[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]

Effect of Medication Co-payment Vouchers on P2Y12 Inhibitor Use and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Myocardial InfarctionThe ARTEMIS Randomized Clinical Trial

Educational Objective
To understand that co-payments may be barriers to medication adherence.
1 Credit CME
Key Points

Question  What is the effect of vouchers to offset the co-payment costs for P2Y12 inhibitors on medication persistence and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among patients with acute myocardial infarction?

Findings  In this cluster randomized trial conducted at 301 hospitals that enrolled 11 001 adult patients with acute myocardial infarction, provision of vouchers to offset the cost of medication co-payments for P2Y12 inhibitors significantly increased patient-reported medication persistence through 1 year (87.0% vs 83.8%), but there was no significant difference in 1-year MACE outcomes (hazard ratio, 1.07).

Meaning  Providing co-payment assistance for P2Y12 inhibitor medications after myocardial infarction increased persistence with a guideline-recommended therapy but did not improve clinical outcomes at 1 year.

Abstract

Importance  Despite guideline recommendations, many patients discontinue P2Y12 inhibitor therapy earlier than the recommended 1 year after myocardial infarction (MI), and higher-potency P2Y12 inhibitors are underutilized. Cost is frequently cited as an explanation for both of these observations.

Objective  To determine whether removing co-payment barriers increases P2Y12 inhibitor persistence and lowers risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

Design, Setting, and Participants  Cluster randomized clinical trial among 301 hospitals enrolling adult patients with acute MI (June 5, 2015, through September 30, 2016); patients were followed up for 1 year after discharge (final date of follow-up was October 23, 2017), with blinded adjudication of MACE; choice of P2Y12 inhibitor was per clinician discretion.

Interventions  Hospitals randomized to the intervention (n = 131 [6436 patients]) provided patients with co-payment vouchers for clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 1 year (median voucher value for a 30-day supply, $137 [25th-75th percentile, $20-$339]). Hospitals randomized to usual care (n = 156 [4565 patients]) did not provide study vouchers.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Independent coprimary outcomes were patient-reported persistence with P2Y12 inhibitor (defined as continued treatment without gap in use ≥30 days) and MACE (death, recurrent MI, or stroke) at 1 year among patients discharged with a prescription for clopidogrel or ticagrelor.

Results  Among 11 001 enrolled patients (median age, 62 years; 3459 [31%] women), 10 102 patients were discharged with prescriptions for clopidogrel or ticagrelor (clopidogrel prescribed to 2317 [36.0%] in the intervention group and 2497 [54.7%] in the usual care group), 4393 of 6135 patients (72%) in the intervention group used the voucher, and follow-up data at 1 year were available for 10 802 patients (98.2%). Patient-reported persistence with P2Y12 inhibitors at 1 year was higher in the intervention group than in the control group (unadjusted rates, 5340/6135 [87.0%] vs 3324/3967 [83.8%], respectively; P < .001; adjusted difference, 2.3% [95% CI, 0.4% to 4.1%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.40]). There was no significant difference in MACE at 1 year between intervention and usual care groups (unadjusted cumulative incidence, 10.2% vs 10.6%; P = .65; adjusted difference, 0.66% [95% CI, −0.73% to 2.06%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.25]).

Conclusions and Relevance  Among patients with MI, provision of vouchers to offset medication co-payments for P2Y12 inhibitors, compared with no vouchers, resulted in a 3.3% absolute increase in patient-reported persistence with P2Y12 inhibitors and no significant reduction in 1-year MACE outcomes.

Trial Registration  ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02406677

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity

JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC

Article Information

Corresponding Author: Tracy Y. Wang, MD, MHS, MSc, Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt St, Durham, NC 27705 (tracy.wang@duke.edu).

Accepted for Publication: November 20, 2018.

Author Contributions: Dr Wang and Ms Kaltenbach had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Wang, Cannon, Fonarow, Choudhry, Henry, Cohen, Bhandary, Khan, Anstrom, Peterson.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Wang, Kaltenbach, Cannon, Fonarow, Henry, Bhandary, Khan, Anstrom, Peterson.

Drafting of the manuscript: Wang, Khan.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Wang, Kaltenbach, Cannon, Bhandary, Anstrom.

Obtained funding: Wang, Bhandary, Khan, Peterson.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Wang, Cannon, Bhandary, Khan.

