Lanton Law Speaks with Drug Topics on Its Over the Counter Podcast on MFN

Ron Lanton of Lanton Law speaks with Drug Topics on their podcast episode of Over the Counter. Ron discusses developing policy expected to enact significant change in the pharmacy industry and beyond titled “Most Favored Nation: Global Benchmarking to Reimagine US Drug Distribution.” Click here to access the podcast.

Lanton Law Speaks with Pharmaceutical Executive on Navigating NIH Funding Cuts, Diversity Bans, and Tariff Challenges

Lanton Law spoke with Pharmaceutical Executive on NIH Funding cuts. The interview is titled “Navigating NIH Funding Cuts, Diversity Bans, and Tariff Challenges: Legal and Industry Implications for Medical Research”

The interview can be seen here.

Lanton Law Quoted in Pharmacy Times Interview on Drug Pricing Reforms Amid the Repeal of Executive Order 14087

Lanton Law was quoted in the Pharmacy Times Article titled "Reversal of Executive Order (EO) 14087 Raises Questions About Future Drug Pricing Reforms.” We discuss the EO and how pharmacists are impacted. The article can be viewed here.

CMS Makes An Impactful Change Regarding Biosimilars

Within its final calendar year 2025 Medicare Advantage and Part D final rule seen here, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Servces (CMS) is allowing Part D sponsors the ability to make midyear substitutions of biosimilars for their reference products on their formularies. 

Specifically:

•  All biosimilars may be substituted as formulary maintenance changes: Part D sponsors may treat formulary substitutions of all biosimilars for their reference products as “maintenance changes” that would not require explicit prior approval by CMS.  This option has previously been available only for interchangeable biological products. Part D sponsors previously had to obtain explicit approval prior to substituting biosimilars other than interchangeable biological products, and these substitutions applied only to enrollees who began therapy after the effective date of the change — delaying enrollees’ access to cheaper options. Treating all biosimilar substitutions as maintenance changes means that midyear formulary substitutions of biosimilars for their reference products would apply to all enrollees (including those already taking the reference product prior to the effective date of the change) following a 30-day advance notice to affected enrollees. 

• New interchangeable biological products may be immediately substituted: We are finalizing additional flexibility for interchangeable biological products not on the market at the time that Part D sponsors submit their initial formulary for CMS approval. Part D sponsors meeting certain requirements have the additional option to immediately substitute a new interchangeable biological product for a reference product and provide notice of the change to affected enrollees after making such change. 

Biosimilar policy continues to evolve. It’s important to be in the know to plan accordingly. 

Lanton Law is a national boutique law and lobbying firm that focuses on healthcare/life sciences and technology. 

If you are an industry stakeholder with questions about the current landscape or if you would like to discuss how your organization’s strategic initiatives might be impacted by either Congress, regulatory agencies or legal decisions, contact us today.

Biden Administration Announces First Ten Drugs Selected for Medicare Price Negotiation

The Biden Administration has announced today that Medicare will be able to negotiate drug prices for the first time due to provisions within the Inflation Reduction Act. 

The first ten selected drugs for negotiation are Eliquis, Jardiance, Xarelto, Januvia, Farxiga, Entresto, Enbrel, Imbruvica, Stelara and Fiasp. 

The Administration stated that these drugs “accounted for $50,5 billion in total Part D gross covered prescription drug costs. The negotiations will occur in 2023 and 2024 and any negotiated prices will become effective beginning in 2026. 

According to HHS press release read here, “In future years, CMS will select for negotiation up to 15 more drugs covered under Part D for 2027, up to 15 more drugs for 2028 (including drugs covered under Part B and Part D), and up to 20 more drugs for each year after that, as outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act.”

Lanton Law is a national boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments in the healthcare and life science spaces. Contact us to learn about how either our legal or lobbying services can help you attain your goals.

What is Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM)?

What is Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM)?

