Skip to main content

Health and Human Services Drug Pricing Report – What Does It Mean?

 On July 9, 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order affirming his administration’s commitment to encouraging competition in the prescription drug market as well as reducing the prices of prescription drugs in the United States. The order required the Secretary of Health and Human Services to report on the challenges addressing innovation and costs within the prescription drug market and to recommend legislative and administrative actions.

The HHS report focused on three “guiding principles”: affordability, competition and innovation. By following these three principles, the report intends to illustrate a pathway to protecting patient access to prescription drugs while simultaneously improving quality of care.








Controlling drug pricing has been a focal point for many years. Many proposals have been made but few have taken root. In fact, according to AARP’s report “TRENDS IN RETAIL PRICES OF BRAND NAME PRESCRIPTION DRUGS USED BY OLDER AMERICANS, 2006 TO 2020” the cost of prescription drugs has risen faster than the rate of inflation every year since 2006.

The HHS report suggests areas where legislative changes are needed to address factors that pose roadblocks to lowering drug costs. Allowing direct price negotiation by Medicare Part B and Part D, making programmatic changes that would protect beneficiaries from high out of pocket costs and limiting the rate of price increases on drugs are three areas where Congress could directly impact drug prices.

The report also highlights the need for legislative reforms that would encourage more and faster development of competitive drugs – including biosimilars, by investing in innovative research and removing roadblocks to generic drug market entry.

The report also probes into areas where existing authorities could be used to move policies levers in turn effecting drug pricing. Using the CMS Innovation Center to test different models of payment, including value-based payments and total cost-of-care models are ways that CMS can leverage its existing infrastructure to address rising prices. Other levers could include modeling different levels of cost sharing for certain populations in order to minimize patient out-of-pocket spending.

Transparency initiatives could also be expanded to include drug price, rebates and outcomes measures providing beneficiaries and others with meaningful information about the connections between cost and quality care. HHS can also work within its existing authorities to make the generic drug approval process more predictable and transparent, thereby encouraging the development of more competitive products.

Some of these initiatives have carried over from prior plans and some carry over into current legislative products. Price negotiation, for example, was a part of the former Administration’s American Patients First blueprint and is included in the latest markup of the Build Back Better Act. The concept of reducing out-of-pocket spending carries over from prior efforts as well. 

There is still significant work to do before any of these proposals come into effect. With only a thin margin in the House and a split Senate, Democrats will need to develop policy proposals that can reach across the aisle and win support from Republicans. Even though these does not appear to be a clear-cut pathway for these proposals, manufacturers should continue to stay aware of this movement and of the significant impact it could have on the pharmaceutical industry overall.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Selecting Therapeutic Alternatives: A Critical Perspective for Drug Manufacturers

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 instructed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to initiate drug price negotiations with manufacturers for the first time. A key component of these negotiations involves considering factors like the drug's benefits and costs to establish a "lowest maximum fair price." (MFP) For drug manufacturers, CMS’s process for making comparisons of therapeutic alternative(s) to determine the MFP raises a number of crucial questions. The IRA's guidance suggests that CMS will initially compare drugs within the same class as the negotiated drug to determine a starting point for pricing. For drug manufacturers, this approach raises concerns regarding price competition within drug classes. As new drugs are often priced in line with preexisting brand-name drugs in the same class, the negotiation process may result in downward pressure on prices for all drugs in the class. This could significantly affect the revenue and profitabi...
Post a Comment
Read more

TCET Pathway Could Accelerate Access to Innovating Technologies

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed the Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies (TCET) pathway to enable quicker coverage decisions for breakthrough devices needing accelerated regulatory review. As described in JAMA Health Forum, TCET allows tailored oversight based on an innovation’s specific benefits and risks. TCET focuses on FDA Breakthrough-designated devices for serious conditions supported by limited clinical data for market authorization. By facilitating transitional coverage, TCET aims to help make cutting-edge technologies accessible to patients while additional real-world evidence is gathered to meet CMS’ “reasonable and necessary” standard.  For developers to optimize TCET’s streamlined approach they should be sure to: - Pursue FDA Breakthrough designation when criteria are met. This opens the TCET pathway.   - Engage CMS early on study designs and evidence needs. Incorporate draft guidance on endpoints and real-world data....
Post a Comment
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more