News Focus
News Focus
icon url

cmm3rd

12/10/18 5:01 PM

#166522 RE: jessellivermore #166518

Insurance companies will try to get away with everything they can if no one challenges them..

That's part of the reason why I think contacting insurance companies/PBMs is important. To the extent they may be aware but want to ignore the evidence in pursuit of perceived greater profits (as you claim), or partly aware and too lazy to become fully educated or to act, they need to be challenged.

When they are challenged enough times, and they know a record is being built of such challenges (they have to report complaints and their handling of same), and they know that the record shows they've been provided the information multiple times, it should become more difficult to plead ignorance.

Also, to the extent they are trying to do the right thing, or they understand that in the long run they would be saving costs by reducing CVD incidence, they would be incentivized to act.
icon url

biowreck

12/10/18 6:26 PM

#166533 RE: jessellivermore #166518

JL, your comments can be quite confusing...when I asked about insurance coverage you sounded like it was a no brained...and now? Quote “biowreck

Quote: "what’s your thoughts on insurance coverage for off label scripts, hasn’t been a problem for me but as a doc, do you think it is of any significance?"

The NNT for this drug on hard MACE is 21...That means you need to treat 21 patients to get a CVD MACE benefit in one patient. ...To put this into perspective the NNT for statins is 104...Meaning....well you get the point....

This is the kind of data insurance companies look at for cost effectiveness...The final results are not in...but 21 is a very impressive number...

":>) JL