Most specialty pharmacies ship a drug and a brochure. We dispense inside a clinical model. Quantify Specialty Care was purpose-built around a single belief: patients on high-risk therapies deserve continuous, clinician-led oversight — not a dispense-and-ship handoff. Every QuantifyRx fill is wrapped in that model, end-to-end.
REMS-Plus, by design
REMS-grade oversight isn't something we'd build. It's how we already operate.
When a manufacturer asks “can your pharmacy run our REMS program?” most specialty pharmacies say yes and then spin up new procedures to comply. We don't. The standard QSC operating model is already REMS-Plus. Adding a new REMS-required therapy means adding a name to a roster, not retrofitting a workflow.
Anaphylaxis-trained RNs at every dose.
Standardized epinephrine kits. Confirmed epinephrine availability. Documented patient and caregiver training. Every infusion. Not a per-visit reactive scramble.
Per-infusion physiology, logged for every dose.
Pre-, intra-, and post-infusion vitals captured by cellular pump and smart patches and reviewed live by the Command Center. Not a generic visit note filed days later.
Nurse-to-nurse coordination, weekly.
Direct RN-to-RN handoffs with the prescriber's clinic and our pharmacy. No fax black-holes. No portal-only updates. A named clinical contact, every patient, every week.
Dedicated Resource Coordinators close SDOH gaps.
Transportation, food, copay, benefits, prior auth. End-to-end resolution by a named coordinator on the QSC team — not a checkbox referred out to a vendor.
Monthly auditable reporting — adherence, AE/ER avoidance, baseline drift, REMS events.
Partner-grade evidence delivered with full patient-level traceability. Adherence, AE/ER avoidance, baseline drift, SDOH interventions, REMS-relevant safety events — in your schema, on your cadence, ready for manufacturer or payer review. The same operating discipline we use to report to self-funded employer plans every month.
Score the field
QuantifyRx vs. traditional specialty pharmacy.
Same seven dimensions a manufacturer access committee reviews when evaluating any network candidate. Here's how the categories actually compare.
Dispense-and-ship, or operating model?
Is the infusion actually supervised?
What happens between scheduled visits?
How is REMS-required anaphylaxis risk handled?
What goes back to the manufacturer?
How does the prescriber stay in the loop?
Who closes the social-determinant gaps that drive non-adherence?
7 of 7. The model is the difference.
Request a criteria-based evaluation against your network standards → See what we're asking