Affordable Care Act Marketplace Research Articles

BackgroundPatients on treatment for CLL can incur significant OOP costs, but little is known about length of time to reach OOP maximums, and variance of cost-sharing between IV and oral medications, especially among privately-insured patients. These issues have both practice and policy implications. First, from a practice perspective, insurance plans can vary their cost-sharing for IV versus oral chemotherapy, and cost-sharing can impact adherence and outcomes. Second, from a policy perspective, 43 states have enacted laws to ensure cost-sharing parity between oral and IV chemotherapy, but there is little evidence that these laws actually lower costs for patients. Thus, our objective was to determine, for both oral and IV drugs, how quickly patients reach their annual OOP maximums.MethodsUsing Health Insurance Marketplace Public Use Files that contain cost-sharing data for all private insurance plans participating in the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) Federally Facilitated Marketplace, we determined the relative impact on OOP cost of oral (ibrutinib) vs. IV (bendamustine/rituximab; BR) chemotherapy on time to reaching OOP maximums. With this data, we created a model of guideline-based, first-line CLL treatment regimens for ibrutinib and BR. We used Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for procedures, and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) J-codes for drugs. We used a patient weight of 70kg and body surface area of 1.8m2 for dosing. Ibrutinib was dosed at 420mg. BR was dosed at bendamustine 70mg/m2 and rituximab 375mg/m2 for the first dose and bendamustine 500mg/m2 for all subsequent doses. We accounted for billing of professional fees, facility fees, infusional drugs, oral specialty drugs, supportive care medications, imaging, and blood tests. The average bill for each visit was applied to ACA Marketplace plans at 100% of Medicare fee schedule. As a sensitivity analysis, we varied costs to 120% and 150% of the Medicare Fee schedule based on an evidence-based multiplier for estimation of private insurance fees. Descriptive statistics and t-tests for comparison were calculated for number of days to reach OOP maximum for each insurance plan. We assessed variation according to metal tier (Catastrophic, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum).ResultsOf the nearly 55,000 ACA plans nationally, 3092 unique insurance plan designs were identified on the ACA Marketplace for 2017. The average OOP maximum of these plans by metal tier was $7150 for catastrophic (maximum allowed by the ACA in 2017), $6883 for bronze, $6463 for silver, $4931 for gold, and $2284 for platinum. On average, patients on 95% of plans will reach the OOP maximum for the year for both BR and ibrutinib. A patient on BR will reach the OOP maximum in a mean of 3 clinic visits (29 days) for 100%, 120% and 150% of Medicare pricing. Using the 100% Medicare pricing estimate, a patient on ibrutinib will reach the OOP maximum in a mean of 3 visits (36 days) based on the typical timing of office visits. For the 120% and 150% of Medicare pricing estimates, the maximum OOP costs for ibrutinib are reached after only 2 visits (8 days). Metal tier also impacted time to maximum. For a patient on BR at 100% of Medicare, the maximum OOP expense was reached after 1 visit (1 day) for catastrophic, 2 visits (2 days) for bronze, 3 visits (28 days) for silver, 4 visits (29 days) for gold, 10 visits (113 days) for platinum. For a patient receiving ibrutinib at 100% of Medicare, the maximum OOP expense was reached after 1 visit (1 day) for catastrophic, 2 visits (8 days) for bronze, and 3 visits (28 days) for silver, gold, and platinum.ConclusionsFirst, using standard Medicare pricing, we found that patients receiving BR or ibrutinib quickly reached their maximum annual OOP caps within an average of 29 days (3 clinic visits) for BR and 36 days (3 visits) for ibrutinib. Using pricing schedules more reflective of private insurance, patients are likely to reach their cap even faster. Second, drug costs contributed most to reaching the maximums despite accounting for standard professional fees, labs, and imaging. These data suggest a limited benefit of state parity laws since the underlying costs of these drugs remain high, and patients reach OOP caps very quickly with either oral or IV drugs. Methods for reducing the financial burden to the patient and health care system from these novel yet expensive therapies need to be explored. DisclosuresZafar:Novartis: Other: Spouse's Employment.

