With massive terminations, data removals, holds on U.S. government funding, cancellation of various programs and meetings, the potential for 25% tariffs on medical products and a multitude of court challenges and appeals, the dust is flying thick at the FDA, NIH and throughout the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are under the microscope again, this time for the price markups their affiliated specialty pharmacies charge for generic drugs used to treat cancer, HIV, multiple sclerosis and other serious conditions.
The fact that both the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice have oversight of mergers and acquisitions is something of a regulatory oddity. But David Balto, an attorney specializing on antitrust matters, told BioWorld that this may change in 2025 thanks to support for such a move from both Congress and the White House.
The drug and device industries have a lot hinging on the results of the Nov. 5 U.S. presidential and congressional elections. Tax policies. The reach of the FTC. Legislation aimed at drug prices, competition, pharmacy benefit managers and lab-developed tests. Cabinet and agency appointments that could reshape Medicare drug negotiations, the 340B program, FDA Orange Book device patent listings, regulatory flexibility and Bayh-Dole march-ins. And that’s just the top of the list.
A growing foray of pharmacy benefit managers’ (PBMs) private labels into the U.S. biosimilar space is intensifying concerns about the antitrust aspects of PBMs’ vertical integration that has them serving as price negotiator, formulary setter, payer, group purchasing organization, pharmacy, provider and now drug "manufacturer."
It’s well past time for the U.S. FDA to end its silence on what device patents can be listed in the Orange Book as part of a drug-device combination product, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said in an Oct. 1 letter that took FDA Commissioner Robert Califf to task for letting the FTC do the FDA’s job.
When the U.S. FTC filed suit Sept. 20 against the country’s three largest pharmacy benefit managers over their alleged use of rebates to artificially inflate U.S. insulin prices, it also put the three big insulin makers, and other drug manufacturers, on notice that they could be next.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s broad rule banning noncompete employment clauses was struck down by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. In a final judgment from Judge Ada Brown, the court set aside the noncompete rule, saying it won’t be enforced or take effect as planned on Sept. 4.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s broad rule banning noncompete employment clauses has been struck down by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. In a final judgment from Judge Ada Brown, the court set aside the noncompete rule, saying it won’t be enforced or take effect as had been planned on Sept. 4.
Privacy legislation was passed and implemented in the European Union, but the picture in the U.S. is pockmarked by state legislation, a scenario that raises concerns about a fractured and impracticable compliance regime.
RSS
