A worldwide survey conducted by an international type 1 diabetes (T1D) advocacy non-profit found that rationing of insulin and related supplies was the greatest in the Unites States.
A worldwide survey conducted by an international type 1 diabetes (T1D) advocacy non-profit found that rationing of insulin and related supplies was the greatest in the Unites States.
T1International said the online survey of patients with type 1 diabetes was conducted in 90 countries, although the greatest number of patients responding came from the United States. The survey released Tuesday builds on 2016 results, and it covered out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, insulin rationing, rationing of blood glucose testing supplies, degree of financial coverage, and sources of financial support.
The survey was completed by 1425 individuals, with 631, or 44.3%, living in the United States. Of those, nearly three-fourths lived with T1D themselves, while 346 (24.3%) were parents or caregivers and 21 (1.5%) were partners or relatives of patients with T1D.
In total 253 (18%) of all respondents reported having rationed insulin at least once in the previous year. Of US respondents, 162 (25.9%) reported having rationed insulin in the previous year. Excluding US patients, in other high-income countries only 6.5% of patients reported rationing in the previous year.
Rationing of blood glucose testing supplies was more common than insulin rationing; overall, 33.5% rationed supplies in the last year, compared with 55.5% in in low- and middle-income countries and 38.6% in the United States.
A total of 976 (66.6%) respondents said there was no financial coverage whatsoever for their OOP diabetes costs.
Coverage for healthcare costs also varied widely. In the United States, there was a much lower percentage of coverage for all costs (6.5%), while high-income country respondents had a significantly higher percentage of coverage for costs (32.4%).
When asked if “some” of their healthcare costs were covered, 70.3% said “yes” overall, compared with almost 89% for the United States and almost 60% for other high-income countries.
Respondents affirming that they had no coverage totaled 13.1%, broken down by 4.3% for the United States and 7.7% for other high-income countries.
When it comes to financial support other than health insurance, such as government assistance, charitable support, or pharmaceutical patient assistance programs, 66.2% said that they do not receive any kind of support. Government assistance was more common in other high-income countries (30.8%) compared with 5.5% in the United States. Overall, almost 15% reported receiving support from family and friends.
Drug company assistance program support totaled 4% in the United States, 2.6% overall, and less than 2% in all other countries, including low-income countries.
T1International said the results are in line with previous studies. The organization also pointed out that other high-income countries have the ability to negotiate prices, as well as some form of national healthcare system, whereas the United States does not, which may account for the differences.
The price of insulin has been the topic of numerous hearing on Capitol Hill, and some companies have responded by introducing authorized generics or by capping prices.
Webinar Addresses Solutions to Improve Adalimumab Biosimilar Uptake
March 18th 2024Government policies, including those related to prescribing incentives and interchangeability, need to be reworked to encourage biosimilar adoption and create meaningful savings for health systems, according to speakers at a recent webinar.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
BioRationality: EMA Announces Readiness to Waive Comparative Efficacy Studies of Biosimilars
March 4th 2024Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, takes a look at the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) announcement that it will investigate whether comparative efficacy tests should be needed for a biosimilar to receive regulatory approval.
What AmerisourceBergen's Report Reveals About Payers, Biosimilar Pricing Trends
May 28th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Tasmina Hydery and Brian Biehn from AmerisourceBergen discussed results from a recent survey, that were also presented at Asembia 2023, diving into the payer perspective on biosimilars and current pricing trends across the US biosimilar industry.
Cardinal Health Report Showcases Biosimilar Growth, Provider and Payer Evolution, and More
February 29th 2024In its annual biosimilars report, Cardinal Health provided updates on how provider acceptance growth, evolving payer dynamics, and the growing pipeline for biosimilars will shape the biosimilar landscape over the next 5 years.
The Underlying Economics of Unbranded Biologics
February 26th 2024Unbranded biologics primarily serve to uphold inflated list prices, typically prompted by loss of exclusivity, aiming to safeguard market share and counter biosimilar competition, although forthcoming legislative changes targeting high drug costs could lessen their significance moving forward.