In addition to the devastating health effects of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the United States is experiencing the highest rates of unemployment since the Great Depression.1 One important and overlooked consequence of unemployment is the loss of employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) coverage for children whose parents lose their jobs. It is estimated 27 million US adults will become uninsured because of unemployment and lose ESI during the pandemic.2 During the pandemic, >4 out of 10 parents with children <19 years old reported they or a family member lost a job, work hours, or work-related income, which is slightly more than for childless adults.3 Two out of 5 adults in newly unemployed households reported having obtained their health insurance coverage from that employer. More than half of US children are covered by ESI,4 including 49% of children with preexisting conditions who have special health care needs.5For lower-income and minority families, this loss of ESI during the COVID-19 pandemic will likely intensify already existing health disparities for children. Unemployment during the pandemic has differentially affected low-income and minority populations in the US. Children of low-wage workers are at risk for resulting coverage loss, including the 25% of children from families with incomes <138% of the federal poverty level (FPL) who are covered by ESI.4 This has been even higher for low-income (5 of 10), Black (5 of 10), and Hispanic (6 of 10) parents.3 Thus, vulnerable families, including those with children with preexisting conditions and special health care needs, are at risk for losing ESI and becoming uninsured if they do not have coverage by other means.The loss of ESI due to pandemic-related unemployment for families has the potential to cause substantial short- and long-term health effects on children. The adverse effects of uninsurance on children have been well documented and include high rates of unmet medical needs, delayed care, unfilled prescriptions, and lack of a usual place of care. Insurance disruptions and being uninsured for part of the year are associated with the same adverse effects.6 Being uninsured or having disruptions in insurance can create barriers to accessing care for children, with the potential to miss recommended preventive services, including scheduled vaccinations and developmental assessments during the well child visit, as well as maintenance care of chronic diseases. These consequences may cause lasting effects on children’s development and growth, particularly for children whose significant health care needs require careful and consistent management.Regaining coverage after the loss of ESI is essential, but the options may play out differently when children are involved. This may lead to increased costs to maintain commercial coverage as a family or mixed coverage types within a family. Families can continue their ESI through COBRA (Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act). However, this comes at an even higher cost for families with multiple members paying the entire premium out of pocket. For a family of 4, this averages $20 576, plus an additional 2%.2 Eligibility for subsidies for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace plans can be limited. Families who do not qualify can face plans with steep premiums, high-deductibles, and potential for substantial out-of-pocket costs for health care. Children who are income-eligible can enroll in Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Plan. Medicaid coverage for children has the advantage of requiring little to no cost-sharing for health care services, although they may have more restricted provider networks than commercial coverage, which may cause disruptions to existing provider relationships. Medicaid may not be available to parents, however, especially if families live in one of the states that did not expand Medicaid as part of the ACA.2 Families may end up with mixed types of coverage within the same family or may have insured and uninsured members in the same family, which is associated with reduced rates of coverage and access to preventive care for eligible children.7 Even if children can have public coverage, the increased financial burden on the family from uninsured or underinsured parents may create cost-related barriers for their children to obtain needed health care.Expanding Medicaid to adults has been shown to have effects on increasing coverage for eligible but unenrolled children. What has not been established is if the converse is true: does a “closed door” preventing parents from obtaining Medicaid coverage make eligible children less likely to be covered? This is a question that is particularly relevant with the current challenges to the viability of the ACA, including the Supreme Court case of California v Texas.8 If the ACA is deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and is overturned, ∼3 million children who obtained Medicaid or CHIP when their parents signed up for insurance could lose their coverage.9 Additionally, the elimination of the ACA Marketplaces and subsidies would remove other important coverage options for families with children who lose ESI in the pandemic. The loss of the ACA’s protections for preexisting conditions could make it challenging to find replacement coverage for children with preexisting conditions, including those children with special health care needs. Given these threats to the ACA, policymakers must make a concerted effort to examine, better understand, and address the direct and indirect impacts of coverage policy on children. For example, more data specific to children are needed to better understand the impact of COVID-related unemployment on coverage loss.The loss of ESI coverage due to a parent’s job loss during COVID-19 has the potential to exacerbate other threats to the health and well-being of children in addition to the pandemic itself. It will likely magnify disparities in health insurance coverage and access for lower-income and minority children because these families are differentially affected by COVID-19 related job loss. In families with incomes <250% FPL, 53% reported a family member lost a job, work hours, or income compared with 33% of families ≥250% FPL.3 As a result, families may face unmanageable health care costs during and after the outbreak, in a time when they have lost income either from being furloughed or becoming unemployed.To support families with these challenges, pediatric clinicians and health advocates should understand the current resources available in their state to maintain coverage for children and youth if families lose ESI. They should communicate about the significant and grave impacts of unemployment and subsequent loss of ESI to their state and federal legislators and advocate for better coverage for children. With this information, policymakers may consider how to expand resources for and devise policy alternatives to ameliorate the financial and health-related challenges unemployed Americans may face. This could include policies such as COBRA extensions, additional Medicaid expansions, emergency Special Enrollment Periods for the ACA Marketplaces, expanded ACA Marketplace subsidies, funding for enrollment assistance, and continued assistance through federal legislation such as the CARES Act and Families First Coronavirus Response Act.As the United States is analyzing the vulnerabilities of the health care system and potential solutions during this pandemic, we must remember to consider the short- and long-term consequences loss of coverage has on children. This includes exacerbating health and health care disparities for lower-income and minority children. The present and future health of children must not be an afterthought as we attempt to address COVID-19–related unemployment and coverage loss for their parents.

