Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31738371›Full record

ArticleJAMA cardiology2020

Contemporary Patterns of Medicare and Medicaid Utilization and Associated Spending on Sacubitril/Valsartan and Ivabradine in Heart Failure.

Andrew Sumarsono, Muthiah Vaduganathan, Ezimamaka Ajufo, Ann Marie Navar, Gregg C Fonarow, Sandeep R Das, Ambarish Pandey

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Contemporary Trends in the Use of and Expenditures on Digoxin in the United States.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew SumarsonoDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Muthiah VaduganathanBrigham and Women's Heart and Vascular Center and Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ezimamaka AjufoDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Ann Marie NavarDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Gregg C FonarowAssociate Editor.
Sandeep R DasDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Ambarish PandeyDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USClinical Research Institute · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: In 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration approved 2 new medications for treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine. However, few national data are available examining their contemporary use and associated costs. Objective: To evaluate national patterns of use of sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine and associated therapeutic spending in Medicare Part D and Medicaid. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this US nationwide claims-based study, we analyzed data from the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Event and Medicaid Utilization and Spending data sets to compare national patterns of use of sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine between 2016 and 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in total spending, per-beneficiary/claim spending, number of beneficiaries, and number of claims between 2016 and 2017 for sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine. Results: The number of Medicare beneficiaries prescribed sacubitril/valsartan increased from 35 423 to 90 606 (156% increase from 2016 to 2017). Medicare beneficiaries prescribed ivabradine increased from 15 856 to 23 213 (46% increase). In 2017, Medicare Part D spent $227 million and $7.3 million on sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine, respectively. This represented increases of 241% and 59% compared with 2016 spending, respectively. The annual Medicare per-beneficiary spending on sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine was $2512 and $2400. Parallel trends in use patterns and spending were observed among Medicaid beneficiaries. Conclusions and Relevance: Although initial experiences suggested slow uptake after regulatory approval, these national data demonstrate an increase in use of sacubitril/valsartan and, to a lesser degree, ivabradine in the United States. Current annual per-beneficiary expenditures remain less than spending thresholds that have been reported to be cost-effective. Ongoing efforts are needed to promote high-value care while improving affordability and access to established and emerging heart failure therapies.

Indexed as

AminobutyratesAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsBiphenyl CompoundsCardiovascular AgentsDrug CombinationsDrug UtilizationHeart FailureHumansIvabradineMedicaidMedicare Part DTetrazolesUnited StatesValsartanAminobutyratesAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsBiphenyl CompoundsCardiovascular AgentsDrug CombinationsIvabradinesacubitril and valsartan sodium hydrate drug combinationTetrazolesValsartan

Identifiers

PMID31738371
PMCPMC6865331
OpenAlexW2988422427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.