Importantly, the policy only applies when a biosimilar’s price is lower than the price of the brand-name reference biologic. This guarantees savings to Medicare and reduces out-of-pocket costs for seniors.
Business Practice
CME/CE
Subscribe
BIOSIMILAR APPROVALS
- Bone Health
- Immunology
- Hematology
- Respiratory
- Dermatology
- Diabetes
- Gastroenterology
- Neurology
- Oncology
- Ophthalmology
- Rare Disease
- Rheumatology
Patient Advocacy Groups Offer Support for BIOSIM Act
The BIOSIM Act would increase the add-on payment for use of a biosimilar, thereby incentivizing practitioners to use these products more often, according to proponents of the bill.
Hoping to stimulate greater use of biosimilars, 28 patient advocacy groups have thrown their weight behind draft legislation that would increase Medicare reimbursement to health care institutions when they prescribe these agents for patients.
The draft legislation would impose a revision to a Medicare payment policy that has been changed before to stimulate biosimilar uptake.
Biosimilars advocates, including companies that produce and distribute biosimilars, contend that additional changes are needed to more successfully incentivize prescribers to choose biosimilars over reference products, which tend to cost more than biosimilars.
The 60 Plus Association, CancerCare, and Healthy Women are among the groups that have endorsed the Bolstering Innovative Options to Save Immediately on Medicines (BIOSIM) Act, which increase physician reimbursement for use of biosimilars.
“According to a recent analysis, women, seniors, and low-income individuals are expected to benefit most from increased access to biosimilars, as they are predominantly impacted by the conditions currently treated by higher-cost biologics for which biosimilar competition can reduce costs. However, despite average cost savings of 30%, biosimilar adoption continues to trail expectations,” the patient advocacy groups state in a letter supporting adoption of the BIOSIM Act.
The legislation has been spearheaded by the Biosimilars Forum and the Biosimilars Council, which represent producers and distributors of biosimilars and generic drugs.
Under current policy, Medicare reimburses based on the average sales price (ASP) of the biosimilar brand plus 6% of the reference product price. Prescribers who choose the reference product get 100% plus 6% of that product’s ASP.
The rationale is that if doctors got 6% of the lower-priced biosimilar, they would be incentivized to prescribe the higher-priced product every time, in order to get 6% of the higher value, and nobody would prescribe the lower-cost agent unless they were committed to saving money for Medicare.
The BIOSIM Act would increase the add-on percentage for biosimilar use to 8% of the reference product ASP, and reference product use would continue to garner just the 6% add-on. The 8% add-on would apply only to biosimilars that cost less than the reference products.
Once a biosimilar qualifies for the additional payment and a payment is made under this policy, the 8% rate would continue for 5 years for that particular biosimilar, assuming the biosimilar continues to qualify as a lower-cost product.
Originally, CMS calculated the ASP for all biosimilars in a category and arrived at a single base price. The add-on payment was still based on the higher reference product price. This was considered a “blended” payment formula.
However, one of the opposing arguments was that biosimilars were not all alike, because some were approved for more indications than others. This led to CMS issuing separate payment codes and reimbursement amounts for each biosimilar. Providers were then reimbursed based on 100% of the individual biosimilar’s ASP plus 6% of the reference product’s ASP.
Additionally, because it takes time to establish an ASP for newly marketed biosimilars, CMS initially reimburses biosimilar use at 106% of the wholesale acquisition price (WAC), which is what manufacturers charge drug wholesalers.
Under the BIOSIM Act, the WAC for a biosimilar also should not be more than the WAC of the reference product.
In their letter addressed to the sponsors of the legislation, Representatives Kurt Schrader (D-OR) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), the advocacy groups did not make the distinction that the 8% payment would apply to the cost of the higher-cost reference product, not the biosimilar.
Recent Videos
Related Content
Survey of Clinicians: Lower Cost of Biosimilars is the Main Driver of Treatment Choice in IBD
September 7th 2024Article
Researchers surveyed clinicians from 63 countries and found that adalimumab and infliximab biosimilars, primarily chosen for their lower cost, are widely available and have improved access to biologic treatment in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
The Role of Coverage Strategies in Biosimilar Market Impact and Cost Savings
September 4th 2024Article
A recent study highlights that although biosimilars have led to significant price reductions, originator products with sole preferred coverage strategies have maintained market share, suggesting that increased biosimilar uptake alone may not fully leverage the market's competitive and cost-saving potential.
Biosimilars in America: Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Impact
July 21st 2024Podcast
Join us as we explore the complexities of the US biosimilars market, discussing legislative influences, payer and provider adoption factors, and strategies to overcome industry challenges with expert insights from Kyle Noonan, PharmD, MS, value & access strategy manager at Cencora.
Prioritizing Patient-Centered Care in PsA: Key Insights From the 2023 EULAR Guidelines
August 29th 2024Article
The 2023 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) provide an evidence-based treatment strategy, prioritizing conventional and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, including biosimilars, tailored to disease manifestations, with an emphasis on safety, cost-effectiveness, and patient-centered care.