Supervision: Wang, Cannon, Bhandary, Khan, Peterson.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Wang reported receiving research grant support to the Duke Clinical Research Institute from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cryolife, Novartis, Pfizer, Portola, and Regeneron and receiving consulting honoraria from Grifols and Gilead. Dr Cannon reported receiving research grant support from Amgen, Arisaph, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, and Takeda and receiving consulting honoraria from Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, Arisaph, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kowa, Lipimedix, Merck, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Takeda. Dr Fonarow reported receiving consulting honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, and Novartis. Dr Choudhry reported receiving research grant support to Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Merck, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, CVS Health, and Medisafe Inc. Dr Henry reported receiving a steering committee honorarium for ARTEMIS from AstraZeneca. Dr Cohen reported receiving research grant support from AstraZeneca, Merck, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific and receiving consulting honoraria from Medtronic and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Anstrom reported receiving a consulting honorarium from AstraZeneca. Dr Peterson reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Genentech, and the American Heart Association GWTG–Stroke Analytic and has served as a consultant/advisory board member for Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi, Bayer, Merck, AstraZeneca, Signal Path, and Venable. No other disclosures were reported.

Funding/Support: This study was supported by a research grant from AstraZeneca to the Duke Clinical Research Institute.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: Funding for the study was provided by AstraZeneca. The trial protocol and data collection forms were designed and written by the academic investigators. Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI, Durham, North Carolina) served as the coordinating center and was responsible for all study data collection and analyses. AstraZeneca collaborated in the design of the study and reviewed and approved the manuscript before submission of the manuscript for publication. The final decision for manuscript submission was made by the academic investigators; the sponsor did not have a right to veto such a decision.

Disclaimer: Dr Peterson, associate editor of JAMA, was not involved in the editorial review of or decision to publish this article.

Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 4.

