Low-Income Subsidy and Anticancer Treatment Uptake in Advanced Lung Cancer.

Chou Yi-Ting YT Farley Joel F JF Stinchcombe Thomas E TE Proctor Amber E AE Lafata Jennifer Elston JE Dusetzina Stacie B SB

Journal of the National Cancer Institute 20200601 6

<h4>Background</h4>High out-of-pocket costs may impact anticancer treatment uptake. The Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) program can reduce patient out-of-pocket cost for Medicare Part D-covered treatments. We examined whether the LIS increased uptake and reduced time to initiate orally administered anticancer drugs in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).<h4>Methods</h4>Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, we identified older adults (aged 65 years ...[more]

PMID: 31501872

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy (LIS) program provides millions of beneficiaries with drug plan premium and cost-sharing assistance. The extent to which LIS recipients experience subsidy losses with annual redetermination cycles and the resulting associations with prescription drug affordability and use are unknown.ObjectiveTo examine how frequently annual LIS benefits are lost among Medicare Part D beneficiaries and how this is associated with prescription drug use and out-of-pocket costs.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study of Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2007 to 2018, annual changes in LIS recipients among those automatically deemed eligible (eg, due to dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid) and nondeemed beneficiaries who must apply for LIS benefits were analyzed using Medicare enrollment and Part D event data. Subsidy losses were classified in 4 groups: temporary losses (<1 year); extended losses (≥1 year); subsidy reductions (change to partial LIS); and disenrollment from Medicare Part D after subsidy loss. Temporary losses could more likely represent subsidy losses among eligible beneficiaries. Multinomial logit models were used to examine associations between beneficiary characteristics and subsidy loss; linear regression models were used to compare changes in prescription drug cost and use in the months after subsidy losses vs before. Analyses were conducted between November 2022 and November 2023.ExposureSubsidy loss at the beginning of each year among subsidy recipients in December of the prior year.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug fills overall and for 4 classes: antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic drugs.ResultsIn 2008, 731 070 full LIS beneficiaries (17%) were not deemed automatically eligible (39% were aged <65 years; 59% were female). Nearly all beneficiaries deemed automatically eligible (≥99%) retained the subsidy annually from 2007 to 2018, compared with 78% to 84% of nondeemed beneficiaries. Among nondeemed beneficiaries, disabled individuals younger than 65 years and racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have temporary subsidy losses vs none. Temporary losses were associated with an average 700% increase in out-of-pocket drug costs (+$52.72/mo [95% CI, 52.52-52.92]) and 15% reductions in prescription fills (-0.58 fills/mo [95% CI, -0.59 to -0.57]) overall. Similar changes were found for antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic prescription drug classes. Beneficiaries who retained their subsidy had few changes.Conclusions and relevanceThe conclusions of this cohort study suggest that efforts to help eligible beneficiaries retain Medicare Part D subsidies could improve drug affordability, treatment adherence, and reduce disparities in medication access.

Project description:ImportanceFood insecurity is associated with a less healthy diet. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is associated with reduced food insecurity, but benefit levels may be insufficient for beneficiaries to afford healthy foods.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether participation in SuperSNAP, a program that provides an additional $40 per month for the purchase of fruits and vegetables with no added sugar, sodium, or fat to SNAP beneficiaries, is associated with changes in food purchasing.Design, setting, and participantsThis longitudinal cohort study used data from transaction records of a large supermarket chain with approximately 500 stores located across North Carolina from October 2019 to April 2020. Participants were SNAP beneficiaries.ExposureSuperSNAP participation.Main outcomes and measuresMonthly spending on all fruits, vegetables, legumes, and nuts (primary outcome); spending on less healthy food categories; and spending on sugar-sweetened beverages as 1 category of less healthy foods. Monthly data on purchases by SNAP beneficiaries before and during SuperSNAP participation were compared with data from SNAP beneficiaries not enrolled in the program who shopped at the same stores. Overlap weighting (a propensity score-based method) was used to account for confounding, and linear mixed-effects models were fitted with random effects to account for repeated measures and clustering by store.ResultsThe study included 667 SuperSNAP participants and 33 246 SNAP beneficiaries who did not use SuperSNAP but shopped in the same stores; 436 SuperSNAP participants had preintervention data and were included in the main analysis. SuperSNAP participation was associated with increased monthly purchases of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and legumes ($31.84; 95% CI, $31.27-$32.42; P < .001; 294.52 oz; 95% CI, 288.84-300.20 oz; P < .001). Only a small increase in spending on less healthy food categories compared with the SNAP beneficiaries who did not use SuperSNAP ($1.60; 95% CI, $0.67-$2.53; P < .001) was observed. As total spending increased, the proportion of total food and beverage spending on less healthy foods significantly decreased (difference, 4.51%; 95% CI, 4.27%-4.74%; P < .001). Monthly spending on sugar-sweetened beverages decreased (difference, $1.83; 95% CI, $1.30-$2.36; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, participation in SuperSNAP was associated with meaningful increases in healthy food purchasing. Subsequent studies should investigate whether healthy food incentive programs improve health outcomes.

Project description:The objective is to estimate the take-up of the Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) among Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes and examine differences in out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug use between LIS enrollees and LIS-eligible non-enrollees. The LIS reduces out-of-pocket drug costs for low-income beneficiaries; however, not all LIS-eligible individuals are enrolled. Take-up of the LIS, and consequences of forgoing this benefit among beneficiaries with diabetes, remains unknown. Health and Retirement Study linked to Medicare administrative data from 2008 to 2016. We conducted two analyses among beneficiaries with diabetes. First, we estimated LIS take-up stratified by income (≤100% of the Federal Poverty Level [FPL] and >100% to ≤150% of FPL). Second, to assess the consequences of forgoing the LIS among near-poor beneficiaries (incomes >100% to ≤150% of FPL), we conducted propensity score-weighted regression analyses to compare out-of-pocket costs, the prescription drug use, and cost-related medication non-adherence among LIS enrollees and LIS-eligible non-enrollees. N/A. Among Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes, 68.1% of those with incomes >100% to ≤150% of FPL received the LIS, while 90.3% with incomes ≤100% of FPL received the LIS. Among near-poor beneficiaries, LIS-eligible non-enrollees incurred higher annual out-of-pocket drug spending ($518; 95 [in USD]% CI: $370 [in USD], $667 [in USD]; p < 0.001), filled 7.3 fewer prescriptions for diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia drugs (95% CI: -11.1, -3.5; p < 0.001), and were 8.9 percentage points more likely to report skipping drugs due to cost (95% CI: 0.3, 18.0; p = 0.04), all compared to LIS enrollees. Despite providing substantial financial assistance with prescription drug costs, the LIS is under-utilized among beneficiaries with chronic conditions requiring routine medication use. As policy makers discuss Part D reforms to address rising out-of-pocket drug costs, they should consider strategies to increase participation in existing programs that alleviate cost burdens among low-income Medicare beneficiaries.

Dataset Information

The Association Between Medicare Low-Income Subsidy and Anticancer Treatment Uptake in Advanced Lung Cancer.

Publications

The Association Between Medicare Low-Income Subsidy and Anticancer Treatment Uptake in Advanced Lung Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets