Abstract:BACKGROUND: Increases in consumer cost sharing lead to decreases in the use of both high- and low-value care. Copay assistance was designed to reduce out-of-pocket (OOP) cost burden. Commercial insurers have recently instituted copay adjustment programs (CAPs), which exclude copay assistance from deductibles and OOP cost maximums, thereby effectively increasing the financial burden on patients. The utilization of these programs by specific demographic populations is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess utilization of copay assistance and CAP exposure in a commercially insured patient population and examine potential differences in the use of each of these programs by non-White and by White patients. METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional study using IQVIA Longitudinal Access and Adjudication Data, linked to Experian Marketing Solutions, LLC consumer data, identified unique patients who were younger than 65 years, covered by commercial insurance, had at least 1 pharmacy claim for treatment within prespecified therapeutic areas, and had full financial data visibility on paid claims (ie, nonmissing data on costs associated with the pharmacy claim and the secondary payer) between January 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. Analyses of copay card use or CAP exposure (defined as the likelihood to be included in the accumulator or maximizer program) between non-White and White patient populations were adjusted for age, gender, household income, patient state of residence, pharmacy benefit manager, state-level CAP policy, and overall drug cost. RESULTS: In total, 4,073,599 unique patients (5.6% of the total database population) were included in the copay card analysis. In adjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in copay card utilization between non-White patients and White patients (odds ratio [OR] = 0.995, 95% CI = 0.99-1.00; P = 0.0964). However, among copay card users, non-White patients were significantly more likely to be exposed to CAPs, as either maximizers (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.22-1.33; P < 0.0001) or accumulators (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.26-1.36; P < 0.0001), compared with White patients. CONCLUSIONS: In an adjusted analysis of this selected sample of a commercially insured population, there was no difference in the use of copay cards between non-White and White patients. CAP exposure, however, was significantly higher among non-White patients. This increased exposure suggests a disproportionate effect due to this reduction in copay assistance benefits, which has the potential to exacerbate racial and ethnic disparities in access to medications. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Mr Ingham, Dr Sadik, and Dr Song are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Dr Zhao is an employee of IQVIA. Dr Fendrick is a consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield, Centivo, Community Oncology Association, Covered California, EmblemHealth, Exact Sciences, Freedman Health, GRAIL, Harvard University, Health & Wellness Innovations, Health at Scale Technologies, HealthCorum, Hygeia, MedsIncontext, MedZed, Merck, Mercer, Montana Health Cooperative, Pair Team, Penguin Pay, Phathom Pharmaceuticals, Proton Intelligence, Risalto Health, Risk International, Sempre Health, Silver Fern Health, State of Minnesota, Teladoc Health, US Department of Defense, Virginia Center for Health Innovation, Wellth, Wildflower Health, Yale New Haven Health System, and Zansors; received research funds from Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Boehringer-Ingelheim, Gary and Mary West Health Policy Center, Arnold Ventures, National Pharmaceutical Council, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), Robert Wood Johnson (RWJ) Foundation, State of Michigan/The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS); and has an outside position at the American Journal of Managed Care (AJMC; co-editor), Medicare Evidence Development & Coverage Advisory Committee (MEDCAC) member, VBID Health (partner).

The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act Evaluation Study: Impact on Nonquantitative Treatment Limits for Specialty Behavioral Health Care

Mental Health Insurance Parity: How Full Is the Glass?

Perinatal Psychotherapy Use and Costs Before and After Federally Mandated Health Insurance Coverage

Comparison of Anticancer Medication Use and Spending Under US Oncology Parity Laws With and Without Out-of-Pocket Spending Caps

Variation in outpatient mental health service utilization under capitation

Providing Behavioral Health Care in PACE - A Review of Federal and State Manual Regulations

Patient liability, treatment adherence, and treatment persistence associated with state bans of copay accumulator adjustment programs

The effects of Medicaid policy changes on adults' service use patterns in Kentucky and Idaho

340B Participation and Safety Net Engagement Among Federally Qualified Health Centers

Assessment of racial and ethnic inequities in copay card utilization and enrollment in copay adjustment programs

Behavioral Health's Integration Within a Care Network and Health Care Utilization

Comprehensiveness of State Insurance Laws and Perceived Access to Pediatric Mental Health Care

Employer-Sponsored Medicare Advantage Plans and the 2018 Therapy Cap Repeal: Reduced Overall Spending Does Not Constrain Out-of-Pocket Costs

Implementation Of New Mexico's 'No Behavioral Health Cost Sharing' Law: A Qualitative Study

Primary Care Behavioral Health Integration and Care Utilization: Implications for Patient Outcome and Healthcare Resource Use

Changes in Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Use of Mental Health Services under the Affordable Care Act: Evidence from California

Health Care Spending, Use, and Financial Hardship among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees with Mental Health Symptoms

Behavioral health integration in the Program of All‐Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE): A scoping review

Removal of prior authorization for medication-assisted treatment: impact on opioid use and policy implications in a Medicare Advantage population

Quantifying Differences in Health Care Consumption for the Management of Multiple Sclerosis Within Privately and Publicly Insured Health Care Programs

Early impacts of the Pennsylvania Rural Health Model on potentially avoidable utilization