Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41051776›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Prior Authorization, Quantity Limits, and Step Therapy for Patient-Administered Antiemetics.

Kaitlyn Vu, Arjun Gupta, Fumiko Chino, Justin Barnes, Bridgette Thom, Michael Anne Kyle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kaitlyn VuHarvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Arjun GuptaDivision of Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Fumiko ChinoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Justin BarnesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Bridgette ThomSchool of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Michael Anne KyleDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Funding

Patient Administrative Burden in Cancer Care DeliveryR00CA277367 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Michael Anne Kyle · 2024 to 2026
$747k
Patient Administrative Burden in Cancer Care DeliveryK99CA277367 · NCI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI KYLE, MICHAEL ANNE · 2023 to 2024
$296k
NCI NIH HHS K99 CA277367NCI NIH HHS R00 CA277367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Antiemetics have level 1 evidence supporting their role in improving quality of life and treatment tolerability for patients with cancer; they are an essential part of quality care. Utilization management (prior authorization, step therapy, and quantity limits) is implemented by insurance companies to improve effectiveness and efficiency and to control costs. Objective: To characterize utilization management policies for antiemetics for Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace and Medicaid plans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a national sample of all available Medicaid and ACA drug formularies in 2024 linked to the US Food and Drug Administration's National Drug Codes. Formulations of the 13 most common self-administered (oral, sublingual, transdermal) antiemetics were identified. Exposure: Plans' prior authorization, quantity limit, and step therapy policies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The share of antiemetics subject to utilization management by coverage type (ACA, Medicaid, Medicaid managed care, state Medicaid), generic vs brand, and geographically by state was calculated. Results: A total of 561 formularies (301 [53.7%] ACA; 260 [46.3%] Medicaid) were included, amounting to 348 215 unique drug-plan formulations (173 607 [49.9%] ACA; 174 608 [50.1%] Medicaid). Overall, utilization management affected 66 981 covered antiemetic medications in ACA plans (39.7%) and 75 727 in Medicaid plans (43.4%). In ACA plans, a greater proportion of generic formulations faced restrictions than brand-name drugs (40.5% of generic [67 931 of 167 587] vs 17.4% of brand [1050 of 6020]). In Medicaid, this was the opposite: 82.5% of brand drugs (4357 of 5280) vs 42.2% of generic drugs (71 370 of 169 328) faced restrictions. Utilization management policies varied greatly by plan and state; some plans imposed at least 1 coverage restriction on 100% of antiemetic formulations, and others none. Quantity limits were the most prevalent utilization management tool, applying to more than one-third of covered antiemetic formulations in ACA (64 198 [37.0%]) and Medicaid plans (55 585 [38.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicaid and ACA formularies, there was substantial variation in utilization management requirements for antiemetics across insurance type and state as well as drug type, use, and class. Efforts to increase standardization of utilization management policies may alleviate administrative burden for patients.

Indexed as

AntiemeticsPrior AuthorizationCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMedicaidNeoplasmsPatient Protection and Affordable Care ActUnited StatesAntiemetics

Identifiers

PMID41051776
PMCPMC12501812

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.