CPS 340B Solutions hosted a roundtable webinar exploring current events impacting the drug pricing program.
On April 12, 2022, the CPS 340B Solutions team presented a roundtable discussion with the goal of examining recent legislative updates and key trends impacting hospitals, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), and other designated entities.
PARTICIPANTS IN THE ROUNDTABLE INCLUDED:
THE EXPERTS CAME TOGETHER TO DISCUSS:
Todd Hudnall opened the roundtable with an overview of CPS 340B Solutions. He noted that CPS partners with more than 2,500 professionals while serving more than 800 partner facilities to provide the following:
Jason Reddish followed with a brief history of contract pharmacy, noting that from 1996 through 2020, every drug manufacturer participating in the 340B program participated in shipping covered outpatient drugs to contract pharmacies. In 2020, some manufacturers began to impose restrictions and requirements on 340B drugs sent to contract pharmacies.
|
He went on to say: “As stated in the 1992 340B statute, CEs are entitled to purchase outpatient drugs at or below the 340B ceiling price and cannot sell or transfer those drugs to anyone other than their patients. Many of the original CEs that were established when the 340B program began, such as Ryan White clinic sites, did not have an in-house pharmacy.” |
REDDISH EXPLAINED THAT IN ORDER TO RECTIFY THIS PROBLEM:
Reddish then noted that since June of 2020, a number of drug manufacturers began imposing restrictions and requirements related to contract pharmacies and 340B drug pricing. To date, 15 pharmaceutical manufacturers have restrictions in place for 340B pricing for contract pharmacies. Because the 340B statute does not speak to restrictions imposed by drug manufacturers, the CE view is that all purchases must be honored. The manufacturer view is that restrictions can be imposed, citing concerns over potential duplicate discounts.
Reddish identified litigation around the issue of manufacturer restrictions and requirements related to 340B, including:
Ted Slafsky pivoted to an overview of federal and state legislative solutions in the works, including the Protect 340B Act, a bipartisan bill submitted to the House of Representatives intended to address the issue of discriminatory reimbursement to 340B pharmacies and providers.
Slafsky noted that HRSA has begun contacting hospitals forced out of 340B during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding possible reinstatement, and explained that a recent bill creates eligibility exceptions to support these CEs.
He also stated that HRSA has asked Congress for regulatory authority, which would allow them to publish regulations in the areas of contract pharmacy, patient definitions, and other places where HRSA does not currently have authority.
Regarding state legislation, Slafsky shared that 18 states have been active in passing legislation that reforms PBM practices and laws that protect 340B CEs. These include anti-pickpocketing laws that prevent PBMs from paying 340B CEs less than non-340B entities. Some bills address additional issues such as payer requirement to tag 340B drugs at the point of sale.
|
Consider The Protect 340B Act, a bipartisan bill submitted to the House of Representatives intended to address the issue of discriminatory reimbursement to 340B pharmacies and providers. |
Interested in more information on how CPS 340B Solutions can partner with your organization to DRIVE EXCELLENCE FOR YOUR 340B PROGRAM?
Let’s schedule a time to connect.