ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2025
Out-of-pocket costs for direct oral anticoagulants and prescription abandonment among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Patient Self-Management of Warfarin Among Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation.Pharmacotherapy · 2026Article
- The Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) in the Geriatric Population-How to Overcome the Challenges of Geriatric Syndromes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used to prevent thrombosis in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Despite their clinical benefits, some patients abandon their DOAC prescription.
objectiveTo retrospectively evaluate the association between patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and abandonment of the first DOAC prescription among patients with NVAF or VTE in the United States.
methodsData from Symphony Health, an ICON plc Company, PatientSource (April 1, 2017, to October 31, 2020) were used to select patients with NVAF or VTE with an approved or abandoned claim for a DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban). OOP costs (2021 US dollars) of the index claim were described by abandonment status, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between OOP costs of the index DOAC claim and abandonment. Analyses were performed in patients with NVAF and VTE separately.
resultsAmong 753,755 patients with NVAF, 88.5% had an approved index DOAC claim and 11.5% had an abandoned index DOAC claim. Among 308,429 patients with VTE, 91.5% had an approved index DOAC claim and 8.5% had an abandoned index DOAC claim. Mean OOP costs of the index DOAC claim were lower in those with an approved than abandoned claim (NVAF approved vs abandoned: $79 vs $175; VTE approved vs abandoned: $65 vs $133). Among patients with NVAF, 21.4% of those with an approved claim and 9.1% of those with an abandoned claim had no OOP costs, 58.7% (approved) and 49.0% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $100, and 19.9% (approved) and 41.9% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than or equal to $100; among patients with VTE, 27.8% (approved) and 15.6% (abandoned) had no OOP costs, 58.4% (approved) and 54.8% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than $0 to less than $100, and 13.8% (approved) and 29.6% (abandoned) had OOP costs greater than or equal to $100. In multivariable models, the risk of abandonment increased by 21% (NVAF) and 17% (VTE) for each $100 in OOP costs (both
conclusionsAmong patients with NVAF or VTE, OOP costs of the first DOAC claim greater than or equal to $100 were associated with the highest risk of abandoning the first DOAC prescription.
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.