References
1.
Yusuf  S, Zhao  F, Mehta  SR, Chrolavicius  S, Tognoni  G, Fox  KK; Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events Trial Investigators.  Effects of clopidogrel in addition to aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation.  N Engl J Med. 2001;345(7):494-502. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa010746PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Wallentin  L, Becker  RC, Budaj  A,  et al; PLATO Investigators.  Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes.  N Engl J Med. 2009;361(11):1045-1057. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0904327PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Wiviott  SD, Braunwald  E, McCabe  CH,  et al; TRITON-TIMI 38 Investigators.  Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes.  N Engl J Med. 2007;357(20):2001-2015. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0706482PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Levine  GN, Bates  ER, Bittl  JA,  et al.  2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused update on duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.  Circulation. 2016;134(10):e123-e155.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Roffi  M, Patrono  C, Collet  JP,  et al; ESC Scientific Document Group.  2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting Without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).  Eur Heart J. 2016;37(3):267-315. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv320PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Basra  SS, Wang  TY, Simon  DN,  et al.  Ticagrelor use in acute myocardial infarction: insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.  J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(12):e008125. doi:10.1161/JAHA.117.008125PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Fosbøl  EL, Ju  C, Anstrom  KJ,  et al.  Early cessation of adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitors among acute myocardial infarction patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the TRANSLATE-ACS study (Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome).  Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(11):e003602. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003602PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Czarny  MJ, Nathan  AS, Yeh  RW, Mauri  L.  Adherence to dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting: a systematic review.  Clin Cardiol. 2014;37(8):505-513. doi:10.1002/clc.22289PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Mehran  R, Baber  U, Steg  PG,  et al.  Cessation of dual antiplatelet treatment and cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PARIS): 2 year results from a prospective observational study.  Lancet. 2013;382(9906):1714-1722. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61720-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Spertus  JA, Kettelkamp  R, Vance  C,  et al.  Prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of premature discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy after drug-eluting stent placement: results from the PREMIER registry.  Circulation. 2006;113(24):2803-2809. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.618066PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Bosworth  HB, Granger  BB, Mendys  P,  et al.  Medication adherence: a call for action.  Am Heart J. 2011;162(3):412-424. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2011.06.007PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Bottorff  MB, Nutescu  EA, Spinler  S.  Antiplatelet therapy in patients with unstable angina and non–ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the CRUSADE national quality improvement initiative.  Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(8):1145-1162. doi:10.1592/phco.27.8.1145PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Choudhry  NK, Avorn  J, Glynn  RJ,  et al; Post-Myocardial Infarction Free Rx Event and Economic Evaluation (MI-FREEE) Trial.  Full coverage for preventive medications after myocardial infarction.  N Engl J Med. 2011;365(22):2088-2097. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1107913PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Doll  JA, Wang  TY, Choudhry  NK,  et al.  Rationale and design of the Affordability and Real-world Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness after Myocardial Infarction Study (ARTEMIS): a multicenter, cluster-randomized trial of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor copayment reduction after myocardial infarction.  Am Heart J. 2016;177:33-41. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2016.04.008PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Cramer  JA, Roy  A, Burrell  A,  et al.  Medication compliance and persistence: terminology and definitions.  Value Health. 2008;11(1):44-47. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00213.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Symphony Health. Integrated Dataverse. Symphony Health website. http://symphonyhealth.com/product/idv/. Accessed October 25, 2018.
17.
Mehran  R, Rao  SV, Bhatt  DL,  et al.  Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium.  Circulation. 2011;123(23):2736-2747. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.009449PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Campbell  MK, Piaggio  G, Elbourne  DR, Altman  DG; CONSORT Group.  Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.  BMJ. 2012;345:e5661. doi:10.1136/bmj.e5661PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Austin  PC.  Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples.  Stat Med. 2009;28(25):3083-3107. doi:10.1002/sim.3697PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Ferdinand  KC, Yadav  K, Nasser  SA,  et al.  Disparities in hypertension and cardiovascular disease in blacks: the critical role of medication adherence.  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017;19(10):1015-1024. doi:10.1111/jch.13089PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Austin  PC.  Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: results of an empirical investigation and Monte Carlo simulations.  Biom J. 2009;51(1):171-184. doi:10.1002/bimj.200810488PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
StataCorp.  Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC; 2017.
23.
Kleinman  LC, Norton  EC.  What’s the risk? a simple approach for estimating adjusted risk measures from nonlinear models including logistic regression.  Health Serv Res. 2009;44(1):288-302. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00900.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Norton  EC, Miller  MM, Kleinman  LC.  Computing adjusted risk ratios and risk differences in Stata.  Stata J. 2013;13(3):492-509. https://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0306. Accessed December 3, 2018.Google ScholarCrossref
25.
Jackevicius  CA, Li  P, Tu  JV.  Prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of primary nonadherence after acute myocardial infarction.  Circulation. 2008;117(8):1028-1036. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.706820PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Mathews  R, Wang  TY, Honeycutt  E,  et al; TRANSLATE-ACS Study Investigators.  Persistence with secondary prevention medications after acute myocardial infarction: insights from the TRANSLATE-ACS study.  Am Heart J. 2015;170(1):62-69. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2015.03.019PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Mathews  R, Wang  W, Kaltenbach  LA,  et al.  Hospital variation in adherence rates to secondary prevention medications and the implications on quality.  Circulation. 2018;137(20):2128-2138. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.029160PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Doll  JA, Hellkamp  AS, Goyal  A, Sutton  NR, Peterson  ED, Wang  TY.  Treatment, outcomes, and adherence to medication regimens among dual Medicare-Medicaid-eligible adults with myocardial infarction.  JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1(7):787-794. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2016.2724PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Choudhry  NK, Patrick  AR, Antman  EM, Avorn  J, Shrank  WH.  Cost-effectiveness of providing full drug coverage to increase medication adherence in post-myocardial infarction Medicare beneficiaries.  Circulation. 2008;117(10):1261-1268. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.735605PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Chernew  ME, Shah  MR, Wegh  A,  et al.  Impact of decreasing copayments on medication adherence within a disease management environment.  Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(1):103-112. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.1.103PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Oberjé  EJ, de Kinderen  RJ, Evers  SM, van Woerkum  CM, de Bruin  M.  Cost effectiveness of medication adherence-enhancing interventions: a systematic review of trial-based economic evaluations.  Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(12):1155-1168. doi:10.1007/s40273-013-0108-8PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Aetna. Aetna launching value-based program that improves medication adherence, cost and outcomes for members who have suffered from heart attacks. Aetna website. https://news.aetna.com/news-releases/aetna-launching-value-based-program-that-improves-medication-adherence-cost-and-outcomes-for-members-who-have-suffered-from-heart-attacks. Published November 14, 2011. Accessed March 6, 2018.
33.
Faridi  KF, Peterson  ED, McCoy  LA, Thomas  L, Enriquez  J, Wang  TY.  Timing of first postdischarge follow-up and medication adherence after acute myocardial infarction.  JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1(2):147-155. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2016.0001PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Masoudi  FA, Ponirakis  A, Yeh  RW,  et al.  Cardiovascular care facts: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry: 2011.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(21):1931-1947. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.05.099PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Krousel-Wood  M, Holt  E, Joyce  C,  et al.  Differences in cardiovascular disease risk when antihypertensive medication adherence is assessed by pharmacy fill versus self-report: the Cohort Study of Medication Adherence among Older Adults (CoSMO).  J Hypertens. 2015;33(2):412-420. doi:10.1097/HJH.0000000000000382PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
Kelly  K, Grau-Sepulveda  MV, Goldstein  BA,  et al.  The agreement of patient-reported versus observed medication adherence in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).  BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2016;4(1):e000182. doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2015-000182PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
37.
Eli Lilly and Co. Program description: Lilly Cares. Lilly website. http://www.lillycares.com/aboutlillycares.aspx. Accessed September 21, 2018.
38.
Brilinta website. https://www.brilinta.com. Accessed September 21, 2018.
39.
Mathews  R, Peterson  ED, Honeycutt  E,  et al.  Early medication nonadherence after acute myocardial infarction: insights into actionable opportunities from the TReatment with ADP receptor iNhibitorS: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events after Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study.  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8(4):347-356. doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001223PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
Close
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close

Name Your Search

Save Search
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
jn-learning_Modal_SaveSearch_NoAccess_Purchase
Close

Lookup An Activity

or

Close

My Saved Searches

You currently have no searches saved.

Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close