SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 29
Downloaden Sie, um offline zu lesen
Congressional Budget Office
Presentation for Congressional Staff
March 19, 2019
March 19, 2019
Anna Anderson-Cook, Jared Maeda, and Lyle Nelson
Health, Retirement, and Long-Term Analysis Division
Prices for and Spending on
Specialty Drugs in Medicare
Part D and Medicaid
The information in this presentation is based on two CBO publications. See Congressional Budget Office, Prices for and Spending on
Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid (March 2019) and Prices for and Spending on Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D
and Medicaid: An In-Depth Analysis (March 2019).
1
CBO
 Examine the prices of specialty drugs, net of rebates and discounts, in
Medicare Part D and Medicaid over the 2010–2015 period.
 Determine the contribution of specialty drugs to the growth of total drug
spending in Medicare Part D and Medicaid.
 Examine average annual spending and out-of-pocket costs on
specialty drugs among Medicare Part D enrollees who use such drugs.
Study Objectives
2
CBO
 Brand-name specialty drugs accounted for just 1 percent of
prescriptions and about 30 percent of net drug spending in both
Medicare Part D and Medicaid in 2015.
 Net spending on specialty drugs in Medicare Part D more than tripled
between 2010 and 2015, rising from $8.7 billion to $32.8 billion.
 Net spending on specialty drugs within Medicaid doubled over the
period, reaching $9.9 billion in 2015.
 Medicaid pays substantially lower net prices for brand-name specialty
drugs than Medicare Part D because average rebates are much larger
in Medicaid.
Key Findings
3
CBO
 Within both Medicare Part D and Medicaid, shifts in use toward higher-
priced drugs, especially new drugs, explained much of the increase in
the average net price of a prescription for a brand-name specialty drug
between 2010 and 2015.
 In Medicare Part D, after adjusting for inflation, net spending per
beneficiary who used a brand-name specialty drug tripled between
2010 and 2015, reaching $33,460.
 For Medicare Part D, after adjusting for inflation, annual out-of-pocket
costs doubled for beneficiaries who used a brand-name specialty drug
but received no cost-sharing subsidies, reaching $3,540 in 2015.
Key Findings
4
CBO
IQVIA is a private company that provides data services and health care analysis.
 CBO used a definition of specialty drugs that was developed by
IQVIA (formerly IMS Health).
 By that definition, a specialty drug treats a chronic, complex, or rare
condition and has at least four of the following seven
characteristics:
– Costs at least $6,000 per year in 2015,
– Is initiated or maintained by a specialist,
– Is administered by a health care professional,
– Requires special handling in the supply chain,
– Is associated with a patient payment-assistance program,
– Is distributed through nontraditional channels (such as a specialty
pharmacy), or
– Requires monitoring or counseling.
Definition of Specialty Drugs
5
CBO
In the analysis of drug prices and spending in Medicare Part D and Medicaid, drugs were identified by National Drug Code (NDC).
Red Book data are available from IBM Micromedex and include list prices (such as the wholesale acquisition cost) as well as drug
characteristics (such as the product name, manufacturer, dosage form, and strength) by NDC.
 Medicare Part D: Beneficiary-level claims data for the entire Part D
population and confidential data on manufacturer rebates and other
discounts by drug for the 2010–2015 period.
 Medicaid: Drug utilization and pharmacy payment data by drug for
both fee-for-service and managed care purchases combined with
confidential data on statutory rebates by drug for the 2010–2015
period.
 IQVIA (formerly IMS Health): List of specialty drugs on the market in
2015.
 Red Book: Drug characteristics including an active ingredient identifier
and brand/generic identifier by National Drug Code.
Data
6
CBO
 Drugs that had the same active ingredient(s) as a drug on
IQVIA’s specialty drug list were labeled as specialty drugs.
 Red Book data were used as a crosswalk to match IQVIA’s
list of specialty drugs with the Medicare Part D and Medicaid data by
active ingredient.
Approach to Identifying Specialty Drugs
7
CBO
The estimates for Medicare Part D were constructed for beneficiaries who do not receive low-income subsidies and include the
effects of the manufacturer rebates and the 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs in a specified phase of the Part D benefit
(referred to as the coverage gap).
For 50 top-selling brand-name specialty drugs in Medicare Part D:
 The average retail price per prescription in 2015 was $4,380 in
Medicare Part D and was similar in Medicaid.
 Net of rebates and discounts, the average price per prescription was
nearly twice as high in Medicare Part D as in Medicaid ($3,600 versus
$1,920).
 The average net price was much higher in Medicare Part D because
the rebates and discounts were much smaller.
 Rebates and discounts averaged 18 percent of the retail price in
Medicare Part D and 56 percent of the retail price in Medicaid.
Prices of Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and
Medicaid in 2015
8
CBO
Weighted Average Prescription Price for 50
Top-Selling Brand-Name Specialty Drugs, 2015
4,380
3,600
780
4,330
1,920
2,410
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
Retail Price Net Price Rebates and Discounts
Medicare Part D Medicaid
Dollars
9
CBO
 In Medicare Part D, average manufacturer rebates and other price
concessions across all brand-name drugs increased from 15 percent to
29 percent from 2010 to 2015.
