Characterizing access for oral oncolytics used to treat breast cancer at an academic medical center.
Shawna Kraft,Annie Cheung,Mary Westover,Gina Widmer,Nichole Pichla,Hanna Venera,Kelley M. Kidwell,Norah Lynn Henry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.2024.20.10_suppl.116
2024-10-01
JCO Oncology Practice
Abstract:116 Background: Everolimus, CDK 4/6, PIK3CA, Her2 tyrosine kinase, and PARP inhibitors are commonly used oral oncolytic agents for breast cancer patients. However, oral oncolytics are tiered differently for insurance cost coverage than IV therapies. We characterized the financial toxicity associated with breast cancer oral oncolytics, investigated the prevalence of financial assistance mechanisms utilized, and explored the association of these mechanisms with timing of treatment initiation in adult breast cancer patients. Methods: Patients 18 years or older with a primary breast cancer diagnosis who received care at the outpatient breast cancer clinic and were prescribed an oral oncolytic by a Michigan Medicine provider were included. Using the electronic medical record, we identified initial prescriptions for everolimus, CDK 4/6 inhibitors (palbociclib, ribociclib, abemaciclib), PIK3CA inhibitor (alpelisib), HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (lapatinib, neratinib, tucatinib), and PARP inhibitors (olaparib, talazoparib) dated between January 1, 2014 and November 30, 2022. Patient demographics, adjuvant versus metastatic status, insurance coverage, monthly out-of-pocket costs, financial assistance obtained, prescribed date, planned medication start date, pill-to-mouth date, duration of treatment and reason for treatment discontinuation were collected. Results: There were 418 unique patients in our final cohort. Almost one third of all prescriptions were filled with financial assistance (n=126, 31.2%). The three most common assistance mechanisms were copay cards (n=55, 43.6%), grants (n=34, 26.9%) and patient assistance programs (n=31, 24.6%). For monthly out-of-pocket costs before any financial assistance was obtained, the three most common cost groups were $0-$15 (n=155, 36%), $15-$100 (n=101, 23.7%) and >$500 (n=91, 21%). Among the 48 prescriptions that were never filled, almost one third were due to prohibitive cost (n=15, 28.3%). For insurance coverage, the three most common types were commercial (n=224, 54%), Medicare Part D (n=108, 26%), and Medicaid (n=57, 14%). The median number of days treatment was delayed was 10 days (range 0-495 days). Insurance approval/denial delays accounted for 33.9% of delays (n=120). Conclusions: One third of breast cancer oral oncolytic prescriptions were filled with financial assistance. In the instances in which patients were not able to receive timely treatment for their cancer, one out of three times it was due to insurance delay.
oncology