MedPAC called for changes to Medicare Part D to remove the financial disincentives that block the use of lower-cost biosimilar therapies.
The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), an independent congressional agency that advises Congress on issues affecting the Medicare program, provided a status report on Medicare Part D during a public meeting on January 11, 2018. MedPAC called for changes to Part D to remove the financial disincentives that block the use of lower-cost biosimilar therapies.
According to the report, the Medicare Part D program had nearly $80 billion in spending in 2016, with $79 billion spent on payments to Part D plans and $1 billion spent on the retiree drug subsidy. Plan enrollees paid approximately $13 billion in premiums (excluding premium subsidies for low-income enrollees), plus additional amounts in cost-sharing.
The status report notes that, while high-cost enrollees (those who have reached the catastrophic phase) were only 8% of Part D enrollees in 2015, these enrollees accounted for 57% of overall spending. “Nearly all of the growth in spending for high-cost enrollees is due to higher prices,” notes the report, and the “use of higher-priced drugs will continue to put strong upward pressure on program spending.” This trend is likely to continue long-term because of the increased focus on specialty drugs—including costly biologic therapies—in drug developers’ pipelines.
Growth in Part D enrollment, says the report, especially among non—low-income-subsidy (non-LIS) enrollees, has driven more catastrophic spending; enrollment in the Part D program has grown approximately 6% per year since 2007, reaching 42.5 million enrollees in 2017. Also driving up spending are the coverage gap discount, plan incentives to put high-price and high-rebate drugs on formularies, and higher drug prices overall.
MedPAC notes that high-cost biologics will only continue to grow in importance in the years ahead, increasing the cost burden on enrollees and on Medicare. Biosimilars, MedPAC says, are important tools that can to promote price competition.
However, some Part D policies, such as copays for LIS enrollees, are negatively affecting biosimilar uptake. MedPAC also notes that the coverage gap discount provides a financial advantage for originator biologics rather than for cheaper biosimilars, and calls for a removal of the financial disincentive for using lower-cost biosimilar options.
Breaking Down Biosimilar Barriers: Interchangeability
November 14th 2024Part 3 of this series for Global Biosimilars Week, penned by Dracey Poore, director of biosimilars at Cardinal Health, explores the critical topic of interchangeability, examining its role in shaping biosimilar adoption and the broader implications for accessibility.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
Overcoming Challenges to Improve Access and Reduce Costs
November 12th 2024Biosimilars hold the potential to dramatically lower health care costs and improve access to life-changing treatments, but realizing this potential will require urgent policy reforms, market competition, and better education for both providers and patients.
Challenges, Obstacles, and Future Directions for Anti-TNF Biosimilars in IBD
November 9th 2024A review article on tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outlined current use of anti-TNF originators and biosimilars, their efficacy and safety, the benefits and challenges of biosimilars, and the future of biosimilars in IBD.
Skyrizi Overtakes Humira: “Product Hopping” Leaves Biosimilar Market in Limbo
November 7th 2024For the first time, Skyrizi (risankizumab-rzaa) has replaced Humira (reference adalimumab) as AbbVie’s sales driver, largely due to companies encouraging “product hopping” to avoid competition, creating concerns for the sustainability of the burgeoning adalimumab biosimilar market.