The survival of the biosimilars approval pathway seemed on surer footing today following oral arguments at the Supreme Court over the Affordable Care Act and the severability of its provisions.
The survival of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) without the individual mandate seemed a distinct possibility following oral arguments in the Supreme Court, and this bodes well for the survival of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), which is part of the ACA statute and enacts the pathway for biosimilar approvals.
“It’s hard for you to argue that Congress intended the entire Act to fall if the mandate was struck down,” Chief Justice John Roberts said. The individual mandate dictated that individuals must have health insurance or pay a penalty for not having it, although the penalty was abolished in 2019. The argument before the court is whether the ACA and its provisions can be salvaged without the mandate or if they must be struck down in their entirety.
Roberts said “there seems to be compelling evidence” that the intent of Congress was for the “rest of the law to survive if an unconstitutional provision were severed.”
The potential loss of the BPCIA was cause for concern in the biosimilars community, where the pathway has enabled 18 biosimilars to come to market so far, making lower-priced versions of costly biologics available to many patients and thereby expanding access to treatment. It is believed that a chaotic interruption to the development of the biosimilars market could erupt without the BPCIA and until Congress develops patch-up legislation as a replacement.
A decision on the case, California v Texas, is expected in the spring of 2021.
For more about the Supreme Court hearing, visit AJMC.com.
Experts Pressure Congress to Remove Roadblocks for Biosimilars
April 12th 2025Lawmakers and expert witnesses emphasized the potential of biosimilars to lower health care costs by overcoming barriers like pharmacy benefit manager practices, limited awareness, and regulatory delays to improve access and competition in chronic disease management during a recent congressional hearing.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
BioRationality: Commemorating the 15th Anniversary of the BPCIA
April 8th 2025Affirming that analytical characterization is often sufficient for biosimilar approval, minimizing unnecessary clinical testing, and enhancing FDA-led education to counter stakeholder misconceptions are key recommendations put forth in this opinion piece by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.
Biosimilars Development Roundup for October 2024—Podcast Edition
November 3rd 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the GRx+Biosims conference, which included discussions on data transparency, artificial intelligence (AI), and collaboration to enhance the global supply chain for biosimilars and generic drugs, as well as the evolving requirements for biosimilar devices.
BioRationality: How Developers Can Expand Their Monoclonal Antibody Biosimilar Portfolio
March 24th 2025Monoclonal antibodies lead biosimilar approvals because of their large market size, well-defined regulatory pathways, and technological feasibility, whereas other biologics encounter development challenges but may see increased adoption as regulatory frameworks advance.
Review Calls for Path to Global Harmonization of Biosimilar Development Regulations
March 17th 2025Global biosimilar regulatory harmonization will be needed to reduce development costs and improve patient access, despite challenges posed by differing national requirements and regulatory frameworks, according to review authors.