ArticleJAMA health forum2025
Use of and Steering to Pharmacies Owned by Insurers and Pharmacy Benefit Managers in Medicare.
Article in JAMA health forum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Essential Retail Pharmacies Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Association between integrated specialty pharmacy care model and pharmaceutical access and costs.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Evaluating the access process for patients transitioning from intravenous to subcutaneous biologic administration for inflammatory bowel disease.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2026Article
- Predicting pharmacy choice for managed care network design.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- The impact of vertical integration on health care delivery and costs: Evidence from physician-pharmacy integration.Journal of health economics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The prevalence of pharmacies owned by integrated insurers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), or insurer-PBMs, is of growing regulatory concern. However, little is known about the role of these pharmacies in Medicare, in which pharmacy network protections may influence market dynamics. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of insurer-PBM-owned pharmacies and the extent to which insurer-PBMs steer patients to pharmacies they own in Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Medicare Part D claims data on prescription fills for a 20% random sample of US beneficiaries enrolled from January 1 through December 31, 2021. Data were analyzed from March to November 2024. Exposures: Prescription fills. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the share of spending filled by insurer-PBM-owned pharmacies overall, by pharmacy type (specialty and nonspecialty), and by drug class. For the top 100 specialty and nonspecialty molecules by claim volume, 2 quantities were identified for 4 major insurer-PBMs (Cigna, CVS, Humana, and UnitedHealth Group): share of the index firm's insurer claims filled by its owned pharmacies and share of other firms' insurer claims filled by the index firm's owned pharmacies. Differences between these quantities were assessed to evaluate the degree to which insurer-PBMs steered patients to their own pharmacies. Results: Among 10 455 726 patients (54.8% women; mean [SD] age, 71.8 [10.7] years), 34.1% of all pharmacy and 37.1% of specialty pharmacy spending occurred through Cigna, CVS, Humana, or UnitedHealth Group pharmacies. Among specialty molecules, market shares varied by drug class (antivirals: 18.5%; antipsychotics: 29.5%; cancer: 32.5%; disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 41.1%; multiple sclerosis: 64.8%; pulmonary arterial hypertension and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: 89.7%). Across molecule-firm combinations, a 19.8 (95% CI, 18.0-21.6)-percentage point and 13.9 (95% CI, 13.1-14.7)-percentage point greater share of claims were filled at insurer-PBM-owned pharmacies than would be expected without steering for specialty and nonspecialty categories, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that insurer-PBM firms represented an important portion of the Medicare Part D market, especially for certain drug classes, and that insurer-PBM firms steered patients to their own pharmacies, despite certain pharmacy network protections in Medicare. These findings underscore the need to understand the impacts of insurer-PBM and pharmacy integration on medication access and costs for Medicare patients.
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.