Health insurance companies are rapidly adopting a new pricing system for very expensive drugs, asking patients to pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars for prescriptions for medications that may save their lives or slow the progress of serious diseases.
With the new pricing system, insurers abandoned the traditional arrangement that has patients pay a fixed amount, like $10, $20 or $30 for a prescription, no matter what the drug's actual cost. Instead, they are charging patients a percentage of the cost of certain high-priced drugs, usually 20 to 33 percent, which can amount to thousands of dollars a month.
The system means that the burden of expensive health care can now affect insured people, too.
No one knows how many patients are affected, but hundreds of drugs are priced this new way. They are used to treat diseases that may be fairly common, including multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, hemophilia, hepatitis C and some cancers. There are no cheaper equivalents for these drugs, so patients are forced to pay the price or do without.
Insurers say the new system keeps everyone's premiums down at a time when some of the most innovative and promising new treatments for conditions like cancer and rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis can cost $100,000 and more a year.
But the result is that patients may have to spend more for a drug than they pay for their mortgages, more, in some cases, than their monthly incomes.
The system, often called Tier 4, began in earnest with Medicare drug plans and spread rapidly. It is now incorporated into 86 percent of those plans. Some have even higher co-payments for certain drugs, a Tier 5.
Now Tier 4 is also showing up in insurance that people buy on their own or acquire through employers, said Dan Mendelson of Avalere Health, a research organization in Washington. It is the fastest-growing segment in private insurance, Mr. Mendelson said. Five years ago it was virtually nonexistent in private plans, he said. Now 10 percent of them have Tier 4 drug categories.
Private insurers began offering Tier 4 plans in response to employers who were looking for ways to keep costs down, said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, which represents most of the nation's health insurers. When people who need Tier 4 drugs pay more for them, other subscribers in the plan pay less for their coverage.
But the new system sticks seriously ill people with huge bills, said James Robinson, a health economist at the University of California, Berkeley. "It is very unfortunate social policy," Dr. Robinson said. "The more the sick person pays, the less the healthy person pays."
Traditionally, the idea of insurance was to spread the costs of paying for the sick.
"This is an erosion of the traditional concept of insurance," Mr. Mendelson said. "Those beneficiaries who bear the burden of illness are also bearing the burden of cost."
And often, patients say, they had no idea that they would be faced with such a situation.
It happened to Robin Steinwand, 53, who has multiple sclerosis.
In January, shortly after Ms. Steinwand renewed her insurance policy with Kaiser Permanente, she went to refill her prescription for Copaxone. She had been insured with Kaiser for 17 years through her husband, a federal employee, and had had no complaints about the coverage.
She had been taking Copaxone since multiple sclerosis was diagnosed in 2000, buying 30 days' worth of the pills at a time. And even though the drug costs $1,900 a month, Kaiser required only a $20 co-payment.
Not this time. When Ms. Steinwand went to pick up her prescription at a pharmacy near her home in Silver Spring, Md., the pharmacist handed her a bill for $325.
There must be a mistake, Ms. Steinwand said. So the pharmacist checked with her supervisor. The new price was correct. Kaiser's policy had changed. Now Kaiser was charging 25 percent of the cost of the drug up to a maximum of $325 per prescription. Her annual cost would be $3,900 and unless her insurance changed or the drug dropped in price, it would go on for the rest of her life.
"I charged it, then got into my car and burst into tears," Ms. Steinwand said.
She needed the drug, she said, because it can slow the course of her disease. And she knew she would just have to pay for it, but it would not be easy.
"It's a tough economic time for everyone," she said. "My son will start college in a year and a half. We are asking ourselves, can we afford a vacation? Can we continue to save for retirement and college?"
Although Kaiser advised patients of the new plan in its brochure that it sent out in the open enrollment period late last year, Ms. Steinwand did not notice it. And private insurers, Mr. Mendelson said, can legally change their coverage to one in which some drugs are Tier 4 with no advance notice.
Medicare drug plans have to notify patients but, Mr. Mendelson said, "that doesn't mean the person will hear about it." He added, "You don't read all your mail."
Some patients said they had no idea whether their plan changed or whether it always had a Tier 4. The new system came as a surprise when they found out that they needed an expensive drug.
