A New $16,000 Postpartum Depression Drug Is Here. How Will Insurers Handle It?

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

A much-awaited treatment for postpartum depression, zuranolone, hit the market in December, promising an accessible and fast-acting medication for a debilitating illness. But most private health insurers have yet to publish criteria for when they will cover it, according to a new analysis of insurance policies.

The lack of guidance could limit use of the drug, which is both novel — it targets hormone function to relieve symptoms instead of the brain’s serotonin system, as typical antidepressants do — and expensive, at $15,900 for the 14-day pill regimen.

Lawyers, advocates, and regulators are watching closely to see how insurance companies will shape policies for zuranolone because of how some handled its predecessor, an intravenous form of the same drug called brexanolone, which came on the market in 2019. Many insurers required patients to try other, cheaper medications first — known as the fail-first approach — before they could be approved for brexanolone, which was shown in early trials reviewed by the FDA to provide relief within days. Typical antidepressants take four to six weeks to take effect.

“We’ll have to see if insurers cover this drug and what fail-first requirements they put in” for zuranolone, said Meiram Bendat, a licensed psychotherapist and an attorney who represents patients.

Most health plans have yet to issue any guidelines for zuranolone, and maternal health advocates worry that the few that have are taking a restrictive approach. Some policies require that patients first try and fail a standard antidepressant before the insurer will pay for zuranolone.

In other cases, guidelines require psychiatrists to prescribe it, rather than obstetricians, potentially delaying treatment since OB-GYN practitioners are usually the first medical providers to see signs of postpartum depression.

Advocates are most worried about the lack of coverage guidance.

“If you don’t have a published policy, there is going to be more variation in decision-making that isn’t fair and is less efficient. Transparency is really important,” said Joy Burkhard, executive director of the nonprofit Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health, which commissioned the study.

With brexanolone, which was priced at $34,000 for the three-day infusion, California’s largest insurer, Kaiser Permanente, had such rigorous criteria for prescribing it that experts said the policy amounted to a blanket denial for all patients, according to an NPR investigation in 2021.

KP’s written guidelines required patients to try and fail four medications and electroconvulsive therapy before they would be eligible for brexanolone. Because the drug was approved only for up to six months postpartum, and trials of typical antidepressants take four to six weeks each, the clock would run out before a patient had time to try brexanolone.

An analysis by NPR of a dozen other health plans at the time showed Kaiser Permanente’s policy on brexanolone to be an outlier. Some did require that patients fail one or two other drugs first, but KP was the only one that recommended four.

Miriam McDonald, who developed severe postpartum depression and suicidal ideation after giving birth in late 2019, battled Kaiser Permanente for more than a year to find effective treatment. Her doctors put her on a merry-go-round of medications that didn’t work and often carried unbearable side effects, she said. Her doctors refused to prescribe brexanolone, the only FDA-approved medication specifically for postpartum depression at the time.

“No woman should suffer like I did after having a child,” McDonald said. “The policy was completely unfair. I was in purgatory.”

One month after NPR published its investigation, KP overhauled its criteria to recommend that women try just one medication before becoming eligible for brexanolone.

Then, in March 2023, after the federal Department of Labor launched an investigation into the insurer — citing NPR’s reporting — the insurer revised its brexanolone guidelines again, removing all fail-first recommendations, according to internal documents recently obtained by NPR. Patients need only decline a trial of another medication.

“Since brexanolone was first approved for use, more experience and research have added to information about its efficacy and safety,” the insurer said in a statement. “Kaiser Permanente is committed to ensuring brexanolone is available when physicians and patients determine it is an appropriate treatment.”

“Kaiser basically went from having the most restrictive policy to the most robust,” said Burkhard of the Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health. “It’s now a gold standard for the rest of the industry.”

McDonald is hopeful that her willingness to speak out and the subsequent regulatory actions and policy changes for brexanolone will lead Kaiser Permanente and other health plans to set patient-friendly policies for zuranolone.

“This will prevent other women from having to go through a year of depression to find something that works,” she said.

Clinicians were excited when the FDA approved zuranolone last August, believing the pill form, taken once a day at home over two weeks, will be more accessible to women compared with the three-day hospital stay for the IV infusion. Many perinatal psychiatrists told NPR it is imperative to treat postpartum depression as quickly as possible to avoid negative effects, including cognitive and social problems in the baby, anxiety or depression in the father or partner, or the death of the mother to suicide, which accounts for up to 20% of maternal deaths.

So far, only one of the country’s six largest private insurers, Centene, has set a policy for zuranolone. It is unclear what criteria KP will set for the new pill. California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, has not yet established coverage criteria.

