Breaking News
January 15, 2019 - AHA: New Cholesterol Guidelines Put Ethnicity in the Spotlight
January 15, 2019 - Different brain areas linked to smoking and drinking
January 15, 2019 - Henry Marsh shares insights into neurosurgery and more at Dean’s Lecture Series
January 15, 2019 - Want to Live Longer? For Just 30 Minutes a Day, Do Anything Else But Sit
January 15, 2019 - The Current issue of “The view from here” is concerned with Targets
January 15, 2019 - Plain packaging sparked tobacco price rises, new study finds
January 15, 2019 - Sedentary lifestyles can be unhealthy, physical activity can lower risk
January 15, 2019 - Gut microbiome may help prevent development of cow’s milk allergy
January 15, 2019 - Lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals more likely to suffer severe substance use disorders
January 15, 2019 - New England Journal of Medicine Publishes Positive Results of the Pivotal Trial of Cablivi (caplacizumab) for Rare Blood Clotting Disorder
January 15, 2019 - Levels of inflammatory marker (CRP) linked to housing type and tenure
January 15, 2019 - Three gifts I’m glad I gave myself in 2018
January 15, 2019 - Columbia’s Pediatrics Department Names New Vice Chairs, Expands Leadership
January 15, 2019 - US FDA Accepts Regulatory Submissions for Review of Tafamidis to Treat Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy
January 15, 2019 - Staying fit can cut your risk of heart attack by half
January 15, 2019 - Vitamin D supplements are of no gain to those over 70, study shows
January 15, 2019 - Scientists create comprehensive new method to predict breast cancer risk
January 15, 2019 - Research shows connection between social media use and impaired risky decision-making
January 15, 2019 - FDA Approves Expanded Use of Adacel (Tdap) Vaccine for Repeat Vaccination
January 15, 2019 - Treating spinal pain with replacement discs made of ‘engineered living tissue’ moves closer to reality
January 15, 2019 - Providers Walk ‘Fine Line’ Between Informing And Scaring Immigrant Patients
January 15, 2019 - Outcomes Poorer for Medicaid Beneficiaries With STEMI
January 15, 2019 - Decorative Products on Foods Can Be Unsafe
January 15, 2019 - A dream of sustainable surgery in Uganda
January 15, 2019 - Study shows how herpes viruses and tumors have learned to manipulate the same ancient RNA
January 15, 2019 - Common Heart, Diabetes Meds May Help Ease Mental Illness
January 15, 2019 - Stress and trauma in earliest years linked to reduced hippocampal volume in adolescence
January 15, 2019 - Scientists identify endogenous activator of sigma-1 receptors in human cells
January 15, 2019 - MAR treatments unlikely to be cause of premature or low birth weight babies
January 15, 2019 - Parental CPTSD increases transmission of trauma to offspring of Tutsi genocide survivors
January 15, 2019 - High-fat diets shown to increase blood pressure
January 15, 2019 - New institute for food safety to be established in Netherlands
January 15, 2019 - Keele University researchers receive £2.4 million grant to help reduce overprescribing of opioids
January 15, 2019 - Synthetic compound reverses mutant p53 aggregate accumulation, study shows
January 15, 2019 - First elder care robot tested in a WSU smart home apartment
January 15, 2019 - Oxford researchers explore relationship between technology use and adolescent mental health
January 15, 2019 - From microbiome research to healthier and sustainable foods
January 15, 2019 - How coaching moms and dads improves infants’ language skills
January 15, 2019 - Precision health approach tapped to identify causes of poverty