– Those price concessions are estimated as a share of the total
amount paid to pharmacies—the retail price.
 In Medicaid, average statutory rebates on brand-name drugs increased
from 56 percent to 67 percent over the 2010–2015 period.
– Those rebates are estimated as a share of the average price that
manufacturers charge to pharmacies—about 95 percent of the
retail price.
 In both Medicare Part D and Medicaid, rebates and other price
concessions were much smaller on average for brand-name specialty
drugs compared with brand-name nonspecialty drugs.
Price Concessions for Brand-Name Drugs
Grew in Medicare Part D and Medicaid Over the
2010–2015 Period
10
CBO
For Medicare Part D, rebates and discounts are expressed as a share of the retail price. For 2015, estimates include the 50 percent
discount in the coverage gap. For Medicaid, the statutory rebates are expressed as a share of the average manufacturer price.
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Medicaid, 2015
Medicaid, 2010
Part D, 2015
Part D, 2010
Percent
All Drugs Brand Nonspecialty Brand Specialty
Average Rebates and Discounts for Brand-Name
Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid
11
CBO
The “mix” of drugs refers to the share of total prescriptions dispensed by drug.
 The average net price per prescription of a brand-name specialty drug
in Medicare Part D grew at an average annual rate of 22 percent from
2010 to 2015 (increasing from $1,310 to $3,590 in 2015 dollars).
 During that period, the average net price per prescription of a brand-
name specialty drug in Medicaid grew at an average annual rate of
12 percent (from $700 to $1,220 in 2015 dollars).
 Those estimates account for increases in the prices of individual drugs
over time as well as shifts in the mix of drugs used between years.
 In each program, most of the price growth was attributable to a change
in the mix of drugs toward those with higher prices, especially new
specialty drugs (which in 2015 had an average prescription price of
$8,680 in Medicare Part D and $4,660 in Medicaid).
Price Growth for Brand-Name Specialty Drugs in
Medicare Part D and Medicaid, 2010 to 2015
12
CBO
Change in Average Net Price of Brand-Name
Specialty Drugs, 2010 to 2015
Price per Prescription in 2015 Dollars
13
CBO
These estimates were generated using a price index to measure the change in prices for each consecutive pair of years in the
2010–2015 period. In each case, the mix of drugs was held constant at the shares in the first of the two years.
 After controlling for changes in the mix of drugs (using a price-index
approach), the net price of brand-name specialty drugs in Part D grew
at an average annual rate of 5.8 percent from 2010 to 2015 (in 2015
dollars).
 Using the same price-index approach, the net price of brand-name
nonspecialty drugs in Part D grew at an average annual rate of
7.4 percent from 2010 to 2015 (in 2015 dollars)—somewhat higher
than the rate for specialty drugs.
Price Growth for Specialty Drugs in Medicare
Part D, Controlling for Changes in the Mix of Drugs
14
CBO
For this analysis, only new molecular entities or biologic products that appeared on the list of novel drug approvals published by the
Food and Drug Administration from 2011 to 2015 were included in the category of new brand-name drugs.
 The average annual net price increase over the 2010–2015 period for
drugs that were on the market throughout that period was 6.8 percent.
– That factor raised average prescription costs by $510 over the
2010–2015 period for brand-name specialty drugs.
 The shift in mix toward higher-priced drugs within the existing (or older)
group of drugs increased the average cost of a brand-name specialty
prescription by $750.
 The shift in mix toward innovative new drugs that were not on the
market in 2010 increased the average cost of a brand-name specialty
prescription by $1,020.
Factors Increasing the Average Cost of a
Brand-Name Specialty Prescription, 2010 to 2015
15
CBO
1,310 1,310
510
750
1,020
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
2010 2015
Shift in Mix Toward
New Drugs
Shift in Mix Toward
Higher-Priced Older
Drugs
Annual Price Increases
for Older Drugs
2010 Average
Prescription Price
Factors Increasing the Average Prescription
Price of Brand-Name Specialty Drugs in Part D
In 2015 Dollars
16
CBO
22%
33%
45%
Annual Price Increases for Older
Drugs
Change in Mix Toward Higher-Priced
Older Drugs
Change in Mix Toward Higher-Priced
New Drugs
Factors Contributing to the Higher Average Cost
of a Brand-Name Specialty Prescription, 2010 to
2015
17
CBO
In 2015, beneficiaries entered the catastrophic phase of the Part D benefit after incurring out-of-pocket costs of $4,700. In that phase
of the benefit, federal reinsurance payments cover 80 percent of drug costs.
 In Medicare Part D, net spending on specialty drugs rose from
$8.7 billion in 2010 to $32.8 billion in 2015, an average annual
increase of 31 percent.
 In Medicaid, net spending on specialty drugs rose during that
period from $4.7 billion to $9.9 billion, an average annual increase
of 16 percent.
 During that time, the share of net spending accounted for by specialty
drugs rose from 13 percent to 31 percent in Medicare Part D and from
25 percent to 35 percent in Medicaid.
 Net spending for brand-name specialty drugs in the catastrophic phase
of the Part D benefit increased from $5.4 billion to $26.1 billion from
2010 to 2015. (The corresponding amounts for all drugs are $14 billion
and $43 billion, respectively.)
Net Spending on Specialty Drugs
18
CBO
Estimates have not been adjusted to remove the effects of general inflation.
Net Drug Spending in Medicare Part D
All Drugs
Nonspecialty Drugs
