Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=29977955
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Absolute Insurer Denial of Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy for Hepatitis C: A
National Specialty Pharmacy Cohort Study
#MMPMID29977955
Gowda C
; Lott S
; Grigorian M
; Carbonari DM
; Saine ME
; Trooskin S
; Roy JA
; Kostman JR
; Urick P
; Lo Re V 3rd
Open Forum Infect Dis
2018[Jun]; 5
(6
): ofy076
PMID29977955
show ga
BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of new direct-acting antiviral (DAA)
regimens, changes in DAA reimbursement criteria, and a public health focus on
hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination, it remains unclear if public and private
insurers have increased access to these therapies over time. We evaluated changes
in the incidence of absolute denial of DAA therapy over time and by insurance
type. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study among patients who had a
DAA prescription submitted from January 2016 to April 2017 to Diplomat Pharmacy,
Inc., which provides HCV pharmacy services across the United States. The main
outcome was absolute denial of DAA prescription, defined as lack of fill approval
by the insurer. We calculated the incidence of absolute denial, overall and by
insurance type (Medicaid, Medicare, commercial), for the 16-month study period
and each quarter. RESULTS: Among 9025 patients from 45 states prescribed a DAA
regimen (4702 covered by Medicaid, 1821 Medicare, 2502 commercial insurance),
3200 (35.5%; 95% confidence interval, 34.5%-36.5%) were absolutely denied
treatment. Absolute denial was more common among patients covered by commercial
insurance (52.4%) than Medicaid (34.5%, P < .001) or Medicare (14.7%, P < .001).
The incidence of absolute denial increased across each quarter of the study
period, overall (27.7% in first quarter to 43.8% in last quarter; test for trend,
P < .001) and for each insurance type (test for trend, P < .001 for each type).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the availability of new DAA regimens and changes in
restrictions of these therapies, absolute denials of DAA regimens by insurers
have remained high and increased over time, regardless of insurance type.