January 14, 2019 - DNA origami can accurately measure how antibodies interact with several antigens
January 14, 2019 - Researchers identify multiple new subtypes of most common childhood cancer
January 14, 2019 - Total Fertility Rates Vary by State
January 14, 2019 - Elevated blood lead level in early childhood associated with increased risk of academic problems in school-aged children
January 14, 2019 - Superior technique identified that can block CRISPR gene editing
January 14, 2019 - Turning breast cancer cells into fat cells prevents the formation of metastases
January 14, 2019 - Review examines what influences HIV-positive patients to stay on antiretroviral drugs in Africa
January 14, 2019 - Identifying genetic factors that lead to squamous cell carcinoma
January 14, 2019 - Virtual video visits can replace office visits without compromising quality of care
January 14, 2019 - Health Highlights: Jan. 10, 2019
January 14, 2019 - Scientists uncover how protein clumps damage cells in Parkinson’s
January 14, 2019 - Physician-scientist’s “indomitable spirit” prevails over personal adversity
January 14, 2019 - King’s researchers receive £1.25 million to investigate fatal eating disorder
January 14, 2019 - UCR researchers uncover how plants sense temperature
January 14, 2019 - Scientists find link between colitis and colon cancer
January 14, 2019 - New skin patch provides long-acting contraceptive protection
January 14, 2019 - Asparagine synthetase deficiency – Genetics Home Reference
January 14, 2019 - Improved stem cell approach could aid fight against Parkinson’s
January 14, 2019 - New class of sleeping pill preserves ability to wake in response to danger signals
January 14, 2019 - Cancer patients are four times more likely to commit suicide
January 14, 2019 - The human brain works in reverse order to retrieve memories
January 14, 2019 - Simple tips can lead to better food choices
January 14, 2019 - Meth’s Resurgence Spotlights Lack Of Meds To Combat The Addiction
January 14, 2019 - TARA Biosystems and Insilico Medicine collaborate to discover novel therapies for cardiac disease
January 14, 2019 - Early life stress in mice affects their offspring behavior
January 14, 2019 - Depression Tied to Worse Asthma Outcomes in Urban Teens
January 14, 2019 - Santa calorie counting
January 14, 2019 - Opiod prescriptions for pet dogs misused by their masters
January 14, 2019 - People with ASD could be better at recognizing regret and relief in others finds study
January 14, 2019 - Conducting ChIP-Seq with Low Cell Numbers
January 14, 2019 - Study explores support and social networks of family carers of people with dementia
January 14, 2019 - At Risk for an Opioid OD? There’s an App for That
January 14, 2019 - Single national electronic health record will help improve care in Canadian hospitals
January 14, 2019 - Study unearths Britain’s first speech therapists
January 14, 2019 - Study reveals nuances of racial inequalities in breast cancer prevention
January 14, 2019 - Air pollution can raise the risk of miscarriage among women finds study
January 14, 2019 - An extra meal a day cuts deaths by half in elderly with hip fractures
January 14, 2019 - Researchers report vision-based neurotransmitter events for the first time
January 14, 2019 - Pharmacists could significantly reduce ED crowdedness
January 14, 2019 - PTSD linked with cardiovascular disease and cancer, study shows
January 14, 2019 - New analytic model can accurately predict patients at risk of developing PTSD
As states try to rein in drug spending, feds slap down one bold Medicaid move