Remote patient monitoring is an innovative way that healthcare providers are using to treat chronic and acute conditions. With COVID-19 spurring faster adoption of telehealth and RPM, the subject of RPM involves the connection of digital tools that record healthcare data that is reviewed by an off-site provider. According to HHS, new treatment methods like RPM can help with the following conditions:

• High blood pressure

• Diabetes

• Weight loss or gain

• Heart conditions

• Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

• Sleep apnea

• Asthma

Many of the devices that patients will use may be familiar to them, including:

• Weight scales

• Pulse oximeters

• Blood glucose meters

• Blood pressure monitors Telehealth.hhs.gov

At Lanton Law we have been monitoring the both exciting and emerging field of RPM. We fully anticipate the conversation to continue to evolve into further regulatory definitions as well as appropriate reimbursement schemes. 

Lanton Law is a national healthcare and technology boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments for our clients. Our HealthIT practice can help stakeholders understand what’s at issue with topics like RPM, RTM and digital therapeutics so that we can help our valued clients. Contact us to learn about how either our legal or lobbying services can help you attain your goals.

Prescription Digital Therapeutics Bill Introduced in Congress

The Medicaid and CHIP Access to Prescription Digital Therapeutics Act also known as S. 5238 seen here was introduced on December 12, 2022 by Senator Capito (R-WV). The bill seeks to “require the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to provide guidance regarding coverage of prescription digital therapeutics under Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program.” While this bill is a step forward for digital therapeutics, questions remain about this bill such as whether this bill will get introduced in the new Congress, will this bill create more access, reduce costs and is the correct reimbursement model?

At Lanton Law we have been monitoring the both exciting and emerging field of prescription digital therapeutics. While the technologies we have been witnessing are promising, there does remain the challenge of reimbursement, since there has not yet been a statutory benefit category established for this new technology. 

Lanton Law is a national healthcare and technology boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments for our clients. Our HealthIT practice can help stakeholders understand what’s at issue with topics like digital therapeutics, RTM and RPM so that we can help our valued clients reach their goals. Contact us to learn about how either our legal or lobbying services can help you attain your goals.

CMS is Proposing to Delay the Radiation Oncology (RO) Model

Last week the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced its proposal to delay the start of the Radiation Oncology Model. The announcement can be found here. No reason was given but the proposed reimbursement structure was undoubtedly the major reason behind this delay. 

So what is the RO Model? According to CMS “The Radiation Oncology (RO) Model aims to improve the quality of care for cancer patients receiving radiotherapy (RT) and move toward a simplified and predictable payment system. The RO Model tests whether prospective, site neutral, modality agnostic, episode-based payments to physician group practices (PGPs), hospital outpatient departments (HOPD), and freestanding radiation therapy centers for RT episodes of care reduces Medicare expenditures while preserving or enhancing the quality of care for Medicare beneficiaries.”

Below are some key elements of the RO Model:

Alternative Payment:

• Episode Payments: CMS makes prospective, episode-based (i.e., bundled) payments, based on a patient's cancer diagnosis, that cover RT services furnished in a 90-day episode for the included  cancer types meeting the included cancer type criteria described in the final rule;

• Site-neutrality: The Model uses site-neutral payment by establishing a common, adjusted national base payment amount for the episode, regardless of the setting where it is furnished;

• Professional and Technical Payment Components: Episode payments are split into professional and technical components to allow the current claims systems for the Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) and the Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) to be used to adjudicate RO Model claims and for consistency with existing business relationships.

• Linking Payment to Quality: The Model links payment to quality using reporting and performance on quality measures, clinical data reporting, and patient experience as factors when determining payment to RO participants. The Model meets the requirements to qualify as an Advanced Alternative Payment Model (APM) and a Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) APM under QPP starting in performance year (PY) 1.

• RO Participants in a Mandatory Model: The RO Model requires participation from RT providers and RT suppliers that furnish RT services within randomly selected CBSAs.

If you are a radiation oncology stakeholder, this is something to continue to watch. 

Lanton Law is a national healthcare and life science boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments for our clients. Our healthcare practice can help stakeholders understand what’s at issue so that we can help our valued clients reach their goals. Contact us to learn about how either our legal or lobbying services can help you attain your priorities.   

