A few weeks after the United States Supreme Court rebuffed Maryland in its attempt to regulate drug prices, legislative committees are meeting Wednesday on a drug price transparency bill, as well as a bill to create a commission to review prices and set ceilings on insurers, pharmacies and hospitals.
A few weeks after the United States Supreme Court rebuffed Maryland in its attempt to regulate drug prices, legislative committees are meeting Wednesday on a drug price transparency bill, as well as a bill to create a commission to review prices and set ceilings on insurers, pharmacies and hospitals.
The bills have been introduced in both the state Senate and the House of Delegates.
A version of each bill stalled in the legislature last year, The Washington Post reported, because of strong opposition from the pharmaceutical industry. This year, things are different given that the drug industry dropped its opposition since the bill also includes insurers and pharmacy benefit managers.
Maryland had previously attempted to regulate drug prices with a bill that gave Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D) the ability to sue drug companies if prices rose sharply. But the United States Supreme Court rejected the state’s appeal of a 2018 federal appeals court ruling that struck down the law, which aimed at preventing price-gouging by pharmaceutical companies. The federal ruling held that Maryland had regulated wholesale pricing by the companies in violation of the Constitution's bar on state-level regulation of interstate commerce beyond its borders.
If the bill regarding a pricing commission is signed into law, the resulting 5-person commission would be modeled after the state’s Health Services Cost Review Commission, which sets limits on hospital spending growth, capping what state entities pay.
The body would be an independent unit of government with certain powers, including the ability to review prescription drug costs, request information from manufacturers, and allow the attorney general to pursue “certain remedies.”
For nearly the past 2 months, Congress has been holding hearings on rising drug prices, such as one about skyrocketing insulin costs in the Senate Finance Committee and a House committee hearing that zeroed in on prices for adalimumab (Humira) and Etanercept (Enbrel), both of which have FDA-approved but as-yet unlaunched biosimilars.
And although most focus on drug affordability has been centered on Washington, DC, Maryland not the only state looking to tackle the problem. The National Academy for State Health Policy is tracking bills across the country in the areas of affordability review, price gouging, pharmacy benefit managers, importation, volume purchasing, and more.
Commercial Payer Coverage of Biosimilars: Market Share, Pricing, and Policy Shifts
December 4th 2024Researchers observe significant shifts in payer preferences for originator vs biosimilar products from 2017 to 2022, revealing growing payer interest in multiple product options, alongside the increasing market share of biosimilars, which contributed to notable reductions in both average sales prices and wholesale acquisition costs.
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.
Denosumab Biosimilars Earn Positive CHMP Opinion for Bone Loss and Giant Cell Tumor of Bone
November 26th 2024The European Medicines Agency Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has issued a positive opinion for the denosumab biosimilars SB16 for all indications referencing Prolia and Xgeva.
Boosting Health Care Sustainability: The Role of Biosimilars in Latin America
November 21st 2024Biosimilars could improve access to biologic treatments and health care sustainability in Latin America, but their adoption is hindered by misconceptions, regulatory gaps, and weak pharmacovigilance, requiring targeted education and stronger regulations.