That's what happened to Robert W. Banning of Arlington, Va., when his doctor prescribed Sprycel for his chronic myelogenous leukemia. The drug can block the growth of cancer cells, extending lives. It is a tablet to be taken twice a day - no need for chemotherapy infusions.
Mr. Banning, 81, a retired owner of car dealerships, thought he had good insurance through AARP. But Sprycel, which he will have to take for the rest of his life, costs more than $13,500 for a 90-day supply, and Mr. Banning soon discovered that the AARP plan required him to pay more than $4,000.
Mr. Banning and his son, Robert Banning Jr., have accepted the situation. "We're not trying to make anybody the heavy," the father said.
So far, they have not purchased the drug. But if they do, they know that the expense would go on and on, his son said. "Somehow or other, myself and my family will do whatever it takes. You don't put your parent on a scale."
But Ms. Steinwand was not so sanguine. She immediately asked Kaiser why it had changed its plan.
The answer came in a letter from the federal Office of Personnel Management, which negotiates with health insurers in the plan her husband has as a federal employee. Kaiser classifies drugs like Copaxone as specialty drugs. They, the letter said, "are high-cost drugs used to treat relatively few people suffering from complex conditions like anemia, cancer, hemophilia, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and human growth hormone deficiency."
And Kaiser, the agency added, had made a convincing argument that charging a percentage of the cost of these drugs "helped lower the rates for federal employees."
Ms. Steinwand can change plans at the end of the year, choosing one that allows her to pay $20 for the Copaxone, but she worries about whether that will help. "I am a little nervous," she said. "Will the next company follow suit next year?"
But it turns out that she won't have to worry, at least for the rest of this year.
A Kaiser spokeswoman, Sandra R. Gregg, said on Friday that Kaiser had decided to suspend the change for the program involving federal employees in the mid-Atlantic region while it reviewed the new policy. The suspension will last for the rest of the year, she said. Ms. Steinwand and others who paid the new price for their drugs will be repaid the difference between the new price and the old co-payment.
Ms. Gregg explained that Kaiser had been discussing the new pricing plan with the Office of Personnel Management over the previous few days because patients had been raising questions about it. That led to the decision to suspend the changed pricing system.
"Letters will go out next week," Ms. Gregg said.
But some with the new plans say they have no way out.
Julie Bass, who lives near Orlando, Fla., has metastatic breast cancer, lives on Social Security disability payments, and because she is disabled, is covered by insurance through a Medicare H.M.O. Ms. Bass, 52, said she had no alternatives to her H.M.O. She said she could not afford a regular Medicare plan, which has co-payments of 20 percent for such things as emergency care, outpatient surgery and scans. That left her with a choice of two Medicare H.M.O's that operate in her region. But of the two H.M.O's, her doctors accept only Wellcare.
Now, she said, one drug her doctor may prescribe to control her cancer is Tykerb. But her insurer, Wellcare, classifies it as Tier 4, and she knows she cannot afford it.
Wellcare declined to say what Tykerb might cost, but its list price according to a standard source, Red Book, is $3,480 for 150 tablets, which may last a patient 21 days. Wellcare requires patients to pay a third of the cost of its Tier 4 drugs.
"For everybody in my position with metastatic breast cancer, there are times when you are stable and can go off treatment," Ms. Bass said. "But if we are progressing, we have to be on treatment, or we will die."
"People's eyes need to be opened," she said. "They need to understand that these drugs are very costly, and there are a lot of people out there who are struggling with these costs."
© 2008 The New York Times
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
33 Comments so far
Show All"I am not going to learn anything from jabbering with people who believe everything that I do, and niether will you."
Indeed. We have learnt that libertarians are incapable of forming logical arguments (i.e. free of formal or informal fallacies).
Treefrog - You do not cure a disease; You cure a person. From Webster's: Cure - "Restoration of health". You asked for major diseases for which cures have been found in the last 100 year. I listed two; malaria is another. I did not say that everyone would accept the cure or had access to it. We seem to think that the punishment for finding a worthwhile medicine should be that the discoverer be required to make it and give it away. If we feel that these drugs should make it to the poor, then why are we not even more obligated to buy them and distribute them for free? What have we done to find these medicines? Think about it.