Lanton Law’s publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only and may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without prior written consent of us. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our “Let’s Chat” form, which can be found on our website at www.lantonlaw.com. The mailing of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Prescription Digital Therapeutics Presses Ahead for Behavioral Health

At Lanton Law we have been monitoring the both exciting and emerging field of prescription digital therapeutics. While the technologies we have been witnessing are promising, there does remain the challenge of reimbursement, since there has not yet been a statutory benefit category established for this new technology. However; behavioral health shows the most immediate promise. 

A recent CMS meeting illustrates this point. CMS released a document titled “Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) Application Summaries and Coding Recommendations” for the Second Biannual, 2021 HCPCS Coding Cycle. The document can be viewed here. The document describes Pear Therapeutics’ reSET-O which is a “12-week interval prescription digital therapeutic for opioid use disorder (OUD).” CMS’ examination ended with its decision effective April 1, 2022 to establish a HCPCS Code to “facilitate options for non-Medicare payers to provide access to this therapy in the home setting,” so that CMS can continue its marketplace monitoring. This on top of the AMA’s CPT Editorial Panel’s actions (seen here) to establish a new CPT code for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Monitoring effective January 2023 shows that there will definitely be more certainty in this field in the next coming years. 

Lanton Law is a national healthcare and life science boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments for our clients. Our HealthIT practice can help stakeholders understand what’s at issue with topics like digital therapeutics, RTM and RPM so that we can help our valued clients reach their goals. Contact us to learn about how either our legal or lobbying services can help you attain your goals.

CMS Ends Most Favored Nation Drug Price Model Proposal

According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the agency has published a final rule in the Federal Register on December 27, 2021, that rescinds the November 27, 2020, MFN Model interim final rule with comment period.​​ The final rule rescinding the Most Favored Nation Model interim final rule with comment period can be found here.

Proposed Rule Background:  

CMS included the following background to the issue in its announcement:

“In the August 10, 2021 Federal Register (86 FR 43620), we published a proposed rule (86 FR 43618, hereafter, referred to as “the August 2021 proposed rule”) that would rescind the Most Favored Nation (MFN) Model interim final rule with comment period (85 FR 76180) that appeared in the November 27, 2020 Federal Register (hereafter, referred to as “the November 2020 MFN Model interim final rule”). The November 2020 MFN Model interim final rule established a 7-year nationwide, mandatory MFN Model to test an alternative way for Medicare to pay for certain Medicare Part B single source drugs and biologicals (including biosimilar biologicals), under section 1115A of the Social Security Act (the Act), with the model performance period beginning on January 1, 2021. The MFN Model was not implemented on January 1, 2021 as contemplated following four lawsuits and a nationwide preliminary injunction. On December 28, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in California Life Sciences Ass'n v. CMS, No. 3:20-cv-08603, which preliminarily enjoined HHS from implementing the MFN Model and the November 2020 interim final rule. For additional information on the MFN Model and the related lawsuits, see the August 2021 proposed rule, the November 2020 MFN Model interim final rule, and the MFN Model website.[1]”

Why does this matter?

Drug price continues to be an issue and it is essential for stakeholders to monitor how reimbursement will be for your operations. 

How Lanton Law Can Help

Lanton Law is a national healthcare and life science boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments for our clients. Our life sciences practice can help stakeholders understand what’s at issue so that we can help our valued clients reach their goals. Contact us to learn about how either our legal or lobbying services can help you attain your goals.

CMS Proposes Rescinding Most Favored Nation Interim Final Rule

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has released a proposed rule that seeks to rescind the Most Favored Nation Model interim final rule with comment period that appeared in the November 27, 2020 Federal Register.  CMS is seeking public comment by October 12, 2021. 

This rule has already had some interesting history. According to the proposal, “In December 2020, while the comment period was open, four lawsuits were filed related to CMS's waivers of proposed rulemaking and delay in effective date as well as other aspects of the MFN Model and the November 2020 interim final rule.

On January 8, 2021, the Solicitor General determined not to appeal the preliminary injunction issued in California Life Sciences. On January 19, 2021, at the parties' request, the U.S. Northern District of California stayed the case until at least April 23, 2021. Subsequently, on April 26, 2021, another stay was granted until July 26, 2021. On July 29, 2021, another stay was granted until September 27, 2021.

In Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, on February 2, 2021, the plaintiff filed a letter seeking leave to file a motion for summary judgment, and HHS filed a letter seeking leave to file a motion for a stay. On February 10, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted HHS's request and stayed the case for 90 days (that is, through May 11, 2021). On May 10, 2021, the stay in this case was extended for an additional 90 days, until August 9, 2021, to give HHS time to consider how to proceed with the rule in light of the “unanimous” court decisions to date. In its order, the court noted that HHS should “not assume that another stay will be granted,” as the stays gave HHS “a half-year to reach a conclusion regarding how to proceed[.]”

As a result of the nationwide preliminary injunction, the MFN Model was not implemented on January 1, 2021, as contemplated in the November 2020 interim final rule. While the nationwide preliminary injunction has been in place, CMS considered how to proceed given stakeholders' concerns about potential impacts of the MFN Model.”

Lanton Law is a national boutique law and lobbying firm that focuses on healthcare/life sciences and technology. 

If you are an industry stakeholder with questions about the current landscape or if you would like to discuss how your organization’s strategic initiatives might be impacted by either Congress, regulatory agencies or legal decisions, contact us today.

Administrative Judge Rules Against Washington State’s Pharmacy Reimbursement Plan Violates Medicaid Rules

Last week the National Association of Chain Drug Stores (NACDS), the Washington State Pharmacy Association (WSPA) and the National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA) celebrated an administrative law judge’s ruling against Washington State that stated Washington’s pharmacy reimbursement plan violated Medicaid’s rules. 

The Washington State Pharmacy Association provided some insightful background into this issue.

“In 2016, CMS put in place a new rule changing how states must reimburse pharmacies. A key part of the rule indicates that states must reimburse pharmacies for their actual costs in dispensing drugs to Medicaid beneficiaries. Since that time, NACDS, WSPA and NCPA forced the issue that Washington State failed to comply with that rule, maintaining its below-cost dispensing fees. The pharmacy groups emphasized throughout the challenge that Washington State refused to adopt cost-based dispensing fees, and maintained below-cost dispensing fees—lower than any state in the country—which may impede patient access to care. The finding upholds CMS’ March 2019 decision to this effect, which was challenged by Washington State.” 

As a long-time advocate for retail pharmacy, we at Lanton Law applaud this decision. 

Lanton Law is a national boutique law and government affairs firm that closely monitors legislative, regulatory and legal developments in the LTC, CBD/hemp, specialty and retail pharmacy space, as well as manufacturers and suppliers. If you are an industry stakeholder with questions about strategy or simply need advice, contact us today.    

New Telehealth Legislation Introduced In the U.S. House of Representatives

Lanton Law has been monitoring the state and federal policy developments with telehealth/telemedicine. We have noticed a newly introduced Congressional bill that is on point. 

The Protecting Access to Post-Covid-19 Telehealth Act has been introduced by several members of the Congressional Telehealth Caucus including Representatives Schweikert (R-AZ), Thompson (D-CA), Welch (D-VT), Johnson (R-OH) and Matsui (D-CA). 

This bi-partisan bill according to the bill’s press release “will continue the expanded use of telehealth beyond the Coronavirus pandemic by eliminating restrictions on the use in Medicare, providing a bridge for patients currently using the practices because of the crisis, and requiring a study on the use of telehealth during COVID-19.”  

Here are the highlights of the legislation according to the release: 

• Eliminating most geographic and originating site restrictions on the use of telehealth in Medicare and establishing the patient’s home as an eligible distant site so patients can receive telehealth care at home and doctors can still be reimbursed, 

• Preventing a sudden loss of telehealth services for Medicare beneficiaries by authorizing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service to continue reimbursement for telehealth for 90 days beyond the end of the public health emergency, 

• Making permanent the disaster waiver authority, enabling Health and Human Service to expand telehealth in Medicare during all future emergencies and disasters, and

• Requiring a study on the use of telehealth during COVID, including its costs, uptake rates, measurable health outcomes, and racial and geographic disparities.

