Industry‐sponsored meal payments are associated with prescriptions and Medicare expenditures on brand‐name colchicine in the United States

Abstract

AimTo investigate the association between industry‐sponsored meal payments and the prescribing patterns of brand‐name colchicines, namely Colcrys and Mitigare, among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States from 2014 to 2021.MethodsThis cross‐sectional study utilized data from the Open Payments Database and Medicare Part D covering the years 2014 to 2021. The study included 54 836 physicians who submitted more than 10 colchicine claims. Exposure was defined as the receipt of one or more industry‐sponsored meals from the manufacturers of Colcrys or Mitigare. The primary outcomes included the likelihood of prescribing Colcrys and Mitigare, as well as the associated number of claims and Medicare expenditures.ResultsAmong 54 836 eligible physicians, 44.9% received meal payments from the Colcrys manufacturer, and 8.0% from the Mitigare manufacturer, over the eight‐year study period. The average meal payment value was $14.9 for Colcrys and $15.1 for Mitigare. The receipt of meal payments was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of prescribing Colcrys (odds ratio: 1.24 [95% CI: 1.21–1.27], p < .001) and Mitigare (odds ratio: 3.54 [95% CI: 2.98–4.20], p < .001). Each additional meal payment corresponded with a significant increase in Medicare expenditures: $55.4 (95% CI: $48.3–$62.5, p < .001) for Colcrys and $153.7 (95% CI: $17.7–$289.6, p = .03) for Mitigare. These associations remained consistent across different specialties and genders.ConclusionThis study reveals that receipt of meal payments from manufacturers of brand‐name colchicine was significantly associated with an increased rate of prescriptions for these brand‐name drugs, leading to higher Medicare expenditures in the United States.

Pharmaceutical industry‐sponsored meals are associated with increased prescriptions and Medicare spending for dupilumab among dermatologists in the United States

“…7,[14][15][16][17] This study only considered meal payments, as previous studies showed that, of several payment categories, meal payments were strongly associated with increased drug prescriptions and healthcare costs in the United States. 6,8,13,18,19 The association between meal payments for dupilumab and the dupilumab prescriptions was evaluated using a logistic generalised estimating equation (GEE), adjusting for the covariates including gender, practice region, years in practice, the graduated medical schools, and payment/prescribed year. 7 Furthermore, the associations between the number of payments and the total number of 30-day standardised claims and Medicare expenditures were examined using negative binomial regression GEE models because the prescription variables were highly skewed, as in a previous study.…”

“…4 Prior investigations have shown that there are significant associations between industry payments to physicians and physicians' prescribing behaviours in several specialties other than dermatology. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] However, to date, no research has explored the association between industry payments to dermatologists and their clinical practices. This study aimed to evaluate the associations between industry payments to dermatologists related to dupilumab and their dupilumab prescribing patterns in the United States.…”

Non-research payments to board-certified cardiologists from pharmaceutical industry in Japan from 2016 to 2019: a retrospective analysis

“…Furthermore, physicians may engage in companies’ promotional or marketing activities, 1 2 potentially biasing their decision-making efforts including prescribing patterns and guideline recommendations. 3 4 These COIs could bias physicians’ decision-making including prescribing patterns and guideline recommendations. 35 17 …”

“… 3 4 These COIs could bias physicians’ decision-making including prescribing patterns and guideline recommendations. 35 17 …”

Letter to Japanese physicians' perceptions of conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies: Estimating two different questioning approaches

“…The healthcare industry tends to focus its marketing efforts on physicians with a larger patient base 4 and more significant influence on other physicians' clinical practices, 5,6 as well as on new expensive drugs that have lower cost-effectiveness and generally prescribed by a limited number of specialists. [7][8][9] This results in younger physicians being less targeted by pharmaceutical companies and having fewer opportunities to receive information, especially about new drugs, from MRs and pharmaceutical companies. 7,10 Therefore, the lower proportion of younger physicians considering information from pharmaceutical companies as essential could be attributed to fewer interactions with the pharmaceutical companies because of their relatively lower prescription volumes and clinical influence compared to older physicians.…”