Last week, CMS closed its comment period on the 2018 Revisions to Payment Policies under the Physician Fee Schedule. Multiple stakeholder groups within the biosimilars industry submitted comments to CMS with respect to its policy on biosimilar reimbursement.
Last week, CMS closed its comment period on the 2018 Revisions to Payment Policies under the Physician Fee Schedule. Multiple stakeholder groups within the biosimilars industry submitted comments to CMS with respect to its policy on biosimilar reimbursement.
In 2016, CMS finalized a proposal to group payment for all biosimilar products referenced on a single originator biologic under common Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) billing code. However, in its 2018 Proposed Rule, CMS sought comments from stakeholders about alternatives billing approaches for biosimilars.
In its comments to CMS, The Biosimilars Forum, a nonprofit organization with a membership comprising biosimilar developers including Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Coherus BioSciences, and others, requested that CMS revise its policy, saying that each biosimilar should have its own HCPCS code for billing and payment. “It is imperative,” the group’s statement says, “that [the current] policy be reversed as soon as possible, and to take effect in [calendar year] 2018, in order to prevent lasting damage to the viability of this nascent biosimilars market.” Without a change to the billing procedure, the group said, biosimilar developers could introduce fewer products to the US marketplace, resulting in less competition and therefore higher costs of treatment. The letter notes that unique HCPCS codes for each product would also improve pharmacovigilance.
Additionally, the Association for Accsssible Medicines and the Biosimilars Council released a report, authored by The Moran Company, that found that, if CMS were to revise its reimbursement code policy, the federal government could save $11.4 billion on medicines over the next decade. “Shifting biosimilar reimbursement to unique codes increases patient access to more affordable, life-saving medicine and lowers prescription drug spending. This policy is critical to the development of a thriving biosimilars medicine market,” said Christine Simmon, executive director of the Biosimilars Council and senior vice president of policy and strategic alliances at AAM. “This new report highlights the significant cost savings possible for both patients and [payers] if CMS implements this recommendation.”
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), an organization representing biopharmaceutical companies, joined the other groups in urging CMS to revise its policy and to provide separate HCPCS codes for each biosimilar. Holly Campbell, deputy vice president of public affairs at PhRMA, told The Center for Biosimilars® via email that “we oppose the current policy of blending coding and reimbursement for biosimilars that share the same reference product. We are encouraged to see the administration may be revisiting this policy. Revising the policy to allow for each biosimilar to have a distinct HCPCS code and reimbursement will promote appropriate clinical and safe use of these products, facilitate effective pharmacovigilence and help to ensure a robust competitive market.”
Prescribers, too, voiced support for a revised policy. The Biologics Prescribers Collaborative (BPC), an organization representing physicians who regularly prescribe biologic medicines, also weighed in. The BPC said that, in the absence of an FDA designation of interchangeability with the reference, each biosimilar product should have its own unique billing code. Biosimilars can only be similar to reference drugs, the BPC said, and assigning 1 reimbursement code “ignores the fundamental science”; a single code used for multiple treatments “seems to treat all biosimilars for a given reference product as interchangeable. Determinations of interchangeability must be made by FDA and based solely on scientific and medical considerations. Interchangeability requires a higher level of evidence than biosimilarity.”
BPC believes that blended reimbursement could encourage inappropriate non-medical switching in order to use the lowest-priced biosimilar at any given time, which could inappropriately limit choices, “especially where an individual patient’s immune reaction may differ between drugs.”
Julie Reed: Why 2024 Is Important for Biosimilars
April 17th 2024Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, showcases how the biosimilar industry is expected to develop throughout 2024, including major policy changes and hope for continued improvement in market share for adalimumab biosimilars.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
Alvotech’s Stelara Biosimilar, Selarsdi, Receives FDA Approval
April 16th 2024Alvotech’s Selarsdi (ustekinumab-aekn), a biosimilar referencing Stelara (ustekinumab), gained FDA approval, making it the second ustekinumab biosimilar and second for the company to be given the green light for the American market.
The Subcutaneous Revolution: Zymfentra and the Future of IBD Care With Dr Andres Yarur
December 17th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Andres Yarur, MD, a researcher and associate professor of medicine at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, discusses the significance of the FDA approval for Zymfentra, the world's first subcutaneous infliximab product, for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
BioRationality: Removing the Misconceptions Surrounding Interchangeability
April 15th 2024Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, outlines the current state of interchangeable biosimilars in the US and policy changes needed to clear up misconceptions surrounding the meaning behind interchangeability designations.
Biosimilars Council: PBM Rebate Schemes Cost Americans, Payers $6 Billion
April 10th 2024A report from the Biosimilars Council evaluating IQVIA data found that rebate schemes orchestrated by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are costing US patients and payers billions of dollars by suppressing biosimilar adoption.