Yesterday, community oncology leaders flooded the Hill to meet with Congress and the administration to warn them of the impact the Medicare sequester’s increased cuts and extension will have on cancer care nationwide.
Yesterday, community oncology leaders flooded the Hill to meet with Congress and the administration to warn them of the impact the Medicare sequester’s increased cuts and extension will have on cancer care nationwide.
The emergency Community Oncology Alliance (COA) fly-in was prompted by the momentum of the tax bill in both the US House and Senate. The bill proposes to raise the current sequester from 2% to 4%, as well as extend cuts at the end of the 10-year budget window.
In 2013, CMS enacted a 2% sequester payment cut to Medicare. The cut was originally intended to be an incentive to design an alternative budget savings package. The cut, signed into law in August 2011, set up the US cancer care system for consolidation and increased costs to seniors, Medicare, and taxpayers, says COA.
Since the sequester was enacted, the effect on the cancer care community has been felt across the nation. According to COA’s 2016 Practice Impact Report:
“We had over a dozen oncology leaders on the Hill yesterday talking about the devastating impact that this would have…not only would it be devastating, but it would be irresponsible of Congress,” Ted Okon, MBA, COA’s executive director, told The Center for Biosimilars® in an interview. “Regardless of whether this tax bill passes, we’ve been arguing all year that CMS in the prior administration should not have applied the sequester to Part B Medicare drugs. We’re at the point now that we’ve been working with Congress and talking to the current administration, and it remains to be seen what we’ll do next if they don’t either legislatively fix this, or if they don’t stop it from a regulatory standpoint.”
Jeff Vacirca, MD, president of COA and CEO of New York Cancer Specialists, also had a strong message for lawmakers. “Our elected officials need to understand that this sequester may seem like funny money to them but it is a slow bleed closing cancer clinics and forcing them into the waiting arms of more expensive hospital systems—especially those profiting off 340B. Congress needs to understand that their doubling down on the sequester and constantly extending it will result in community oncology practices being forced to shut their doors, which will cause access issues for patients and increase treatment costs as cancer care shifts to expensive hospitals,” said Vacirca in a statement.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
CHMP Pushes 3 Biosimilars Forward, Spelling Hope for Ophthalmology, Supportive Care Markets
February 6th 2025The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) recommended 3 biosimilars and new indications for reference biologics, moving them closer to final European approval and expanding patient access.
The Banking of Biosimilars: Insights From a Leading Health Economist
February 4th 2025Biosimilars have the potential to reduce health care costs and expand patient access, but economic and policy barriers affect adoption, explored James D. Chambers, PhD, MPharm, MSc, associate professor at the Tufts Medical Center Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, in an interview.
BioRationality: No More Biosimilars—Just Biogenerics
February 3rd 2025Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, argues that regulatory agencies should eliminate redundant clinical efficacy testing for biosimilars, recognizing them as "biogenerics" since physicochemical and in vitro biological comparisons are sufficient to ensure safety and efficacy.