Lanton Law is a national boutique law and government affairs firm that focuses on healthcare/life sciences, technology and finance. If you are an industry stakeholder with questions about the current landscape or if you would like to discuss how your organization’s strategic initiatives might be impacted by either Congress, regulatory agencies or legal decisions, contact us today.

CMS Star Ratings: Will Biosimilars Benefit?

This article is in Biosimilar Development: Click here to read the article

In case you can’t access the article, here is the text below.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) star ratings system was created in 2007 for insurance plans operating under both the Medicare Advantage and Part D. This 1 to 5 system (with 5 being the highest rating) is a way for CMS to measure the value of a plan and determine whether to continue to allow it to be part of the program. However, it’s more than just the plan, since the plan’s providers play a key role in how CMS evaluates each plan.

Essentially, the system measures other items as well, such as clinical quality, beneficiary satisfaction, and regulatory compliance, in addition to included providers. Plans are incentivized with financial rewards for improving quality performance and achieving the highest rating. What has been interesting to watch over time is how the star ratings system has become the go to evaluator for anything healthcare. The question is whether this concept could be applied to reduce drug costs, specifically, where biosimilars are concerned. 

We received our answer with the introduction of the Star Ratings for Biosimilars Act, otherwise known as H.R. 4629. This bipartisan bill is sponsored by Congressmen Tonko (D-NY) and Gibbs (R-OH), but to date it hasn’t gotten much support. The bill has a U.S. Senate version sponsored by Senators Cassidy (R-LA) and Menendez (D-NJ). According to Senator Cassidy’s press release, “This bill would incentivize insurers to use lower cost versions of drugs by rating the plan based on usage of biosimilar medications. Using lower cost drugs will lead to positive health outcomes with lower out of pocket costs for patients.” We have also seen similar legislative language in S.2543, known as the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act of 2019.

For years now, we have witnessed several debates on how biosimilars could potentially lower drug costs, and this proposed legislation is another example of the potential promise that biosimilars have in helping policymakers lower drug costs. But will this bill help? Specifically, the proposed legislation calls for determining whether a biosimilar is on the formulary, assesses whether and how utilization management tools are applied with respect to a biosimilar, and assesses the percentage of enrollees prescribed the biosimilar biological product when the reference biological product is also available.

While I applaud any idea that attempts to lower costs and promote patient access, the devil is always in the details. For example, will these proposed metrics of incentivizing plans to use biosimilars work? Will there be competing metrics that plans have that may be better measurements than CMS?

Industry stakeholders like physicians and pharmacists may not like having plans with too much autonomy because unfairness and bias in measuring provider compliance may come into play, as plans and their partner pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) would likely favor their providers and pharmacies, which could result in different star ratings for some. Will hospitals be amenable to this system when they already have complaints against CMS’ star ratings programs due to hospitals not being able to predict quality improvement metrics for operational efficiency? Physician education on biosimilars will have to be increased as well, since their comfort level with biosimilars will help spawn more utilization by their patients. Lastly, what impact will star ratings on biosimilars have on insurer rebates? At this time, it is too early to tell, since without this clarity it is even hard to quantify if biosimilars are already experiencing formulary disadvantages due to innovators offering larger discounts. One thing is for certain, in order to force monumental change, it may be best to do it via mandate. Forced compliance, in my opinion, will bring out the potential bugs in a system fast.

Ultimately, the other big issue is whether there is enough time to get legislation like this through Congress, along with a presidential signature. It would also help if the bill had more support, through either Congressional members or a push from powerful interested stakeholders. To date, the bill doesn’t have a significant number of cosponsors. It could be that it is December or that lowering drug prices through biosimilars is an idea that is spread throughout too many current Congressional proposed bills.

Theoretically, this seems like a win-win for both parties, but, realistically, we are on the doorstep of campaign season. With the upcoming elections on the state and federal level expected to be explosive, will lawmakers find the will to agree on a bipartisan solution like this before the political rhetoric heats up? We can only hope.