ArticleAmerican health & drug benefits2019
Realized and Projected Cost-Savings from the Introduction of Generic Imatinib Through Formulary Management in Patients with Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia.
Article in American health & drug benefits, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maximizing the Value of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Management Using Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in the USA: Potential Determinants and Consequences of Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs, with Proposed Optimization Approaches.Clinical drug investigation · 2024Pooled it
- Current evidence on the efficacy and safety of generic imatinib in CML and the impact of generics on health care costs.Blood advances · 2021Pooled it
- Financial Impact of Treatment Choice in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: A Comparison of Later Generation TKIs versus Imatinib from Patient and Payer Perspectives.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2026Article
- Valuing the Societal Impact of Medicines and Other Health Technologies: A User Guide to Current Best Practices.Forum for health economics & policy · 2024Article
- Development and clinical application of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry-based assay to quantify eight tyrosine kinase inhibitors in human plasma.Journal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab · 2023Article
- Feasibility of treatment-free remission with generic imatinib: Results of generic imatinib-free trial-in-chronic myeloid leukaemia-chronic phase study.The Indian journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Use of budget savings from patent expiration of cancer drugs to improve affordability and accessibility.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Realized and Projected Cost-Savings from the Introduction of Generic Imatinib Through Formulary Management in Patients with Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia.American health & drug benefits · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImatinib, a first-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and the newer second-generation TKIs have dramatically improved outcomes for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). A previous model estimated the potential cost-savings over the next 2 years after the loss of patent exclusivity for imatinib in the United States in 2016 and its availability in a generic form. Payers have indeed realized meaningful savings, but it took 2 years for the prices of generic imatinib to decline substantially.
objectiveTo quantify the cost-savings for a US health plan from the passive substitution of generic imatinib and the impact of step-edit therapy with the use of generic imatinib before coverage of a second-generation TKI.
methodsWe updated the previously published model utilizing hypothetical 1-million-member commercial and Medicare plans to include current TKI use and pricing combined with recent epidemiologic data. Regression models were used to project utilization to 5 years after the loss of imatinib's patent exclusivity. We compared generic imatinib costs with a scenario in which generic imatinib was not available. The impact of a step-edit therapy restriction was explored for patients with incident CML. The analyses were repeated for the entire US population based on national census data.
resultsThe 1-million-member commercial plan saved $0.5 million (3%) from pharmacy spending on TKIs in year 1 and $3.9 million (19%) in year 2 after the loss of patent exclusivity. The projected savings significantly increased to $7.8 million (37%), $8.3 million (39%), and $8.6 million (40%) in years 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Step-edits strategies were projected to result in small incremental savings of $0.3 million (1.5%) annually in years 3 to 5. The 1-million-member Medicare plan saved $1.7 million (3%) in year 1 and $14.1 million (19%) in year 2. The projected savings were $27.8 million (37%), $29.5 million (39%), and $30.8 million (40%), with step-edit estimated to add only $0.9 million (1.2%) annually in years 3 to 5. Generic imatinib saved US payers $2.5 billion (13% of the total spending on TKIs) in years 1 and 2. In years 3 to 5, the cumulative projected savings totaled $12.2 billion, and the savings were expected to grow to 39% as a result of passive generic imatinib substitution, with only 1.7% additional savings from step-edit restriction.
conclusionsAs a result of a lower price for generic imatinib relative to the brand-name version of the drug, substantial cost-savings to US payers over the next 3 years are expected without step-edit formulary management restrictions. Cost-saving strategies, including formulary management restrictions, should adhere to evidence-based guidelines to ensure the appropriate use of generic imatinib and all available TKIs, with the objective to maintain positive outcomes and, in turn, increase the value of patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32055281PMC6996618W2993955657What 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.