Skip to main content

CMS Proposes Revisions to Drug Pricing Policies

In the CY 2022 Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule, released yesterday (https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2021-14973.pdf) CMS is proposing two changes to its long-standing policies on drug pricing. 


First, CMS is proposing to require manufacturers of drugs covered under Part B to report ASP data even if the manufacturer does not have a Medicaid rebate agreement. Noting that many manufacturers without a Medicaid rebate agreement currently report ASP data to CMS, CMS believes its proposed will cause little upset to manufacturers and would in fact preserve the status quo. 

In a 2017 report (http://medpac.gov/docs/default-source/reports/jun17_ch2.pdf), MEDPAC presented findings many repackagers do not report ASP data to CMS and that this failure to report could be skewing Medicare payment rates. In this year’s proposal, CMS presents its own findings that exempting repackagers from reporting ASP data could increase errors in ASP calculations and delay CMS’s ability to timely publish Part B drug pricing data. Therefore, CMS proposes to not exclude repackagers from this requirement – effectively requiring repackagers to report ASP data to CMS.

Section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act provides an approval pathway for new drugs whose application relies full reports of investigations of safety and effectiveness but where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference.  

In the CY 2021 Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule, CMS proposed that for these so-called 505(b)(2) drugs, they would continue to determine if the 505(b)(2) drug is assigned to a single- or multiple-source drug code based on the similarities (or differences) between the new drug’s ingredients, route of administration and frequency of administration. After reviewing stakeholder comments, CMS chose to delay finalizing its policy in order to more thoughtfully review the issue.

In this year’s proposed rule, CMS revisits its CY 2021 proposal and provides a process that it proposes to use to determine when a drug approved under 505(b)(2) would be considered a multiple source drug for Medicare Part B payment purposes. 

In short, drugs which CMS determines “match” one another in terms of active ingredient, dosage form, salt form, and other ingredients would move to a verification phase. In this phase CMS would determine, based on pharmacokinetic and clinical studies of the drug whether it could be assigned to a multiple source drug code. Finally, after verification, CMS will make its determination to assign the drug to a multiple source drug code.

CMS is soliciting feedback and comments on both of these proposal through September 13, 2021. For more information about these, and other proposals included in the proposed rule, contact me at john@policypros.net.

John Warren is the owner and principal consultant at Gettysburg Healthcare Consulting. Located in Hanover, Pennsylvania. He focuses on issues affecting the Medicare program -- including coverage, coding, and reimbursement of diagnostic tests, prescription drugs and other Medicare covered services. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Innovative Models for Lowering Drug Spending

Recently, much has been written about the escalating costs of drug prices in the US. Increasing drug prices are present challenges to those who struggle with affordability and access to their medications. The Inflation Reduction Act brought changes to the way the Medicare program reimburses for prescription drugs. Last year, President Biden challenged the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) to develop and test new payment models that can support value-based payments and promote high-quality healthcare. CMMI has recently proposed three models intended to improve affordability and access to drugs as well as measuring the feasibility of implementation.       1. The Medicare High-Value Drug List Model Under this model, Part D plans would be encouraged to offer a low, fixed co-payment across all cost-sharing phases of the Part D drug benefit for a standardized Medicare list of generic drugs that treat chronic conditions. Patients picking plans that participate in the Model wi

FDA Pilot Program for Certain In Vitro Diagnostic Tests

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced a pilot program designed to improve oncology patient care by establishing minimum performance standards for in vitro diagnostic tests (IVDTs) used with a limited number of oncology drug products. An IVDT is a device that provides critical information for the safe and effective use of a therapeutic product. The FDA typically requires a companion diagnostic to receive marketing authorization concurrently with the approval of the corresponding therapeutic product. However, in cases where no satisfactory alternative treatment exists for a serious or life-threatening condition, the FDA may approve a therapeutic product even without a companion IVDT. Currently, laboratory developed tests (LDTs) are being used in such cases, and the FDA exercises enforcement discretion regarding these tests. The pilot program aims to improve drug selection and patient care by establishing minimum performance characteristics for certain LDTs used in id

Bridging the Gap: The Long Road from FDA Approval to Medicare Coverage

A new study published in JAMA Health Forum reveals that the road to Medicare coverage for novel medical technologies is a long and winding one. Researchers found that only 44% of innovative devices and diagnostics approved by the FDA from 2016-2019 had even “nominal” Medicare coverage by 2022. This data highlights major hurdles in the system that delay patient access to beneficial emerging technologies. About the Research The study examined 281 novel products cleared through the FDA from 2016-2019 via the high-risk premarket approval, de novo, and breakthrough 510(k) pathways. These included things like groundbreaking diagnostic tests, implantable devices, and other innovative treatment technologies. The goal was to measure how long it took to establish national or regional Medicare coverage policies for these newly approved products. This is important because Medicare coverage is required before hospitals, physicians and patients can reliably access new technologies. Key Findings The