Insurers’ policies for zuranolone will be written at a time when the regulatory environment around mental health treatment is shifting. The U.S. Department of Labor is cracking down on violations of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, which requires insurers to cover psychiatric treatments the same as physical treatments.

Insurers must now comply with stricter reporting and auditing requirements intended to increase patient access to mental health care, which advocates hope will compel health plans to be more careful about the policies they write in the first place.

In California, insurers must also comply with an even broader state mental health parity law from 2021, which requires them to use clinically based, expert-recognized criteria and guidelines in making medical decisions. The law was designed to limit arbitrary or cost-driven denials for mental health treatments and has been hailed as a model for the rest of the country. Much-anticipated regulations for the law are expected to be released this spring and could offer further guidance for insurers in California setting policies for zuranolone.

In the meantime, Burkhard said, patients suffering from postpartum depression should not hold back from asking their doctors about zuranolone. Insurers can still grant access to the drug on a case-by-case basis before they formalize their coverage criteria.

“Providers shouldn’t be deterred from prescribing zuranolone,” Burkhard said. 

This article is from a partnership that includes KQEDNPR and KFF Health News.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • How community health screenings get more people of color vaccinated
  • In Defense of Food – by Michael Pollan
    Eat real food, mostly plants, and not too much. In Defense of Food offers a simple, attainable approach to healthy eating.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Fat’s Real Barriers To Health

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Fat Justice In Healthcare

    This is Aubrey Gordon, an author, podcaster, and fat justice activist. What does that mean?

    When it comes to healthcare, we previously covered some ideas very similar to her work, such as how…

    There’s a lot of discrimination in healthcare settings

    In this case, it often happens that a thin person goes in with a medical problem and gets treated for that, while a fat person can go in with the same medical problem and be told “you should try losing some weight”.

    Top tip if this happens to you… Ask: “what would you advise/prescribe to a thin person with my same symptoms?”

    Other things may be more systemic, for example:

    When a thin person goes to get their blood pressure taken, and that goes smoothly, while a fat person goes to get their blood pressure taken, and there’s not a blood pressure cuff to fit them, is the problem the size of the person or the size of the cuff? It all depends on perspective, in a world built around thin people.

    That’s a trivial-seeming example, but the same principle has far-reaching (and harmful) implications in healthcare in general, e.g:

    • Surgeons being untrained (and/or unwilling) to operate on fat people
    • Getting a one-size-fits-all dose that was calculated using average weight, and now doesn’t work
    • MRI machines are famously claustrophobia-inducing for thin people; now try not fitting in it in the first place

    …and so forth. So oftentimes, obesity will be correlated with a poor healthcare outcome, where the problem is not actually the obesity itself, but rather the system having been set up with thin people in mind.

    It would be like saying “Having O- blood type results in higher risks when receiving blood transfusions”, while omitting to add “…because we didn’t stock O- blood”.

    Read more on this topic: Shedding Some Obesity Myths

    Does she have practical advice about this?

    If she could have you understand one thing, it would be:

    You deserve better.

    Or if you are not fat: your fat friends deserve better.

    How this becomes useful is: do not accept being treated as the problem!

    Demand better!

    If you meekly accept that you “just need to lose weight” and that thus you are the problem, you take away any responsibility from your healthcare provider(s) to actually do their jobs and provide healthcare.

    See also Gordon’s book, which we’ve not reviewed yet but probably will one of these days:

    “You Just Need to Lose Weight”: And 19 Other Myths About Fat People – by Aubrey Gordon

    Are you saying fat people don’t need to lose weight?

    That’s a little like asking “would you say office workers don’t need to exercise more?”; there are implicit assumptions built into the question that are going unaddressed.

    Rather: some people might benefit healthwise from losing weight, some might not.

    In fact, over the age of 65, being what is nominally considered “overweight” reduces all-cause mortality risk.

    For details of that and more, see: When BMI Doesn’t Measure Up

    But what if I do want/need to lose weight?

    Gordon’s not interested in helping with that, but we at 10almonds are, so…

    Check out: Lose Weight, But Healthily

    Where can I find more from Aubrey Gordon?

    You might enjoy her blog:

    Aubrey Gordon | Your Fat Friend

    Or her other book, which we reviewed previously:

    What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Fat – by Aubrey Gordon

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • How to Eat 30 Plants a Week – by Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    If you’re used to eating the same two fruits and three vegetables in rotation, the “gold standard” evidence-based advice to “eat 30 different plants per week” can seem a little daunting.

