Advocates took to Capitol Hill last week to brief lawmakers and their staff about the implications the recent CMS policy change may have on patient access to treatments.
Last month, CMS announced that it would begin to allow Medicare Advantage plans to implement step therapy as a negotiation tool for drug prices. The announcement was met with concern as various industry stakeholders, such as the Community Oncology Alliance, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, all spoke out against the change.
Hosted by the Part B Access for Seniors and Physicians (ASP) Coalition, advocates took to Capitol Hill last week to brief lawmakers and their staff about the implications the policy may have on patient access to treatments covered under the Medicare Part B program.
Read more about how seniors may be impacted by the Medicare policy change.
Providing the physician viewpoint of step therapy during the meeting was Angus Worthing, MD, FACP, FACR, a practicing rheumatologist and chair of the ACR’s government affairs committee. “Far too many of my patients with Medicare prescription drug plans have experienced frustrating delays in getting treatment due to step therapy,” he said. “Expanding step therapy to [Medicare Advantage] plans will only add more people to the list of those who will face difficulties assessing the care prescribed by their physician as the best course of care.”
Lawmakers also heard from Katie Roberts, a patient advocate with the Arthritis Foundation. “As an individual with psoriatic arthritis, I am unfortunately all too familiar with how even seemingly brief delays in treatment can make a crucial difference in a patient’s life… Lawmakers must understand that this policy change will do real harm to individuals with chronic diseases by delaying treatment access at a time when it is most critically needed.”
During the briefing, a representative from Xcenda, a policy research and consulting firm, provided an overview of their recent report that analyzed physicians’ prescribing behavior through the Medicare Part B program. The report, titled “Medicare Physician-Administered Drugs: Do Providers Choose Treatment Based on Payment Amount?” found that “there is no meaningful correlation between drug payment and utilization, challenging the theory that physicians significantly favor drugs with high add-on payments.”
Though many industry groups have spoken out against the policy change, CMS has remained firm in its decision. The policy change will take effect in January 2019.
Escaping the Void: All Things Biosimilars With Craig & G
May 4th 2025To close out the Festival of Biologics, Craig Burton and Giuseppe Randazzo from the Association for Accessible Medicines and the Biosimilars Council tackle the current biosimilar landscape and how the industry can emerge from the "biosimilar void."
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
What Stands in the Way of Biosimilar Use Across MENA Countries?
May 21st 2025Despite the clear promise of cost savings and expanded access, the path to integrating generics and biosimilars across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is tangled in a web of distrust, inconsistent policies, and deep-rooted cultural preferences for branded drugs.