- Bone Health
- Immunology
- Hematology
- Respiratory
- Dermatology
- Diabetes
- Gastroenterology
- Neurology
- Oncology
- Ophthalmology
- Rare Disease
- Rheumatology
Pharma Groups Denied Restraining Order in Nevada Drug Pricing Lawsuit
Judge James C. Mahan of the US District Court denied the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO)’s motion for a temporary restraining order that would force Nevada to “cease and desist all action implementing or enforcing” contested sections of Nevada’s Senate Bill 539.
Judge James C. Mahan of the US District Court denied the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO)’s motion for a temporary restraining order that would force Nevada to “cease and desist all action implementing or enforcing” contested sections of Nevada’s Senate Bill (SB) 539.
SB 539, signed into law by Republican Governor Brian Sandoval, requires drug makers to annually disclose list prices for insulins, profits made, and discounts provided to pharmacy benefit managers. It also requires drug makers to explain spikes in insulin pricing. Trade groups PhRMA and BIO called the drug “unprecedented” and “unconstitutional.”
In his decision, Mahan indicated that the court could rule a temporary restraining order only if the moving party showed that immediate and irreparable loss or damage would result before the opposing party’s motion for a preliminary injunction could be heard. He called such a restraining order an “extraordinary remedy” that would not be granted without the plaintiff’s demonstrating the possibility of irreparable. Mahan said that PhRMA and BIO had not shown that they would suffer such damage, in part because the first disclosures from industry concerning drug pricing will not be due until July of 2018.
Now that the motion for the restraining order has been denied, the state will have until September 27, 2017 to file its reply to PhRMA and BIO’s motion for preliminary injunction.
What Stands in the Way of Biosimilar Use Across MENA Countries?
May 21st 2025Despite the clear promise of cost savings and expanded access, the path to integrating generics and biosimilars across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is tangled in a web of distrust, inconsistent policies, and deep-rooted cultural preferences for branded drugs.
Escaping the Void: All Things Biosimilars With Craig & G
May 4th 2025To close out the Festival of Biologics, Craig Burton and Giuseppe Randazzo from the Association for Accessible Medicines and the Biosimilars Council tackle the current biosimilar landscape and how the industry can emerge from the "biosimilar void."
The Trump Administration’s Drug Price Actions and Why US Prices Are Already Sky-High
May 17th 2025While the Trump administration’s latest executive order touts sweeping drug price cuts through international benchmarking, the broader pharmaceutical pricing crisis in the US reveals a far more complex web of development costs, profit incentives, and absent price controls—raising the question of whether any single policy, including potential drug tariffs, can truly untangle it.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
Targeted Reimbursement Encourages Oncology Biosimilar Use
May 7th 2025Incentivizing physicians with modest financial bonuses may seem like a small step, but in Japan’s outpatient oncology setting, it helped push trastuzumab biosimilars toward broader adoption, demonstrating how even limited reimbursement reforms can reshape prescribing behavior under the right conditions.
