ArticleHealth services research2018
Impact of the 340B Drug Pricing Program on Cancer Care Site and Spending in Medicare.
Article in Health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association Between Reimbursement Incentives and Physician Practice in Oncology: A Systematic Review.JAMA oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Association of 340B entity eligibility with changes in hospital financial performance.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Local population characteristics and access equity of 340B contract pharmacies.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- What is driving 340B growth: utilization or price?Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Outpatient chemotherapy drug costs and expensive chemotherapy drug use in 340B and Non-340B hospitals: an observational study.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Assessing the Impact of the 340B Drug Pricing Program: A Scoping Review of the Empirical, Peer-Reviewed Literature.The Milbank quarterly · 2024Article
- Outcomes of the 340B Drug Pricing Program: A Scoping Review.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- The impacts of the 340B Program on health care quality for low-income patients.Health services research · 2023Article
- Association Between New 340B Program Participation and Commercial Insurance Spending on Outpatient Biologic Oncology Drugs.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- 340B Drug Pricing Program and hospital provision of uncompensated care.The American journal of managed care · 2021Article
- Relationship between initiation of 340B participation and hospital safety-net engagement.Health services research · 2020Article
- The unintended consequences of the 340B safety-net drug discount program.Health services research · 2020Article
- Use of High-Cost Cancer Treatments in Academic and Nonacademic Practice.The oncologist · 2020Article
- The impact of integration on outpatient chemotherapy use and spending in Medicare.Health economics · 2019Article
- Consequences of the 340B Drug Pricing Program.The New England journal of medicine · 2018Article
- The Association of the 340B Program with Affordable Care Act (ACA) Premiums: A Longitudinal Analysis from 2018 to 2022.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
- Mapping 340B Funds Flow Through Contract Pharmacies.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the impact of the 340B drug discount program on the site of cancer drug administration and cancer care spending in Medicare. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
setting2010-2013 Medicare claims data for a random sample of Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries with cancer. STUDY
designWe identified the 340B effect using variation in the availability of 340B hospitals across markets. We considered beneficiaries from markets that newly gained a 340B hospital during the study period (new 340B markets) as the treatment group. Beneficiaries in markets with no 340B hospital were the control group. We used a difference-in-differences approach with market fixed effects. DATA COLLECTION: Secondary data analysis. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe probability of a patient receiving cancer drug administration in hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) versus physician offices increased 7.8 percentage points more in new 340B markets than in markets with no 340B hospital. Per-patient spending on other cancer care increased $1,162 more in new 340B markets than in markets with no 340B hospital.
conclusionsThe 340B program shifted the site of cancer drug administration to HOPDs and increased spending on other cancer care. As the program expands, continuing assessment of its impact on service utilization and spending would be needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.