With the expanded use of step therapy on the horizon in 2020, an advocacy initiative of rheumatology, arthritis, and gastroenterology and other associations recently released a report “grading” payers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) for the extent of their prescription coverage of medications for patients with autoimmune disorders.
With the expanded use of step therapy on the horizon in 2020, an advocacy initiative of rheumatology, arthritis, and gastroenterology and other associations recently released a report “grading” payers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) for the extent of their prescription coverage of medications for patients with autoimmune disorders.
Perhaps not unsurprisingly, most fail, according to the report, which was created by Kenneth E. Thorpe, PhD, and Manasvini Singh of Emory University and released by the group, called Let My Doctors Decide. The report examines drug coverage by Medicare plans as well as commercial plans, specifically coverage limitations on medications for Crohns disease, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis. The coverage limitations evaluated include prior authorization (PA), formulary status, tier placement, and step therapy.
The report calls attention to how coverage for those 5 diseases could change as CMS expands the use of step therapy in Medicare, the group said in a statement.
To cut healthcare costs, CMS wants to add PA and step therapy to Medicare Part D drugs for those receiving new prescriptions. Additionally, the rule includes a similar policy for self-administered Part D drugs (including biologics such as pegfilgrastim, etanercept, and adalimumab).
The 5 autoimmune diseases studied do not fall within the rule affecting Medicare Part D’s 6 protected classes—antidepressants, antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, immunosuppressants for treatment of transplant rejection, antiretrovirals, and antineoplastics.
CMS wants to give Part D plans more flexibility for which drugs must be included in the protected drug classes instead of forcing them to cover all of them; that creates an incentive to keep prices high, CMS has said. But the report says the findings show how coverage for drugs within those 5 disease areas may change if the CMS plan is implemented next year.
The report found that most Medicare Part B plans received “A” grades for their coverage of physician-administered drugs; Part B plans currently have no restrictions, but the Trump administration wants to additionally shift some Part B drugs to Part D, where they would have more limits.
According to the findings, 86% of Medicare Advantage and Part D plans received an “F” for access to medicines at the pharmacy. All plans within Medicare Advantage and Part B received an “A” for access to medicines that are administered in a doctor’s office.
The report said 97% of plans impose “severe to austere restrictions” on access to therapies in all 5 conditions. Multiple sclerosis had the fewest plans that impose the highest level of restrictions (81%); psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis had the most plans with the highest restrictions on access (89%).
Commercial plans fared a little better, with 69% having the most restrictions for Crohn disease, 47% for psoriatic arthritis, 66% for rheumatoid arthritis, 28% for multiple sclerosis and 31% for psoriasis.
Let My Doctors Decide was created by patient advocacy and provider groups, led by the American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association (AARDA), to provide resources and education to patients and physicians about step therapy. The group includes the American Behcet’s Disease Association, American Gastroenterological Association, Coalition of State Rheumatology Organizations, Dermatology Nurses’ Association, International Foundation for Autoimmune and Autoinflammatory Arthritis, Lupus Foundation of America, National Organization of Rheumatology Managers, and Sjögren’s Syndrome Foundation.
“When recommended by doctors for medical reasons, step therapy can be the right choice,” said Randall Rutta, a federal policy consultant working for AARDA. “However, there is an important distinction between sound medical protocol versus economically-driven decisions that do not take into consideration what is medically best for the patient.”
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.
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.
What AmerisourceBergen's Report Reveals About Payers, Biosimilar Pricing Trends
May 28th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Tasmina Hydery and Brian Biehn from AmerisourceBergen discussed results from a recent survey, that were also presented at Asembia 2023, diving into the payer perspective on biosimilars and current pricing trends across the US biosimilar industry.
Rising Biosimilar Adoption for an Italian Payer Will Benefit National Health Care System, Patients
April 9th 2024Data from 2021 and 2022 indicates increasing biosimilar use in an Italian health care company, with potential for full adoption in the future, benefiting both the National Health System and citizens through efficient and sustainable health care policies.
Review Highlights Most Popular European Policies to Boost Biosimilar Uptake
April 3rd 2024Although tender systems are a common strategy to encourage biosimilar utilization across Europe, policies like automatic substitution are rarely utilized, according to a systematic review of European policies and biosimilar uptake.