Search Results (2)

Copay accumulator (CA) and copay maximizer (CM) programs in the United States, which prevent manufacturer copay assistance from counting toward deductibles or out-of-pocket (OOP) maximums, are increasingly used, raising concerns about costs and outcomes for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BPD) treated with branded atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) and/or antidepressants (ADs). This retrospective claims study used Kythera commercial data (2020–2024) in the United States to identify adults with MDD or BPD who had at least 1 diagnosis and one branded AAP or AD prescription between 2021 and 2023, requiring 12 months’ continuous enrollment pre- (2020–2021) and post-index (2023–2024) and at least three months of post-index branded medication use. This retrospective claims study used Kythera commercial data (2020–2024) to identify adults with MDD or BPD who had at least one diagnosis and one branded AAP or AD prescription between 2021 and 2023, requiring 12 months’ continuous enrollment pre- and post-index and at least 3 months of post-index branded medication use. Patients were stratified into CA, CM, or standard copay plan (SCP) cohorts, and propensity score matching was used to compare treatment patterns and costs. Both CA and CM groups had significantly higher median OOP costs than SCPs (e.g., $75/$60 vs. $16 for MDD+AAP; p < 0.0001), and higher pharmacy costs among adherent patients. CA patients had poorer adherence and persistence, shorter treatment duration, and higher discontinuation and abandonment rates than SCPs. These findings highlight higher OOP burden and adherence challenges with CA and CM programs, underscoring the need for careful benefit design for US mental health patients. Full article

Background: Copay cards are intended to mitigate patient out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses. This qualitative, exploratory focus group study aimed to capture patient perceptions of copay cards and copay adjustment programs (CAPs; insurers’ accumulator and maximizer policies), which redirect the copay card utilization benefits intended for patients’ OOP expenses. Methods: Patients with chronic conditions were recruited through Janssen’s Patient Engagement Research Council program. They completed a survey and attended a live virtual session to provide feedback on copay cards. Results: Among 33 participants (median age, 49 years [range, 24–78]), the most frequent conditions were cardiovascular-metabolic disease and inflammatory bowel disease. Patients associated copay cards with lessening financial burden, improving general and mental health, and enabling medication adherence. An impact on medication adherence was identified by 10 (63%) White and nine (100%) Black respondents. Some patients were unaware of CAPs despite having encountered them; they recommended greater copay card education and transparency about CAPs. Conclusion: Patients relied on copay cards to help afford their prescribed medication OOP expenses and maintain medication adherence. Use of CAPs may increase patient OOP expenses. Patients would benefit from awareness programs and industry – healthcare provider partnerships that facilitate and ensure access to copay cards. Full article