MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972150441 · doi:10.1080/21556660.2019.1658313

Understanding purchasing patterns and product access of newly launched specialty generics

2019· article· en· W2972150441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stacey Ness, Ron Lucas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Drug Assessment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Product (mathematics)PurchasingPharmacyLaunchedSpecialtyMarketingBusinessMedicineAdvertisingFamily medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Many specialty drugs have lost patent exclusivity and more specialty generics (SGs) are expected in the future. Payers continue to look for ways to manage health care costs in the specialty pharmacy space and SG products offer the opportunity for savings. Given increasing interest in SGs, manufacturers are expected to invest more than $100 billion in the development of SGs over the next five years. To remain competitive, pharmacies must have access to SG products and access to competitive pricing for SGs, which can be obtained by accessing pharmaceutical manufacturer agreements through MHA Specialty Pharmacy Solutions. Aims: Understand purchase patterns of newly launched SGs and see if increased access to product was facilitated by the entrance of a SG. Methods: To determine purchase patterns of newly launched SGs, the rate of change of both the brand and generic products were measured for five specialty drugs across MHA pharmacy members. When possible, the brand rate was measured by the units of brand product purchased the quarter prior to the generic launch compared to the number of units in first quarter 2019 (1Q19). The generic product rate was measured by the units of generic product in the quarter it launched compared to units in 1Q19. To detect changes in product access to SGs, the number of corporations dispensing the brand was measured in the quarter prior to the generic launch compared with the number of corporations dispensing the generic in 1Q19. Results: Brand imatinib (Gleevec1) number of units decreased 80% while generic imatinib units grew by 134%. The number of corporations dispensing generic imatinib increased 34%. Brand hydroxyprogesterone caproate (OHPC) (Makena2) number of units decreased 67% while generic OHPC units grew by 641%. The number of corporations dispensing generic OHPC increased 38%. Brand abiraterone acetate (Zytiga3) number of units decreased 63% while generic abiraterone units grew by 289%. The number of corporations dispensing generic abiraterone increased 60%. Brand tetrabenazine (Xenazine4) and brand dalfampridine ER (Ampyra5) could not be measured due to limited distribution. Generic tetrabenazine units increased 2967% and the number of corporations dispensing increased 2114%. Generic dalfampridine ER units increased 1451% and the number of corporations dispensing increased 463%. Conclusions: Pharmacies purchasing through MHA Specialty Pharmacy Solutions are able to expand their access to products and quickly adopt SGs in order to grow their businesses and serve patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Drug AssessmentSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207