    Where this book excels is in reminding the reader to use a lot of diverse plants that are readily available in any well-stocked supermarket, but often get forgotten just because “we don’t buy that”, so it becomes invisible on the shelf.

    It’s not just a recipe book (though yes, there are plenty of recipes here); it’s also advice about stocking up and maintaining that stock, advice on reframing certain choices to inject a little diversity into every meal without it become onerous, meal-planning rotation advice, and a lot of recipes that are easy but plant-rich, for example “this soup that has these six plants in it”, etc.

    He also gives, for those eager to get started, “10 x 3 recipes per week to guarantee your 30”, in other words, 10 sets of 3 recipes, wherein each set of 3 recipes uses >30 different plants between them, such that if we have each of these set-of-three meals over the course of the week, then what we do in the other 4–18 meals (depending on how many meals per day you like to have) is all just a bonus.

    The latter is what makes this book an incredibly stress-free approach to more plant-diverse eating for life.

    Bottom line: if you want to be able to answer “do you get your five-a-day?” with “you mean breakfast?” because you’ve already hit five by breakfast each day, then this is the book for you.

    Click here to check out How To Eat 30 Plants A Week, and indeed eat 30+ different plants per week!

    Share This Post

  • Eat To Beat Cancer

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Controlling What We Can, To Avoid Cancer

    Every time a cell in our body is replaced, there’s a chance it will be cancerous. Exactly what that chance is depends on very many factors. Some of them we can’t control; others, we can.

    Diet is a critical, modifiable factor

    We can’t choose, for example, our genes. We can, for the most part, choose our diet. Why “for the most part”?

    • Some people live in a food desert (the Arctic Circle is a good example where food choices are limited by supply)
    • Some people have dietary restrictions (whether by health condition e.g. allergy, intolerance, etc or by personal-but-unwavering choice, e.g. vegetarian, vegan, kosher, halal, etc)

    But for most of us, most of the time, we have a good control over our diet, and so that’s an area we can and should focus on.

    Choose your animal protein wisely

    If you are vegan, you can skip this section. If you are not, then the short version is:

    • Fish: almost certainly fine
    • Poultry: the jury is out; data is leaning towards fine, though
    • Red meat: significantly increased cancer risk
    • Processed meat: significantly increased cancer risk

    For more details (and a run-down on the science behind the above super-summarized version):

    Skip The Ultra-Processed Foods

    Ok, so this one’s probably not a shocker in its simplest form:

    ❝Studies are showing us is that not only do the ultraprocessed foods increase the risk of cancer, but that after a cancer diagnosis such foods increase the risk of dying❞

    Source: Is there a connection between ultraprocessed food and cancer?

    There’s an unfortunate implication here! If you took the previous advice to heart and cut out [at least some] meat, and/but then replaced that with ultra-processed synthetic meat, then this was not a great improvement in cancer risk terms.

    Ultra-processed meat is worse than unprocessed, regardless of whether it was from an animal or was synthetic.

    In other words: if you buy textured soy pieces (a common synthetic meat), it pays to look at the ingredients, because there’s a difference between:

    • INGREDIENTS: SOY
    • INGREDIENTS: Rehydrated Textured SOY Protein (52%), Water, Rapeseed Oil, SOY Protein Concentrate, Seasoning (SULPHITES) (Dextrose, Flavourings, Salt, Onion Powder, Food Starch Modified, Yeast Extract, Colour: Red Iron Oxide), SOY Leghemoglobin, Fortified WHEAT Flour (WHEAT Flour, Calcium Carbonate, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin), Bamboo Fibre, Methylcellulose, Tomato Purée, Salt, Raising Agent: Ammonium Carbonates

    Now, most of those original base ingredients are/were harmless per se (as are/were the grapes in wine—before processing into alcohol), but it has clearly been processed to Hell and back to do all that.

    Choose the one that just says “soy”. Or eat soybeans. Or other beans. Or lentils. Really there are a lot of options.

    About soy, by the way…

    There is (mostly in the US, mostly funded by the animal agriculture industry) a lot of fearmongering about soy. Which is ironic, given the amount of soy that is fed to livestock to be fed to humans, but it does bear addressing:

    ❝Soy foods are safe for all cancer patients and are an excellent source of plant protein. Studies show soy may improve survival after breast cancer❞

    Source: Food risks and cancer: What to avoid

    (obviously, if you have a soy allergy then you should not consume soy—for most people, the above advice stands, though)

    Advanced Glycation End-Products

    These (which are Very Bad™ for very many things, including cancer) occur specifically as a result of processing animal proteins and fats.

    Note: not even necessarily ultra-processing, just processing can do it. But ultra-processing is worse. What’s the difference, you wonder?