Specialty Drugs
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Billions of Dollars
19
CBO
Estimates have not been adjusted to remove the effects of general inflation.
Net Drug Spending in Medicaid
All Drugs
Nonspecialty Drugs
Specialty Drugs
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Billions of Dollars
20
CBO
 Brand-name specialty drugs accounted for about 1 percent of
prescriptions and 30 percent of net drug spending in Medicare Part D
and Medicaid in 2015.
 Brand-name specialty drugs accounted for about 95 percent of all
specialty drug spending in both programs.
Share of Net Spending on Brand-Name
Specialty Drugs
21
CBO
 Real (inflation-adjusted) net spending on a per capita basis did not
increase much over the 2010–2015 period because the increased
spending on specialty drugs was nearly offset by the decline in
spending on nonspecialty drugs.
 On a per capita basis, net spending for specialty drugs grew at an
average annual rate of 20 percent per year in real terms over the
2010–2015 period.
 Almost all of that growth can be explained by growth in the average
price of a prescription for brand-name specialty drugs, which grew at a
similar rate.
 In contrast, real net per capita spending on nonspecialty drugs in
Medicare Part D declined at an average annual rate of 4 percent.
Growth in Real Net per Capita Spending on
Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D, 2010 to 2015
22
CBO
Net per Capita Spending in Medicare Part D
330
2,290
2,620
830
1,830
2,660
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Specialty Nonspecialty Total
2010 2015
Per Capita Spending in 2015 Dollars
23
CBO
The average cost of a prescription in 2010 of $53 is expressed in 2015 dollars.
 Real net per capita spending on all brand-name drugs declined slightly
from $1,870 to $1,840 between 2010 and 2015.
– The increase in real per capita spending for brand-name specialty
drugs was offset by a decline in spending for nonspecialty brand-
name drugs, largely because of patent expirations.
 The market share for generic drugs increased over the 2010–2015
period from about 75 percent to over 85 percent.
 After adjusting for inflation, the average net cost of a prescription for all
drugs in Medicare part D declined from $53 in 2010 to $50 in 2015.
 The quantity of prescriptions taken per beneficiary increased slightly
from 4.1 to 4.4 prescriptions per month.
Factors Limiting Growth in Net per Capita
Drug Costs in Medicare Part D, 2010 to 2015
24
CBO
 On an inflation-adjusted per capita basis, net spending in the
catastrophic phase of the benefit doubled, increasing from $550 in
2010 to $1,080 in 2015.
 Spending on specialty brand-name drugs accounted for just over
80 percent of that increase in net per capita spending in the
catastrophic phase of the benefit.
 All of the increase in net per capita spending in the catastrophic phase
of the benefit on brand-name specialty drugs can be attributed to the
increase in the average price of a brand-name specialty drug over the
2010–2015 period.
– On a per capita basis, the quantity of brand-name specialty drugs
taken per beneficiary declined slightly over the period.
Increases in Per Capita Spending in the
Catastrophic Phase of the Part D Benefit
25
CBO
 The percentage of Medicare beneficiaries taking a brand-name
specialty drug declined from 2.8 percent to 2.4 percent over the
2010–2015 period.
 Among Part D enrollees who used a brand-name specialty drug and
received no cost-sharing subsidies, the average annual net spending
on such drugs rose fourfold in real terms, from $8,970 in 2010 to
$36,730 in 2015.
 Most of that increase occurred in the catastrophic phase of the Part D
benefit.
 The average out-of-pocket cost for brand-name specialty drugs among
Part D enrollees who used such drugs and had no cost-sharing
subsidies doubled in real terms, from $1,750 in 2010 to $3,540 in 2015.
Net Spending on Brand-Name Specialty Drugs
Among Medicare Part D Users of Such Drugs
26
CBO
Annual Net Spending on Brand-Name Specialty
Drugs Among Users Without Cost-Sharing
Assistance
8,970
1,750
5,960
36,730
3,540
33,530
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
Total Net Spending Out-of-Pocket Costs Spending in Catastrophic Phase
2010 2015
Spending per User in 2015 Dollars
27
CBO
 Among all Part D enrollees who used a brand-name specialty drug, the
average annual cost of brand-name specialty drugs per user of such
drugs increased from $11,330 to $33,460.
 The average number of brand-name prescriptions per enrollee who
took a brand-name specialty drug increased slightly from 8.6 to 9.3
over the 2010–2015 period.
 The increase in the average cost of a brand-name specialty
prescription accounted for about 90 percent of the increase in spending
per user of a brand-name specialty drug between 2010 and 2015.
How Costs Increased per Beneficiary Using a
Brand-Name Specialty Drug
28
CBO
 For this analysis, only new molecular entities or biologic products that
appeared on the list of novel drug approvals published by the Food and
Drug Administration from 2011 to 2015 were included in the category of
new brand-name drugs.
 Because of data limitations, an analysis of the change in per capita
drug spending was not conducted for Medicaid.
 Beneficiaries covered by Medicare Part D are age 65 or older or
disabled, whereas beneficiaries covered by Medicaid’s drug benefit are
mostly adults under age 65 or children in low-income households.
 Drug spending per beneficiary is much higher in Medicare Part D than
in Medicaid. For example, in 2015, average net drug spending per
beneficiary was $2,660 in Medicare Part D and about $500 in
Medicaid.
Notes

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Mehr von Congressional Budget Office

CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...
CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...
CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...Congressional Budget Office
 
The Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing Slides
The Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing SlidesThe Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing Slides
The Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing SlidesCongressional Budget Office
 
The Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 Slides
The Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 SlidesThe Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 Slides
The Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 SlidesCongressional Budget Office
 
Using Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of Taxpayers
Using Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of TaxpayersUsing Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of Taxpayers
Using Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of TaxpayersCongressional Budget Office
 
Perspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding Plan
Perspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding PlanPerspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding Plan
Perspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding PlanCongressional Budget Office
 
The 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher Costs
The 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher CostsThe 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher Costs
The 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher CostsCongressional Budget Office
 
Exploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the Budget
Exploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the BudgetExploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the Budget
Exploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the BudgetCongressional Budget Office
 
CBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget Projections
CBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget ProjectionsCBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget Projections
CBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget ProjectionsCongressional Budget Office
 
Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment
 Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment
Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of UnemploymentCongressional Budget Office
 
CBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary Outlook
CBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary OutlookCBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary Outlook
CBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary OutlookCongressional Budget Office
 
Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...
Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...
Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...Congressional Budget Office
 
CBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the Congress
CBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the CongressCBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the Congress
CBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the CongressCongressional Budget Office
 
Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020
Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020
Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020Congressional Budget Office
 
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget OfficeThe Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget OfficeCongressional Budget Office
 
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget OfficeThe Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget OfficeCongressional Budget Office
 

Mehr von Congressional Budget Office (20)

CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...
CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...
CBO’s Approach to Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the No Surprises Act of...
 
The Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing Slides
The Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing SlidesThe Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing Slides
The Budget and Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034: Press Briefing Slides
 
The Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 Slides
The Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 SlidesThe Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 Slides
The Economic Outlook for 2024 to 2034 in 19 Slides
 
Using Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of Taxpayers
Using Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of TaxpayersUsing Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of Taxpayers
Using Multiple Data Sources to Learn About the Race and Ethnicity of Taxpayers
 
Perspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding Plan
Perspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding PlanPerspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding Plan
Perspectives on the Navy’s 2024 Shipbuilding Plan
 
The 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher Costs
The 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher CostsThe 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher Costs
The 2024 Outlook for Navy Shipbuilding: Familiar Plans and Higher Costs
 
CBO’s Use of GitHub
CBO’s Use of GitHubCBO’s Use of GitHub
CBO’s Use of GitHub
 
Exploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the Budget
Exploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the BudgetExploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the Budget
Exploring the Effects of Medicaid During Childhood on the Economy and the Budget
 
CBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget Projections
CBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget ProjectionsCBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget Projections
CBO’s Role and Most Recent Long-Term Budget Projections
 
Atlas of Military Compensation
Atlas of Military CompensationAtlas of Military Compensation
Atlas of Military Compensation
 
Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment
 Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment
Approaches to Estimating the Noncyclical Rate of Unemployment
 
CBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary Outlook
CBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary OutlookCBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary Outlook
CBO’s Analysis of the Long-Term Budgetary Outlook
 
Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...
Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...
Projecting the Effects of U.S. Federal Policies on Electric Vehicle Demand an...
 
CBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the Congress
CBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the CongressCBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the Congress
CBO’s Recent Appeals for New Research to Enhance Its Work for the Congress
 
Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020
Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020
Trends in the Distribution of Household Income From 1979 to 2020
 
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget OfficeThe Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
 
Health Care and the Federal Budget
Health Care and the Federal Budget Health Care and the Federal Budget
Health Care and the Federal Budget
 
How CBO Projects Corporate Income Tax Revenues
How CBO Projects Corporate Income Tax RevenuesHow CBO Projects Corporate Income Tax Revenues
How CBO Projects Corporate Income Tax Revenues
 
CBO’s 2023 Long-Term Budget Projections
CBO’s 2023 Long-Term Budget ProjectionsCBO’s 2023 Long-Term Budget Projections
CBO’s 2023 Long-Term Budget Projections
 
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget OfficeThe Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget Process and the Role of the Congressional Budget Office
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...
Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...
Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...kajalverma014
 
Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara 9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...
Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara  9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara  9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...
Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara 9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...kumargunjan9515
 
Scaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP process
Scaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP processScaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP process
Scaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP processNAP Global Network
 
An Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCC
An Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCCAn Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCC
An Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCCNAP Global Network
 
2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.
2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.
2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.Christina Parmionova
 
Unique Value Prop slide deck________.pdf
Unique Value Prop slide deck________.pdfUnique Value Prop slide deck________.pdf
Unique Value Prop slide deck________.pdfScottMeyers35
 
Lorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final Presentation
Lorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final PresentationLorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final Presentation
Lorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final PresentationCuyahoga County Planning Commission
 
Financing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Financing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCCFinancing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Financing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCCNAP Global Network
 
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 31
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 312024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 31
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 31JSchaus & Associates
 
Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...
Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...
Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...kumargunjan9515
 
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 32
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 322024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 32
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 32JSchaus & Associates
 
Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)
Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)
Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)NAP Global Network
 
Time, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie Whitehouse
Time, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie WhitehouseTime, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie Whitehouse
Time, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie Whitehousesubs7
 
Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar 💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃 Top Class Call Girl ...
Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar  💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃  Top Class Call Girl ...Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar  💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃  Top Class Call Girl ...
Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar 💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃 Top Class Call Girl ...Namrata Singh
 
Peace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdf
Peace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdfPeace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdf
Peace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdfNAP Global Network
 
2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg
2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg
2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgergMadhuKothuru
 
Vasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In Mumbai
Vasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In MumbaiVasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In Mumbai
Vasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In MumbaiPriya Reddy
 
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCCFinance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCCNAP Global Network
 
9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts
9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts
9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai EscortsPooja Nehwal
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...
Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...
Cheap Call Girls In Hyderabad Phone No 📞 9352988975 📞 Elite Escort Service Av...
 
tOld settlement register shouldnotaffect BTR
tOld settlement register shouldnotaffect BTRtOld settlement register shouldnotaffect BTR
tOld settlement register shouldnotaffect BTR
 
Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara 9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...
Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara  9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara  9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...
Dating Call Girls inBaloda Bazar Bhatapara 9332606886Call Girls Advance Cash...
 
Scaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP process
Scaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP processScaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP process
Scaling up coastal adaptation in Maldives through the NAP process
 
An Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCC
An Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCCAn Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCC
An Atoll Futures Research Institute? Presentation for CANCC
 
2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.
2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.
2024 UN Civil Society Conference in Support of the Summit of the Future.
 
Unique Value Prop slide deck________.pdf
Unique Value Prop slide deck________.pdfUnique Value Prop slide deck________.pdf
Unique Value Prop slide deck________.pdf
 
Lorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final Presentation
Lorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final PresentationLorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final Presentation
Lorain Road Business District Revitalization Plan Final Presentation
 
Financing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Financing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCCFinancing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Financing strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
 
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 31
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 312024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 31
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 31
 
Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...
Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...
Delivery in 20 Mins Call Girls Malappuram { 9332606886 } VVIP NISHA Call Girl...
 
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 32
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 322024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 32
2024: The FAR, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 32
 
Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)
Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)
Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (TCAP)
 
Time, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie Whitehouse
Time, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie WhitehouseTime, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie Whitehouse
Time, Stress & Work Life Balance for Clerks with Beckie Whitehouse
 
Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar 💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃 Top Class Call Girl ...
Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar  💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃  Top Class Call Girl ...Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar  💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃  Top Class Call Girl ...
Kolkata Call Girls Halisahar 💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃 Top Class Call Girl ...
 
Peace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdf
Peace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdfPeace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdf
Peace-Conflict-and-National-Adaptation-Plan-NAP-Processes-.pdf
 
2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg
2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg
2024 asthma jkdjkfjsdklfjsdlkfjskldfgdsgerg
 
Vasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In Mumbai
Vasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In MumbaiVasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In Mumbai
Vasai Call Girls In 07506202331, Nalasopara Call Girls In Mumbai
 
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCCFinance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
 
9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts
9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts
9867746289 Independent Call Girls in Mumbai Airport 24/7 - Mumbai Escorts
 

Prices for and Spending on Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid

  • 1. Congressional Budget Office Presentation for Congressional Staff March 19, 2019 March 19, 2019 Anna Anderson-Cook, Jared Maeda, and Lyle Nelson Health, Retirement, and Long-Term Analysis Division Prices for and Spending on Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid The information in this presentation is based on two CBO publications. See Congressional Budget Office, Prices for and Spending on Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid (March 2019) and Prices for and Spending on Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid: An In-Depth Analysis (March 2019).
  • 2. 1 CBO  Examine the prices of specialty drugs, net of rebates and discounts, in Medicare Part D and Medicaid over the 2010–2015 period.  Determine the contribution of specialty drugs to the growth of total drug spending in Medicare Part D and Medicaid.  Examine average annual spending and out-of-pocket costs on specialty drugs among Medicare Part D enrollees who use such drugs. Study Objectives
  • 3. 2 CBO  Brand-name specialty drugs accounted for just 1 percent of prescriptions and about 30 percent of net drug spending in both Medicare Part D and Medicaid in 2015.  Net spending on specialty drugs in Medicare Part D more than tripled between 2010 and 2015, rising from $8.7 billion to $32.8 billion.  Net spending on specialty drugs within Medicaid doubled over the period, reaching $9.9 billion in 2015.  Medicaid pays substantially lower net prices for brand-name specialty drugs than Medicare Part D because average rebates are much larger in Medicaid. Key Findings
  • 4. 3 CBO  Within both Medicare Part D and Medicaid, shifts in use toward higher- priced drugs, especially new drugs, explained much of the increase in the average net price of a prescription for a brand-name specialty drug between 2010 and 2015.  In Medicare Part D, after adjusting for inflation, net spending per beneficiary who used a brand-name specialty drug tripled between 2010 and 2015, reaching $33,460.  For Medicare Part D, after adjusting for inflation, annual out-of-pocket costs doubled for beneficiaries who used a brand-name specialty drug but received no cost-sharing subsidies, reaching $3,540 in 2015. Key Findings
  • 5. 4 CBO IQVIA is a private company that provides data services and health care analysis.  CBO used a definition of specialty drugs that was developed by IQVIA (formerly IMS Health).  By that definition, a specialty drug treats a chronic, complex, or rare condition and has at least four of the following seven characteristics: – Costs at least $6,000 per year in 2015, – Is initiated or maintained by a specialist, – Is administered by a health care professional, – Requires special handling in the supply chain, – Is associated with a patient payment-assistance program, – Is distributed through nontraditional channels (such as a specialty pharmacy), or – Requires monitoring or counseling. Definition of Specialty Drugs
  • 6. 5 CBO In the analysis of drug prices and spending in Medicare Part D and Medicaid, drugs were identified by National Drug Code (NDC). Red Book data are available from IBM Micromedex and include list prices (such as the wholesale acquisition cost) as well as drug characteristics (such as the product name, manufacturer, dosage form, and strength) by NDC.  Medicare Part D: Beneficiary-level claims data for the entire Part D population and confidential data on manufacturer rebates and other discounts by drug for the 2010–2015 period.  Medicaid: Drug utilization and pharmacy payment data by drug for both fee-for-service and managed care purchases combined with confidential data on statutory rebates by drug for the 2010–2015 period.  IQVIA (formerly IMS Health): List of specialty drugs on the market in 2015.  Red Book: Drug characteristics including an active ingredient identifier and brand/generic identifier by National Drug Code. Data
  • 7. 6 CBO  Drugs that had the same active ingredient(s) as a drug on IQVIA’s specialty drug list were labeled as specialty drugs.  Red Book data were used as a crosswalk to match IQVIA’s list of specialty drugs with the Medicare Part D and Medicaid data by active ingredient. Approach to Identifying Specialty Drugs
  • 8. 7 CBO The estimates for Medicare Part D were constructed for beneficiaries who do not receive low-income subsidies and include the effects of the manufacturer rebates and the 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs in a specified phase of the Part D benefit (referred to as the coverage gap). For 50 top-selling brand-name specialty drugs in Medicare Part D:  The average retail price per prescription in 2015 was $4,380 in Medicare Part D and was similar in Medicaid.  Net of rebates and discounts, the average price per prescription was nearly twice as high in Medicare Part D as in Medicaid ($3,600 versus $1,920).  The average net price was much higher in Medicare Part D because the rebates and discounts were much smaller.  Rebates and discounts averaged 18 percent of the retail price in Medicare Part D and 56 percent of the retail price in Medicaid. Prices of Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid in 2015
  • 9. 8 CBO Weighted Average Prescription Price for 50 Top-Selling Brand-Name Specialty Drugs, 2015 4,380 3,600 780 4,330 1,920 2,410 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 Retail Price Net Price Rebates and Discounts Medicare Part D Medicaid Dollars
  • 10. 9 CBO  In Medicare Part D, average manufacturer rebates and other price concessions across all brand-name drugs increased from 15 percent to 29 percent from 2010 to 2015. – Those price concessions are estimated as a share of the total amount paid to pharmacies—the retail price.  In Medicaid, average statutory rebates on brand-name drugs increased from 56 percent to 67 percent over the 2010–2015 period. – Those rebates are estimated as a share of the average price that manufacturers charge to pharmacies—about 95 percent of the retail price.  In both Medicare Part D and Medicaid, rebates and other price concessions were much smaller on average for brand-name specialty drugs compared with brand-name nonspecialty drugs. Price Concessions for Brand-Name Drugs Grew in Medicare Part D and Medicaid Over the 2010–2015 Period
  • 11. 10 CBO For Medicare Part D, rebates and discounts are expressed as a share of the retail price. For 2015, estimates include the 50 percent discount in the coverage gap. For Medicaid, the statutory rebates are expressed as a share of the average manufacturer price. 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 Medicaid, 2015 Medicaid, 2010 Part D, 2015 Part D, 2010 Percent All Drugs Brand Nonspecialty Brand Specialty Average Rebates and Discounts for Brand-Name Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid
  • 12. 11 CBO The “mix” of drugs refers to the share of total prescriptions dispensed by drug.  The average net price per prescription of a brand-name specialty drug in Medicare Part D grew at an average annual rate of 22 percent from 2010 to 2015 (increasing from $1,310 to $3,590 in 2015 dollars).  During that period, the average net price per prescription of a brand- name specialty drug in Medicaid grew at an average annual rate of 12 percent (from $700 to $1,220 in 2015 dollars).  Those estimates account for increases in the prices of individual drugs over time as well as shifts in the mix of drugs used between years.  In each program, most of the price growth was attributable to a change in the mix of drugs toward those with higher prices, especially new specialty drugs (which in 2015 had an average prescription price of $8,680 in Medicare Part D and $4,660 in Medicaid). Price Growth for Brand-Name Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D and Medicaid, 2010 to 2015
  • 13. 12 CBO Change in Average Net Price of Brand-Name Specialty Drugs, 2010 to 2015 Price per Prescription in 2015 Dollars
  • 14. 13 CBO These estimates were generated using a price index to measure the change in prices for each consecutive pair of years in the 2010–2015 period. In each case, the mix of drugs was held constant at the shares in the first of the two years.  After controlling for changes in the mix of drugs (using a price-index approach), the net price of brand-name specialty drugs in Part D grew at an average annual rate of 5.8 percent from 2010 to 2015 (in 2015 dollars).  Using the same price-index approach, the net price of brand-name nonspecialty drugs in Part D grew at an average annual rate of 7.4 percent from 2010 to 2015 (in 2015 dollars)—somewhat higher than the rate for specialty drugs. Price Growth for Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D, Controlling for Changes in the Mix of Drugs
  • 15. 14 CBO For this analysis, only new molecular entities or biologic products that appeared on the list of novel drug approvals published by the Food and Drug Administration from 2011 to 2015 were included in the category of new brand-name drugs.  The average annual net price increase over the 2010–2015 period for drugs that were on the market throughout that period was 6.8 percent. – That factor raised average prescription costs by $510 over the 2010–2015 period for brand-name specialty drugs.  The shift in mix toward higher-priced drugs within the existing (or older) group of drugs increased the average cost of a brand-name specialty prescription by $750.  The shift in mix toward innovative new drugs that were not on the market in 2010 increased the average cost of a brand-name specialty prescription by $1,020. Factors Increasing the Average Cost of a Brand-Name Specialty Prescription, 2010 to 2015
  • 16. 15 CBO 1,310 1,310 510 750 1,020 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 2010 2015 Shift in Mix Toward New Drugs Shift in Mix Toward Higher-Priced Older Drugs Annual Price Increases for Older Drugs 2010 Average Prescription Price Factors Increasing the Average Prescription Price of Brand-Name Specialty Drugs in Part D In 2015 Dollars
  • 17. 16 CBO 22% 33% 45% Annual Price Increases for Older Drugs Change in Mix Toward Higher-Priced Older Drugs Change in Mix Toward Higher-Priced New Drugs Factors Contributing to the Higher Average Cost of a Brand-Name Specialty Prescription, 2010 to 2015
  • 18. 17 CBO In 2015, beneficiaries entered the catastrophic phase of the Part D benefit after incurring out-of-pocket costs of $4,700. In that phase of the benefit, federal reinsurance payments cover 80 percent of drug costs.  In Medicare Part D, net spending on specialty drugs rose from $8.7 billion in 2010 to $32.8 billion in 2015, an average annual increase of 31 percent.  In Medicaid, net spending on specialty drugs rose during that period from $4.7 billion to $9.9 billion, an average annual increase of 16 percent.  During that time, the share of net spending accounted for by specialty drugs rose from 13 percent to 31 percent in Medicare Part D and from 25 percent to 35 percent in Medicaid.  Net spending for brand-name specialty drugs in the catastrophic phase of the Part D benefit increased from $5.4 billion to $26.1 billion from 2010 to 2015. (The corresponding amounts for all drugs are $14 billion and $43 billion, respectively.) Net Spending on Specialty Drugs
  • 19. 18 CBO Estimates have not been adjusted to remove the effects of general inflation. Net Drug Spending in Medicare Part D All Drugs Nonspecialty Drugs Specialty Drugs 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Billions of Dollars
