Yesterday, 9 physician groups sent a joint letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar in which they voiced concerns about the President’s 2019 Budget and the Council of Economic Advisers’ drug plan.
Yesterday, 9 physician groups sent a joint letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar in which they voiced concerns about the President’s 2019 Budget and the Council of Economic Advisers’ drug plan.
The groups say that the proposal to increase Medicare Part D formulary flexibility to limit or reduce coverage for patients could create problems for patients taking high cost drugs like biologics and biosimilars. This proposal would change the Part D plan formulary standards to require a minimum of 1 drug per category or class rather than the current 2. “We believe Part D benefits should not limit patients’ access to the medical therapy judged by the treating physician to be the most efficacious choice,” say the groups.
In addition, consolidating Part D drug coverage under the Medicare Part D program could also lead to access problems and force patients to use higher-cost sites of care. Given the different formulary structure and cost sharing between Part B and Part D, the groups worry that out-of-pocket costs for patients would increase, particularly for patients taking biologics prescribed by rheumatology, oncology, and neurology providers.
The groups also oppose a restructuring of Medicare Part B physician reimbursement for in-office treatment that would pay physicians 3% above the average sales price (ASP) of a drug rather than the current ASP plus 6%, and the letter urges HHS to repeal the sequester cuts to Part B drug reimbursements: “Many small and rural practices lack the ability to negotiate bulk discounts in their drug purchases and have already been forced to stop administering biologic therapies to Medicare patients,” the letter states.
Finally, the groups call for further clarification on introducing physician reimbursement that is not tied to drug prices, as physicians have no control over the cost of drugs or ancillary services, nor do they control the severity of the illnesses that these drugs treat. “Our physicians should not be penalized for rampant inflation in these sectors,” they said.
The physician groups made it clear that they support proposals that would:
The letter was signed by the American Academy of Dermatology Association, American Academy of Neurology, American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American College of Gastroenterology, American College of Rheumatology, American Gastroenterological Association, American Urological Association, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
Senators Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Protect Skinny Labeling
January 2nd 2025To close out the year, 4 senators came together to introduce a new bipartisan bill to protect biosimilar and generic drug manufacturers from patent litigation when obtaining “skinny label” approvals for their products.
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.
How Vertical Integration Drives Innovation and Access in Biosimilars
December 27th 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, highlights how vertical integration in the biosimilar industry streamlines costs, improves supply reliability, accelerates market adoption, and enhances patient access, while emphasizing the value of collaboration, quality control, and value-based contracts for sustainable health care delivery.
13 Strategies to Avoid the Nocebo Effect During Biosimilar Switching
December 18th 2024A systematic review identified 13 strategies, including patient and provider education, empathetic communication, and shared decision-making, to mitigate the nocebo effect in biosimilar switching, emphasizing the need for a multifaceted approach to improve patient perceptions and therapeutic outcomes.
BioRationality: Withdrawal of Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule Spells Major Setback for Biosimilars
December 10th 2024The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)’s withdrawal of its proposed terminal disclaimer rule is seen as a setback for biosimilar developers, as it preserves patent prosecution practices that favor originator companies and increases costs for biosimilar competition, according to Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.