PORTAL: Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law
  • About Us
    • What is PORTAL?
    • Core Faculty
    • Research Team
    • Affiliated Faculty & Researchers
    • Expert Roundtable
  • Our Work
    • Publications
    • Policy Action
    • Literature Scan
    • In the Press
    • Media Center
    • Teaching
    • CeBIL
    • Biomarkers >
      • About The Project
      • The PBRC Team
      • Our Collaborators
      • AERO Graph
      • Workshops
      • Biomarkers2018
    • FDA REMS
  • Blog
  • Events
    • #policyethx 2020-2021
    • Events Archive >
      • #policyethx 2019-2020
      • #policyethx 2018-2019
      • #policyethx 2017-2018
      • #policyethx 2016-2017
      • Biosimilar Insulin
      • Older Events
  • Join Us
    • PORTAL Fellowships
    • Program Coordinator
  • Contact
    • Inquiries
    • E-mail List
  • About Us
    • What is PORTAL?
    • Core Faculty
    • Research Team
    • Affiliated Faculty & Researchers
    • Expert Roundtable
  • Our Work
    • Publications
    • Policy Action
    • Literature Scan
    • In the Press
    • Media Center
    • Teaching
    • CeBIL
    • Biomarkers >
      • About The Project
      • The PBRC Team
      • Our Collaborators
      • AERO Graph
      • Workshops
      • Biomarkers2018
    • FDA REMS
  • Blog
  • Events
    • #policyethx 2020-2021
    • Events Archive >
      • #policyethx 2019-2020
      • #policyethx 2018-2019
      • #policyethx 2017-2018
      • #policyethx 2016-2017
      • Biosimilar Insulin
      • Older Events
  • Join Us
    • PORTAL Fellowships
    • Program Coordinator
  • Contact
    • Inquiries
    • E-mail List
Picture

New Rule Might Increase Out-of-Pocket Drug Costs for Patients

3/26/2021

0 Comments

 
By Bryan Walsh and Aaron S. Kesselheim

This blog was originally published on Bill of Health, the blog of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School.

Patients may face increased out-of-pocket drug costs as a result of a new rule finalized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in July 2020 that would permit wide use of co-pay accumulator adjustment programs (CAAPs).

These increased costs may have effects on medication adherence, and in turn may affect health outcomes. In a recent commentary published in the American Journal of Managed Care, we explain the background to this rule and suggest ways CMS could narrow it to avoid these potential negative effects.

Drug manufacturers often have temporary assistance programs that cover all or a portion of a patients’ out-of-pocket costs when filling a prescription for a brand-name drug. While this reduces financial barriers to filling prescriptions, it creates economic waste when lower cost generic versions exist, yet are overlooked because the assistance programs make it cheaper for the patient to fill the brand-name drug.

Commercial insurers use CAAPs to respond to this concern. CAAPs incentivize use of lower cost generics over brand-name drugs by ignoring payments made by drug manufacturer assistance programs when determining whether a plan beneficiary’s out-of-pocket costs have reached the annual limit imposed by the Affordable Care Act.

But the success of CAAPs requires three things:

(1) Lower-cost alternatives must exist, such as in the form of generic versions of the brand-name drug, or generic versions of drugs in the same class that have similar clinical benefits;

(2) beneficiaries must know that these restrictions on manufacturer assistance exist, and therefore be able to choose the lower-cost alternative; and
​
(3) beneficiaries would have met their yearly out-of-pocket limits, and thus would have been excused from coinsurance and co-payments for a portion of the year, only if these restrictions did not exist.

In July 2020, CMS finalized a rule that ignores the first two requirements. The finalized rule permits CAAPs even in situations where no lower cost generic exists, and it fails to mandate disclosures to beneficiaries informing them of the existence of such programs. This allows insurers to ignore all payments made by drug manufacturer assistance programs while potentially surprising beneficiaries with unexpected out-of-pocket costs. This is particularly detrimental to beneficiaries with high yearly out-of-pocket expenditures for prescription drugs who expect to meet their yearly maximum and be excused from such expenses for a portion of the calendar year.

The new administration should therefore seek to narrow this rule to permit CAAPs only in situations where a lower cost generic alternative exists and is medically available, and mandate disclosures informing beneficiaries of the existence of CAAPs in their plan to assist in making informed decisions concerning the acceptance of drug manufacturer assistance.
Picture
Bryan Walsh, JD, is a ​
postdoctoral fellow at PORTAL.



Picture
Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, JD, MPH is Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Director of PORTAL.

0 Comments

Why France Spends Less than the United States on Drug: A Comparative Study of Drug Pricing and Pricing Regulation

3/23/2021

0 Comments

 
By Veronique Raimond

Pharmaceutical spending per capita in the U.S. is higher than in all other industrialized countries. Policymakers seeking lower drug spending often suggest benchmarking prices against other countries, including France, which spends half as much as the US on prescription drugs. In a new study, PORTAL researchers found that Medicare could save billions of dollars annually on prescription drug spending if the US adopted the French approach to evaluating and negotiating drug prices and limiting unfettered annual drug price increases.

We compared the price dynamics in France and the US between 2010 and 2018 for the six brand-name drugs with the highest gross expenditures in Medicare Part D. We analyzed associations between price changes in each country and key regulatory events in the light of a comprehensive review of US and French laws and regulations related to drug pricing. Prices for the six drugs studied were higher in the US than in France. In 2018, if Medicare had paid French prices for just the 6 the brand-name drugs in the cohort, the agency would have saved $5.1 billion. We identified 12 factors that explain why the US spends more than France on drugs, including variations in unit prices and the volume of prescriptions, driven by health technology assessment and value-based pricing in France.

American citizens are rightly concerned about the high cost of medications, and this study shows that regulations can help to reduce the cost of drugs and to align it with their value.
​

We point out that linking a drug’s price to clinical benefits at the launch of the drug and over its lifetime, as observed in France, is key to controlling spending. The regulation of prescription drugs in France is governed by rules that can inform discussions of US prescription drug policy and potential Medicare price negotiations.

Picture

Veronique Raimond, Ph.D., M.P.H., M.Sc. is Senior Product Manager at the French National Authority for Health Department of Health Economics and Public Health Evaluation. She was  a 2019-2020 Commonwealth Fund Harkness Fellow in Health Care Policy and Practice.​

0 Comments

    Author

    PORTAL Blog posts are authored by PORTAL faculty, trainees, and collaborators.

    PORTAL is a research core within the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

    Archives

    January 2022
    December 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    May 2021
    March 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Picture
Program On Regulation, Therapeutics And Law (PORTAL)
Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics
1620 Tremont Street, Suite 3030
Boston, MA 02120
CONTACT