  • 20. 19 CBO Estimates have not been adjusted to remove the effects of general inflation. Net Drug Spending in Medicaid All Drugs Nonspecialty Drugs Specialty Drugs 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Billions of Dollars
  • 21. 20 CBO  Brand-name specialty drugs accounted for about 1 percent of prescriptions and 30 percent of net drug spending in Medicare Part D and Medicaid in 2015.  Brand-name specialty drugs accounted for about 95 percent of all specialty drug spending in both programs. Share of Net Spending on Brand-Name Specialty Drugs
  • 22. 21 CBO  Real (inflation-adjusted) net spending on a per capita basis did not increase much over the 2010–2015 period because the increased spending on specialty drugs was nearly offset by the decline in spending on nonspecialty drugs.  On a per capita basis, net spending for specialty drugs grew at an average annual rate of 20 percent per year in real terms over the 2010–2015 period.  Almost all of that growth can be explained by growth in the average price of a prescription for brand-name specialty drugs, which grew at a similar rate.  In contrast, real net per capita spending on nonspecialty drugs in Medicare Part D declined at an average annual rate of 4 percent. Growth in Real Net per Capita Spending on Specialty Drugs in Medicare Part D, 2010 to 2015
  • 23. 22 CBO Net per Capita Spending in Medicare Part D 330 2,290 2,620 830 1,830 2,660 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Specialty Nonspecialty Total 2010 2015 Per Capita Spending in 2015 Dollars
  • 24. 23 CBO The average cost of a prescription in 2010 of $53 is expressed in 2015 dollars.  Real net per capita spending on all brand-name drugs declined slightly from $1,870 to $1,840 between 2010 and 2015. – The increase in real per capita spending for brand-name specialty drugs was offset by a decline in spending for nonspecialty brand- name drugs, largely because of patent expirations.  The market share for generic drugs increased over the 2010–2015 period from about 75 percent to over 85 percent.  After adjusting for inflation, the average net cost of a prescription for all drugs in Medicare part D declined from $53 in 2010 to $50 in 2015.  The quantity of prescriptions taken per beneficiary increased slightly from 4.1 to 4.4 prescriptions per month. Factors Limiting Growth in Net per Capita Drug Costs in Medicare Part D, 2010 to 2015
  • 25. 24 CBO  On an inflation-adjusted per capita basis, net spending in the catastrophic phase of the benefit doubled, increasing from $550 in 2010 to $1,080 in 2015.  Spending on specialty brand-name drugs accounted for just over 80 percent of that increase in net per capita spending in the catastrophic phase of the benefit.  All of the increase in net per capita spending in the catastrophic phase of the benefit on brand-name specialty drugs can be attributed to the increase in the average price of a brand-name specialty drug over the 2010–2015 period. – On a per capita basis, the quantity of brand-name specialty drugs taken per beneficiary declined slightly over the period. Increases in Per Capita Spending in the Catastrophic Phase of the Part D Benefit
  • 26. 25 CBO  The percentage of Medicare beneficiaries taking a brand-name specialty drug declined from 2.8 percent to 2.4 percent over the 2010–2015 period.  Among Part D enrollees who used a brand-name specialty drug and received no cost-sharing subsidies, the average annual net spending on such drugs rose fourfold in real terms, from $8,970 in 2010 to $36,730 in 2015.  Most of that increase occurred in the catastrophic phase of the Part D benefit.  The average out-of-pocket cost for brand-name specialty drugs among Part D enrollees who used such drugs and had no cost-sharing subsidies doubled in real terms, from $1,750 in 2010 to $3,540 in 2015. Net Spending on Brand-Name Specialty Drugs Among Medicare Part D Users of Such Drugs
  • 27. 26 CBO Annual Net Spending on Brand-Name Specialty Drugs Among Users Without Cost-Sharing Assistance 8,970 1,750 5,960 36,730 3,540 33,530 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 Total Net Spending Out-of-Pocket Costs Spending in Catastrophic Phase 2010 2015 Spending per User in 2015 Dollars
  • 28. 27 CBO  Among all Part D enrollees who used a brand-name specialty drug, the average annual cost of brand-name specialty drugs per user of such drugs increased from $11,330 to $33,460.  The average number of brand-name prescriptions per enrollee who took a brand-name specialty drug increased slightly from 8.6 to 9.3 over the 2010–2015 period.  The increase in the average cost of a brand-name specialty prescription accounted for about 90 percent of the increase in spending per user of a brand-name specialty drug between 2010 and 2015. How Costs Increased per Beneficiary Using a Brand-Name Specialty Drug
  • 29. 28 CBO  For this analysis, only new molecular entities or biologic products that appeared on the list of novel drug approvals published by the Food and Drug Administration from 2011 to 2015 were included in the category of new brand-name drugs.  Because of data limitations, an analysis of the change in per capita drug spending was not conducted for Medicaid.  Beneficiaries covered by Medicare Part D are age 65 or older or disabled, whereas beneficiaries covered by Medicaid’s drug benefit are mostly adults under age 65 or children in low-income households.  Drug spending per beneficiary is much higher in Medicare Part D than in Medicaid. For example, in 2015, average net drug spending per beneficiary was $2,660 in Medicare Part D and about $500 in Medicaid. Notes