Affordable Care Act Marketplace Research Articles

Related Topics

Articles published on Affordable Care Act Marketplace

Health Plan Switching and Health Care Utilization

Access to a novel first-line single-tablet HIV antiretroviral regimen in Affordable Care Act Marketplace plans, 2018–2020

Personalized Letters And Emails Increased Marketplace Enrollment Among Households Eligible For Zero-Premium Plans

Coverage for the Entire Cervical Cancer Screening Process Without Cost-Sharing: Lessons From Colorectal Cancer Screening.

HPR90 A Quasi-Experimental Study of the Effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces Subsidies on Access to Care and Healthcare Utilization of Nonelderly Adults With Chronic Conditions

Rates of Medicare Enrollment Among Dialysis Patients After Implementation of Medicare Payment Reform and the Affordable Care Act Marketplace

Association of Funding Cuts to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Navigator Program With Privately Sponsored Television Advertising

Association of County Race and Ethnicity Characteristics With Number of Insurance Carriers and Insurance Network Breadth

Turnover in Zero-Premium Status Among Health Insurance Marketplace Plans Available to Low-Income Enrollees

Accessibility of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace websites

Marketplace Health Insurance Ratings: Most Potential Enrollees Have Access To Plans Of Medium Or High Quality.

Tobacco Surcharges Associated With Reduced ACA Marketplace Enrollment.

Increasing Insurance Choices In The Affordable Care Act Marketplaces, 2018-21.

State minimum wages and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2008-2018.

The Impact of the Affordable Care Act Insurance Expansions on Opioid‐Related Emergency Department Visits

Insurance Design and Out-of-Pocket (OOP) Costs: a Comparison of Oral and Intravenous (IV) Treatment Plans for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) in the Era of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)

Understanding Consumer Experiences and Insurance Outcomes Following Plan Disenrollment in the Nongroup Insurance Market.

Enrollee Experience with Providers in the Arkansas Medicaid Expansion Program.

Children’s Coverage Vulnerabilities With Loss of a Parent’s Employer-Sponsored Insurance

Access to Neurosurgery in the Era of Narrowing Insurance Networks: Statewide Analysis of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Marketplace Plans in Arizona

Lead the way for us