The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up one piece of the 340B conundrum that’s pitting biopharma against hospitals and catching the Department of Health and Human Services in between. The case the court agreed to hear, the American Hospital Association (AHA) v. Becerra, focuses on whether HHS has the authority to cut Medicare reimbursement rates to reflect the steep discounts 340B hospitals get on certain prescription drugs.
After delaying it twice, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is proposing to rescind a Trump-era rule that would have given certain low-income patients insulin and injectable epinephrine products at the steeply discounted 340B rate.
Originally intended as a way to help provide health care to uninsured and underinsured Americans, the 340B program has mutated into a revenue stream that’s benefiting large U.S. hospital systems, contract pharmacies and even pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) while contributing to higher drug prices for patients, according to stakeholders speaking at a May 26 Air 340B summit on the federal program.
In divvying up U.S. spending on orphan vs. nonorphan indications for drugs approved for both, a new study could fuel future debates and inform policy on orphan drug incentives. The study, led by a team of University of Michigan and Boston University researchers, found that 21% of the total dollars spent in 2018 in the U.S. on the 15 top-selling partial orphan drugs went to the treatment of rare diseases, while more than 70% went to the treatment of common diseases.
A consequence of one of President Joe Biden’s first executive orders (EOs) is that some low-income patients may have to wait at least two more months to get the out-of-pocket relief they were promised for insulin and injectable epinephrine.
The latest global regulatory news, changes and updates affecting biopharma, including: HHS posts rule for agency enforcement action; Guidance to help with COVID-19 Mabs; Chinese pharma exec sentenced on U.S. drug charges.
Several hospital and pharmacy groups, including the American Hospital Association, filed suit last week in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in an effort to force the Department of Health and Human Services to stop drug companies from “undermining” the 340B prescription drug discount program.
Given the minimal accountability written into the 340B prescription drug discount program, a few biopharma companies recently began taking oversight into their own hands by demanding data claims or refusing to extend the mandated discounts to contract pharmacies.
“Nothing to see here” seems to be the general reaction to the four executive orders President Donald Trump signed Friday in an effort to reduce U.S. prescription drug prices. Two of the orders – one on importing drugs from Canada and the other on kicking the safe harbor out from under the rebates pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) get from drug companies – instruct Health and Human Services (HHS) to continue, or resume, rulemaking on those measures.