Mr Obvious
The subject is magic pills for the life of the person or disease vs cure. Did I miss something?
Treefrog - You are a typical American. You don't call it a cure unless you can pop a pill and go on with your bad habits. Sometimes a cure means more than popping a magic pill.
Also, colon cancer is not a chronic disease.
Mr. Obvious
If all it took was to stop one case of colon cancer to pronouce a cure that would be great, however every day new cases are diagnosed and treated and that is not a cure.
Treefrog - Fortunately my mother didn't get your message about no cure for the colon cancer that she was diagnosed with 17 years ago.
Veterans prescriptions cost $2.00 a prescription and they send you a three month supply. Of course the enrollment cost can be a little pricey.
MisoPretty
Have you contacted the drug companies directly, some of them have programs to reduce the costs of prescriptions.
This year, one of my prescriptions(which shall remain nameless) went from
$10 for a 3 month supply to
$70 for a ONE month supply
another went from $10/3 month to $100/3 month
another, 10/month to $60/month
Mr Obvious
Thank you for the post, here is the thing. Colon cancer is not cured (two of my neighbors use those little pastic bags attached to a stoma on thier mid-section). Colon cancer is treated by life-style choices (exercise helps), early detection, and surgical intervention. Treated...cured is something else.
How about most stomach ulsers? Discovered the bacteria that causes them and they can now be cured with antibiotics. Most colon cancer can now also be cured if regular colonoscopies are conducted. Lots more too. We just take it for granted.
Can anyone list any chronic diseases that have been cured in the last century? Anyone?
culicomorpha - I am not going to learn anything from jabbering with people who believe everything that I do, and niether will you.
I am all for increased government investment in medical research if that is what American's want. I just do not expect much to come out of it based on past history. I place my faith in the evil capitalist pigs, driven by money and greed, to find the cures to our illnesses. I also think we need to take some personal accountability for our biggest health crisis - over eating and lack of excersize. The amount of money being poured into research to combat illnesses associated with blubber is insane.
Very worrisome "progress" this evidently is.
And I wish the article mentioned what the situation is in the U.S. for generics; knowing U.S. Big Pharma. is very opposed to generics producers, while I'm not sure if generics have been legislated as banned in the U.S.
I also wonder if the 40% or more [ineffective] Big Pharma. meds include the kinds without which people can or will die; having been recently told by a respectable person, whose elderly father has never taken Big Pharma. meds and refuses to ever do so, instead having learned a lot about natural meds, including herbs, spices, and wild plants. Well, she told me that some expert or -like investigation concluded that around 40%, or more (?), of all meds from these corporations are like very totally ineffective.
My mind is totally incapable of understanding how anyone can choose NOT to help someone sick..
There is right and wrong.. If you think a persons illness is a justifiable reason to make profit.. that is just wrong period.
Look at the rest of the world.. you can see small little countries with a GDP less than the yearly profits of a single big Pharma company, but yet they manage to beat the US hands down in all major measures of value for dollar invested in health care.
I am embarrassed that the (used to be) good'ol USA the richest country in the world has fallen behind some 3rd world countries in it's peoples over all health care..
A good example of BIG PHARMA"S lust for profits ..
they started several nasty rumors around old folks centers throughout the states, about how online drugstores located in Canada were "watering down" the Meds, or just selling placebo's so that is why the prices were cheaper.
oldsters who had the brass to shop in Canada, for their meds ( in some cases at a 3rd the cost in the US) were threatened and harassed at the border, when they returned with their made in the US, but bought in Canada drugs.
then to top it all off they claimed Canadian testing standards were not as good/ stringent as those in the US (which any light research will show, that because of the political gutting of most oversight bodies, the exact opposite is the case).
They LIE, they cheat, they will say /do anything to continue to suck the sick and elderly dry of every last cent they can.. then when the poor sick/old people run out of cash.. they get tossed aside like used hankies.
How these "people" who profit from someones illness can sleep at night . let alone look at themselves in the mirror without shame , i just can't fathom.
