ArticleJAMA network open2026
Out-of-Pocket Spending for Biologic Drugs After Biosimilar Competition for Medicare Patients.
Article in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Biosimilar competition has been associated with in lower prices and decreased US health care spending, but this has not consistently led to lower out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for commercially insured patients using these medications. Objective: To investigate whether biosimilar competition was associated with lower OOP spending for Medicare patients who used biologics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used an event study design. Participants were patients with Medicare Advantage coverage in a national commercial claims database (Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database) who used 1 of 7 clinician-administered biologics (filgrastim, infliximab, pegfilgrastim, epoetin alfa, bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab) from 2009 to 2022. Data were analyzed from April to November 2025. Exposure: The calendar year when the first biosimilars entered the market for each drug. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was annual OOP spending for all doses of the biologic that a patient received in each year. Two-part regression models were used to estimate mean annual OOP spending in each year, adjusted for patient age, sex, US Census region, diagnosis, and place of service. Results were stratified by whether patients paid coinsurance or deductibles vs those who only paid copayments. Results: A total of 273 774 patient-years for the 7 drugs were analyzed. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 76 (8) years, 57.6% were female, 53.4% used biologics to treat cancer, 49.7% received biologics in outpatient clinics, and 13.0% received biosimilars. Overall, 52.2% of patients paid coinsurance or deductibles, 5.2% paid only copayments, and 40.8% paid no OOP costs. Across the drugs in the cohort, mean annual OOP costs decreased by $94 (95% CI, -$105 to -$84) after competition, from $233 (95% CI, $228 to $237) in the year before biosimilar competition to $165 (95% CI, $158 to $172) 4 years after competition. Annual OOP costs decreased for all 7 drugs, and decreases were larger among patients who paid coinsurance or deductibles, compared with those who only paid copayments. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that biosimilar competition was associated with lower OOP spending for Medicare patients, likely because many patients paid a percentage of drug costs. These findings suggest that by reducing OOP spending, biosimilar competition can improve access and adherence to biologic medications 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.