The exclusion of makers of devices and drugs from a proposed overhaul of the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) probably took many in industry by surprise, but Premier Inc., of Charlotte, N.C., argued that this approach fails to capitalize on an opportunity to hold manufacturers accountable for clinical outcomes in value-based arrangements.
The much-maligned medical device tax was finally laid to rest Dec. 20, as President Donald Trump signed a spending bill that included a permanent repeal of the tax. The 2.3% excise tax on devices was brought into the statute via the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and its repeal brings much-needed breathing room to small device makers.
Wells Fargo Securities LLC recently published The MedTech Manual – 2020 Outlook, in which it says the medical device sector “will continue to be a port in the storm because the political focus will remain on drug pricing and increasing access to [health care].” Overall, the industry has performed quite well in comparison with other health care sectors during 2019. The financial firm’s senior analyst Larry Biegelsen and colleagues wrote that they expect the medical device sector to continue moving in a positive direction despite Medicare for All (MFA) rhetoric and an upcoming presidential election.
One sentence buried more than 1,500 pages into a fiscal 2020 spending bill the U.S. Senate passed Thursday could open the door to a broader range of insulin biosimilars. The provision, requested by the FDA, expands the definition of a “biological product” to include chemically synthesized polypeptides.
The Guardant360 assay accurately detected genomic alterations that permit patient matching to targeted therapies, according to a presentation of the plasmaMATCH study at the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. The study is the largest ever performed for a liquid biopsy.
Dublin-based Medtronic plc reported Wednesday that the U.S. FDA has given the green light to its Stealth Autoguide system. The company said it is the first cranial robotic platform that integrates with its enabling technology portfolio to create an end-to-end procedural solution.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed two spending packages that boosted funds for both the FDA and the NIH, but device and generic drug makers saw other benefits. The House legislation would allow makers of biosimilars and generic drugs to sue brand names for blocking access to the index article, but also repealed the medical device tax, a change that would bolster development of the novel therapies that are the industry’s lifeline. Both spending bills carry numerous provisions related to the health care economy and will go to the Senate for passage, hopefully before the government runs out of money Dec. 20.
While the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) revisits its coverage policy for transcatheter mitral valve repair devices, several physician societies have drafted recommendations for operator and institutional volume requirements that could restrict the number of centers authorized to practice devices such as Abbott Park, Ill.-based Abbott Laboratories’ Mitraclip.
Device makers have been scrambling for space in value-based care arrangements even though the pace of adoption of those arrangements has been somewhat tepid. While device makers are not explicitly included in a proposed overhaul of the Stark and Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) regulations, providers may soon be more engaged in these arrangements, thus providing device makers with more opportunities even if they are not included in the rewrite of the related regulatory provisions.
Those who believe the U.S. Supreme Court must revisit the patent subject matter eligibility problem may get their wish. While Solicitor General Noel Francisco advised the Court that it should not hear the Berkheimer case, he nonetheless said that Athena v. Mayo might avail the Supreme Court of the appropriate fodder for resolving the ongoing subject matter eligibility problem.