A few years ago, Dennis Kucinich proposed legislation that would have the government pay 100% of all research and development costs on new drugs, which then could NOT be patented by private companies. The formulas would be released to any company that wanted to manufacture and market them as generics. This plan would create competition while preventing the super-high prices drug companies charge as long as a patent is in force.
(If a company wanted to be able to patent a new drug, it would have to pay 100% of the R&D costs itself. Few would choose that route.)
Mr. Obvious, Your reply proves my point.
Mr Obvious, private money is not generating cures either. There is no market incentive to cure people. The market incentive is to create a lifelong dependence on a drug, which they can then sell for a very high price. This is how the market works, which is exactly why the market fails in providing health care. It is the same reason why the market fails in protecting the environment. Why protect the environment now when it is future generations who will pay the price?
You know, there are plenty of libertarian message boards around, where they wax eloquently about the supreme virtues of the market. However, this is not one of them.
jbw3d - Good samaritans choose to help. They are not extorted by the government to fund charities that they do not choose. Some social programs are definitely needed, but some of these programs have worked against local and community caring. When government programs are supposed to serve this purpose, some simply feel that they have done their part when they pay their taxes.
This is my first time posting here. There's one little factual quibble I have with this article, which is otherwise useful. Copaxone, the first MS drug mentioned, is a daily subcutaneous (short needle) injection, not a pill. I know because I used it for five days before switching to Avonex. I despair that our culture is so self-centered. The good samaritan concept that we all chip in with insurance premiums to help those who are sick is not part of being an American anymore. Instead it's "I've got mine, why should I help you?" The idea that profit can be made from other peoples' illness and misery is simply immoral. The problem, of course, is that corporations are not subject to any guiding principles other than the holy grail of profit.
SICKO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
do you guys remember the highly touted MEDICARE DRUG PLAN....i sure do.....IT STINKS !!!
chessgames56 - No, public money is not generating cures. No incentive.
How much of these new co-pays will go straight into the pockets of CEOs who reap billions in stock options in addition to their millions in salary and perks? Why won't our government negotiate with Pharma for fair pricing? McBush thinks we can solve these problems with health savings accounts andtort reform. Brilliant!
Social Policy? Corporate profits first and then lip service is given to social policy. The AARP, for example, militantly passes the expense onto elderly Americans. Seniors should avoid any association with the AARP, just a corrupt ad agency for big-pharma and private insurance.
A sensible public policy on commercial drugs diverts profits to discover the causes of the disease which have typically high variability due to genetics and environment, to lower the cost of diagnostics, and to promote prevention. When the citizen fails to demand such policies, either directly through individual exchange/association selectivity, or indirectly through government regulation, the citizen is failing his/her duty in the market and civic spheres. The people lose, by sacrificing health/well-being and sacrificing self-determination, political/economic power.
And isn't taxpayer money being used to fund much of the research for new drugs?
The continuous fleecing of the little guy. Although it's more like a mugging, isn't it? "Pay me or die," is what Big Pharma is saying.
We seriously need single payer government sponsored health care that focuses on preventative medicine. As long as our health care is in a "for profit" mode, it will never be affordable. The insurance companies, the drug companies, the AMA, and all of their lobbyists are living high on the hog while the rest of us either have no medical coverage, extremely high monthly premiums, or deductibles and co-pays so astronomically high we cannot pay them. Remember John Edwards' health plan where he advocated going after the drug companies, the AMA, and all of their lobbyists?
The co-efficent of Greed in the Drug Industry is truly outrageous!!
The Insurance companies are sure holding America Hostage. I hope I never get any serious health problems, or I might have to fly to Cuba Illegally and get treated at an Affordable price.
The system is FUBAR but there are programs that will help. Robin Steinwand, 53, who has multiple sclerosis, should try switching her medication to Avonex, a weekly IM injection for Multiple Sclerosis. She could then possibly get into the Avonex Alliance Program which supplies the drug at astronomically low prices. Certain qualifications must be met but it is better to try then to just pay the new amount until you lose your home or other dire circumstances occur. The Avonex Alliance Program can be reached at MS Active - http://www.msactivesource.com/msavProject/msas.portal
I only wish I could help the cancer victim and that someone someday will fix the health care system in this country that is geared for bottom line profit and not medical care.
Best of luck to Ms. Steinwand and all those who are still suffering…