Immune-checkpoint inhibitors among privately insured cancer patients: Utilization pattern and out-of-pocket cost.

Abstract

e19252 Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is a form of immunotherapy that “releases the brakes” on the immune cells to restore antitumor immunity and promote tumor cell death to treat cancer. In March 2011, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved ipilimumab, the 1st ICI, to treat advanced-stage melanoma. Since December 2014, FDA successively approved another six ICIs: nivolumab, pembrolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab, cemiplimab, and atezolizumab. Beside melanoma, the treatment indications for these agents have been expanded to renal cell carcinoma, microsatellite instability (MSI)-high malignancies, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. No study had examined the patterns and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs of ICI among cancer patients (pts) with private insurance. Methods: We used the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database to document the uptake of ICI from 2011 to 2017. Using the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes, and national Drug code, we identified ICI claims among pts 18 to 64 years old. OOP cost for ICI was computed as sum of coinsurance, copayment, and deductible. To determine whether financial burden was higher for pts with high-deductible (HD) plans, we dichotomized pts’ insurance plan as HD vs. non-HD. Summary statistics was used to describe the patterns of ICI use. We used Wilcoxon Rank Sum test to compare the OOP by HD status. Results: The study cohort included 7,855 pts with 62,636 ICI claims of ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab, and atezolizumab between 2011 and 2017. The median age was 57 years and about 56.9% pts were male. Approximately 90% of pts used ICI as monotherapy, and the median number of claims per patient was 4. The most commonly used ICI was nivolumab (55.4%), accounting for about 90% of claims after 2014, followed by lpilimumab (24.6%), pembrolizumab (18.5%). Among the ICI pts, 17.2% enrolled in HD plans and 82.8% had non-HD plans. The median OOP for both HD and non-HD groups was $0, whereas the 3rd quartile of OOP was significantly higher for pts in HD plans ($556 vs. $26, P < 0.01). In addition, approximately 18.7% of pts (17.3% of pts in non-HD and 25.6% in HD plans) paid over $500 OOP per patient for ICI. Conclusions: The use of ICI was dramatically increased as more ICI agents were approved since 2015. Although more than 50% of pts had $0 OOP, possibly due to the out-of-pocket max provision in private insurance, pts with HD plans are especially susceptible to high financial burden of ICIs.