As states try to rein in drug spending, feds slap down one bold Medicaid move

image_pdfDownload PDFimage_print

States serve as “laboratories of democracy,” as U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said. And states are also labs for health policy, launching all kinds of experiments lately to temper spending on pharmaceuticals.

No wonder. Drugs are among the fastest-rising health care costs for many consumers and are a key reason health care spending dominates many state budgets — crowding out roads, schools and other priorities.

Consider Vermont, California and Oregon, states that are beginning to implement drug price transparency laws. In Nevada, the push for transparency includes the markup charged by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs). In May, Louisiana joined a growing list of states banning “gag rules” that prevent pharmacists from discussing drug prices with patients.

State-based experiments may carry even greater weight for Medicaid, the federal-state partnership that covers roughly 75 million low-income or disabled Americans.

Ohio is targeting the fees charged to its Medicaid program by PBMs. New York has established a Medicaid spending drug cap. In late June, Oklahoma’s Medicaid program was approved by the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to begin “value-based purchasing” for some newer, more expensive drugs: When drugs don’t work, the state would pay less for them.

But around the same time, CMS denied a proposal from Massachusetts that was seen as the boldest attempt yet to control Medicaid drug spending.

Massachusetts planned to exclude expensive drugs that weren’t proven to work better than existing alternatives. The state said Medicaid drug spending had doubled in five years. Massachusetts wanted to negotiate prices for about 1 percent of the highest-priced drugs and stop covering some of them. CMS rejected the proposal without much explanation, beyond saying Massachusetts couldn’t do what it wanted and continue to receive the deep discounts drugmakers are required by law to give state Medicaid programs.

The Medicaid discounts were established in 1990 law based on a grand bargain that drugmakers say guaranteed coverage of all medicines approved by the Food and Drug Administration in exchange for favorable prices.

The New England Journal of Medicine dives into the CMS decision regarding Massachusetts and its implications for other state Medicaid programs in a commentary by Rachel Sachs, an associate professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, and co-author Nicholas Bagley. They dispute the Trump administration’s claim that Massachusetts’ plan would violate the grand bargain.

We talked with Sachs about Massachusetts’ proposal and the implications for the rest of the country. Her answers have been edited for length and clarity.

Q: Why do you think states, such as Massachusetts, should be allowed to exclude some drugs, a move the pharmaceutical industry has said would break the deal reached back in 1990?

In our view, there’s a way to frame it where the bargain has been broken and Massachusetts is simply trying to restore the balance. The problem is that the meaning of FDA approval has changed significantly over the last almost 30 years. Now we have a lot more drugs that are being approved more quickly, on the basis of less evidence — smaller trials, using surrogate endpoints — where the state has real questions about whether these drugs work at all, not only whether they are good value for the money.

Q: You suggest that Massachusetts could make a reasonable case if it chose to challenge the CMS denial. How?

CMS did not explain why it didn’t grant Massachusetts’ waiver. It needs to give reasons for denying something that Massachusetts, in our view, has the legal ability to do. CMS’ failure to give reasons in this case resembles their failure to give reasons in a number of other cases that have recently led courts to strike down actions by the Trump administration for failure to explain the actions that they were taking.

(Note: A spokeswoman for Health and Human Services in Massachusetts says the state is not going to challenge the CMS decision.)

Q: While CMS blocked the Massachusetts experiment, it has approved the value-based purchasing plan in Oklahoma, and New York has capped its Medicaid drug spending. Aren’t those signs of flexibility for states?

In some ways, yes, and in other ways, no. New York passed a cap on state Medicaid pharmaceutical spending. But once the state hits that cap, it doesn’t mean the state will stop paying for prescription drugs. It just means the state is empowered to negotiate with some of these companies and seek additional discounts. They didn’t need CMS approval for this. New York doesn’t have the ability to say “If you don’t take this deal, we’re not going to cover this product.”

Oklahoma is pursuing outcomes-based pricing, which is of interest. It’s the first state to express interest in doing so. However, there are a lot of observers who are skeptical that outcomes agreements of this kind will materially lower prices or if they just provide companies cover to charge higher prices in the first instance.

Q: So what options do you see ahead for states given what happened in Massachusetts with the Medicaid waiver?

Unfortunately, states are quite limited in what they’re able to do on their own, in terms of controlling prescription drug costs — both costs that are borne by the state in its capacity as a public employer and its capacity as an insurer for the Medicaid population. and then more generally for the many citizens who are on private insurance plans throughout the state.

This is a real problem, this concern of federal pre-emption where states’ ability to go beyond federal law is often limited. So what we’re seeing now is more states like Massachusetts and Vermont taking action that forces the federal government to do something or say something. States are increasingly putting pressure on the federal government because they know that their ability to act on this problem of drug pricing is limited.

This story is part of a partnership that includes WBUR, NPR and Kaiser Health News.

Martha Bebinger, WBUR: [email protected], @mbebinger

Kaiser Health NewsThis article was reprinted from khn.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Tagged with:

About author

Related Articles