This week, the House of Representatives passed the Medicare Part B Improvement Act, a bipartisan bill that, among other provisions, seeks to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act in order to address the delivery of at-home infusion therapy.
This week, the House of Representatives passed the Medicare Part B Improvement Act, a bipartisan bill that, among other provisions, seeks to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act in order to address the delivery of at-home infusion therapy.
The bill provides for the addition of a temporary home infusion benefit to Medicare, beginning in 2019 and ending in 2021, payment for which would be based on the physician fee schedule. The bill also provides for the following:
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the act would reduce direct spending by $4 million over the 2018 to 2027 period, and would not affect revenues.
Home infusion trade organizations such as the National Home Infusion Association (NHIA) have publicly supported the act—NHIA’s chairman, Varner Richards, PharmD, provided testimony in support of the bill to the Committee on Energy and Commerce last week—and hope that the Senate will follow the House’s lead.
Many clinicians, however, may prove resistant to the idea of administering infused biologics and biosimilars in home settings. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR)’s official position statement, “Patient Safety and Site of Service for Biologics,” says that, because adverse events are not uncommon—and are potentially severe—with infused biologics, such infusions should be administered in a monitored healthcare setting. ACR’s position goes on to say that infusion should be supervised by a provider with appropriate training, nurse practitioners and physician assistants who supervise infusion centers should work with physicians, and no patient should be forced to receive infusions at home for the purpose of lowering healthcare costs.
Despite the act’s move to encourage home infusion for Medicare patients, CMS has simultaneously proposed a cut to reimbursement to home healthcare agencies (HHAs) in the Medicare program. In the agency’s 2018 Home Health Prospective Payment System Rate Update, CMS proposes a cut of 0.4% (an estimated $80 million) in payments to HHAs. Modern Healthcare reports that most of the cuts proposed were initially provided for in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in order to address overpayments for home health services, and that payments to HHAs have seen cuts of $260 million in 2016, $60 million in 2015, and $200 million in 2014. These cuts appear to have prompted more than 900 home health providers to drop from the Medicare rolls in the past 3 years.
CMS also proposes to reimburse for home healthcare in 30-day periods beginning in 2019; currently, Medicare pays for home health services for 60-day periods, which may be renewed if the patient’s physician deems further care necessary.
CMS will receive comments on its proposed changes to home health payments until September 25, 2017.
Empowering Vulnerable Populations: The Path to Equitable Biologic Therapy Access
December 22nd 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, senior vice president and system chief pharmacy officer at Providence, discusses strategies to improve equitable access to biologic therapies, including tiered formularies, income-based cost sharing, patient assistance programs, and fostering payer partnerships.
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.
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.
Perceptions of Biosimilar Switching Among Veterans With IBD
December 2nd 2024Veterans with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) prioritize shared decision-making, transparency, and individualized care in biosimilar switching, favoring delayed switching for severe cases and greater patient control.
The Rebate War: How Originator Companies Are Fighting Back Against Biosimilars
November 25th 2024Few biologics in the US have multiple biosimilar competitors, but originator biologics respond quickly to competition by increasing rebates and lowering net prices, despite short approval-to-launch timelines for biosimilars.