    The difference between “ultra-processed” and just “processed”:
    • Your average hotdog has been ultra-processed. It’s not only usually been changed with many artificial additives, it’s also been through a series of processes (physical and chemical) and ends up bearing little relation to the creature it came from.
    • Your bacon (that you bought fresh from your local butcher, not a supermarket brand of unknown provenance, and definitely not the kind that might come on the top of frozen supermarket pizza) has been processed. It’s undergone a couple of simple processes on its journey “from farm to table”. Remember also that when you cook it, that too is one more process (and one that results in a lot of AGEs).

    Read more: What’s so bad about AGEs?

    Note if you really don’t want to cut out certain foods, changing the way you cook them (i.e., the last process your food undergoes before you eat it) can also reduce AGES:

    Advanced Glycation End Products in Foods and a Practical Guide to Their Reduction in the Diet

    Get More Fiber

    ❝The American Institute for Cancer Research shows that for every 10-gram increase in fiber in the diet, you improve survival after cancer diagnosis by 13%❞

    Source: Plant-based diet is encouraged for patients with cancer

    Yes, that’s post-diagnosis, but as a general rule of thumb, what is good/bad for cancer when you have it is good/bad for cancer beforehand, too.

    If you’re thinking that increasing your fiber intake means having to add bran to everything, happily there are better ways:

    Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • How community health screenings get more people of color vaccinated
  • The Art Of Letting Go – by Nick Trenton

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    You may be wondering: is this a basic CBT book? And, for the most part, no, it’s not.

    It does touch on some of the time-tested CBT techniques, but a large part of the book is about reframing things in a different way, that’s a little more DBT-ish, and even straying into BA. But enough of the initialisms, let’s give an example:

    It can be scary to let go of the past, or of present or future possibilities (bad ones as well as good!). However, it’s hard to consciously do something negative (same principle as “don’t think of a pink elephant”), so instead, look at it as taking hold of the present/future—and thus finding comfort and security in a new reality rather than an old memory or a never-actual imagining.

    So, this book has a lot of ideas like that, and if even one of them helps, then it was worth reading.

    The writing style is comprehensive, and goes for the “tell them what you’re gonna tell them; tell them; then tell them what you told them” approach, which a) is considered good for learning b) can feel a little like padding nonetheless.

    Bottom line: this reviewer didn’t personally love the style, but the content made up for it.

    Click here to check out The Art Of Letting Go, and let go!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Zucchini & Oatmeal Koftas

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    These vegetarian (and with one tweak, vegan) koftas are delicious as a snack, light lunch, or side to a larger meal. Healthwise, they contain the healthiest kind of fiber, as well as omega-3 fatty acids, and beneficial herbs and spices.

    You will need

    • ¼ cup oatmeal
    • 1 large zucchini, grated
    • 1 small carrot, grated
    • ¼ cup cheese (your preference; vegan is also fine)
    • 2 tbsp ground flaxseed
    • 2 tbsp nutritional yeast
    • ¼ bulb garlic, minced
    • 2 tsp black pepper, coarse ground
    • ½ tsp MSG or 1 tsp low-sodium salt
    • Small handful fresh parsley, chopped
    • Extra virgin olive oil, for frying

    Method

    (we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

    1) Soak the flaxseed in 2 oz hot water for at least 5 minutes

    2) Combine all of the ingredients except the olive oil (and including the water that the flax has been soaking in) in a big bowl, mixing thoroughly

    3) Shape into small balls, patties, or sausage shapes, and fry until the color is golden and the structural integrity is good. If doing patties, you’ll need to gently flip them to cook both sides; otherwise, rolling them to get all sides is fine.

    4) Serve! Traditional is with some kind of yogurt dip, but we’re not the boss of you, so enjoy them how you like:

    Enjoy!

    Want to learn more?

    For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Margarine vs Butter – Which is Healthier

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing margarine to butter, we picked the butter.

    Why?

    Once upon a time, when margarines were filled with now-banned trans fats, this would have been an easy win for butter.

    Nowadays, the macronutrient/lipid profiles are generally more similar (although margarine often has a little less saturated fat), except one thing that butter has in its favor:

    More micronutrients. What exactly they are (and how much) depends on the diet and general health of the cows from whom the milk to make the butter came, but they’re not something found in plant-based butter alternatives at this time.

    Nevertheless, because of the saturated fat content, it’s not advisable to use more than a very small amount of either (two tablespoons of butter would put one at the daily limit already, without eating any other saturated fat that day).

    Read more: Butter vs Margarine

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: