Before providing input on how to handle Medicare drug price “negotiations” (controls), BIO notes “legal flaws” in the structure and the limited room to impact the process.
What’s happening: On April 14, BIO provided nearly 70 pages of recommendations for implementing “negotiations” in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in response to a request for comments from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).
The process misses the target: Without tackling the market leverage of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), the IRA cannot achieve meaningfully lower patient out-of-pocket costs for drugs, says BIO.
The process is “legally flawed” because drug manufacturers have no negotiating power. Further, CMS’s plans for the process “have been issued as final,” precluding transparent rulemaking based on comments.
The process is one-sided. “The implementation…would materially benefit from two-sided engagement on all topics, including a full opportunity for stakeholders to submit comments on proposed policies and meaningful responses to such comments,” BIO notes.
BIO comments extensively on several key areas, including:
- defining eligible drugs;
- selecting drugs for negotiation and an opportunity for dispute;
- negotiating transparently and predictably;
- calculating and setting maximum fair price (MFP); and,
- using rebates to enforce MFP.
Read the comments from BIO and the Council of State Bioscience Associations (CSBA).
Read more on Bio.News.
BIO's Chief Policy Officer, John Murphy, writes in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette about the negative impacts of the IRA for cancer patients.
More Health News:
The New York Times: Supreme Court delays decision on abortion pill, preserving access for now
“The drug will remain widely available as the justices extended their deadline to Friday on whether to uphold the F.D.A.’s approval of the pill”—read our recap of the week in mifepristone on Bio.News.