Abstract Introduction Vaginal estrogen is an essential medication for many post-menopausal women. However, cost can be prohibitive for patients and insurance coverage can be difficult to predict. Objective The objective of this study was to describe the insurance coverage of vaginal estrogen formulations in terms of overall coverage score and cost across the Mid-Atlantic for 2024 insurance plans. Methods This is a cross-sectional study examining coverage scores, tiers, and cost of vaginal estrogen formulations (generic estradiol cream and tablets, Premarin, Imvexxy, Femring, Estring, Estrace cream and tablets, Vagifem, Yuvafem) in the mid-Atlantic states (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia). Census data was used to identify the most populous three districts in each state. All insurance plans for the top ten insurers in each district were then reviewed for the tier and cost of vaginal estrogen formulations. A weighted coverage score ranging from 0.2 to 1.0 was then adopted based on the proportion of tier coverage for each formulation, with lower tiers (and thus better prescription coverage) conferring a greater weight in the calculation of the score. Analyses were performed using STATA. Fisher’s exact test and chi-squared tests were used where appropriate. Medians were used as the distribution of cost was non-parametric. Multivariate regression including formulation, location, and insurer was also performed. Results Three-hundred and forty-two insurance plans were ultimately included in the analysis. The median cost of tier 1 formulations was $0 (IQR $0 to $0) while the median cost of tier 4 formulations was $100 (IQR $36 to $226). Non-formulary medications were much more expensive with a median cost of $413 (IQR $204 to $413). Estradiol tablets overall had the best coverage score of 0.75 compared to Estrace tablets and Vagifem which had coverage scores of 0.2. On initial analysis by high ($150 or greater) or low (<$150) cost formulations, prescriptions from Delaware made up a greater percentage of higher compared to lower cost (14% vs 9%, p<0.001), while formulations from Virginia made up a greater percentage of lower compared higher cost (24% vs 18%, p=0.02). Insurer impacted cost and this persisted on regression analysis when controlling for location and tier, with Aetna (aOR 1.18, p=0.048) and Kaiser (aOR 2.9, p<0.001) remaining predictive for higher cost. Conclusions High costs of vaginal estrogen may be prohibitive to patients using these medications. Living in Delaware or having Aetna or Kaiser insurance may result in higher costs. Disclosure No.
Read full abstract