California drug makers want to put a face other than Martin Shkreli's on the issue of drug pricing.
Saying
a price transparency bill in the state Legislature will shift money
from research to paperwork, the California Life Sciences Association
trade group is unleashing a digital campaign emphasizing patients and
caregivers.
The
initiative is the latest in the rhetorical back-and-forth featuring
legislators, patient advocacy groups, consumer organizations, labor
unions, insurers and the biopharmaceutical industry — a debate that
often features Shkreli's well-documented plan as CEO of Turing
Pharmaceuticals to increase the price of a generic drug treating HIV
patients by 5,000 percent.
What's
more, drug pricing is a dominant issue as 15,000 or more biotech
executives and others land on San Francisco this week for the
Biotechnology Innovation Organization's annual convention.
It
is the first time the Bay Area has hosted BIO's big convention since
2004, when some protestors pelted convention-goers with tomatoes to
highlight their opposition to genetically modified food. Now the
industry's battle with consumers and legislators centers on Gilead Sciences Inc.'s $1,000-a-pill hepatitis C drugs, Shkreli and other price increases.
A
petition effort will put a pricing initiative on November's ballot, but
the state legislation would require biopharmaceutical companies to
report to state government purchasers when a drug price increases more
than 10 percent or when a new drug will cost more than $10,000 a year.
It also would require insurance companies to report information about
drug price increases.
"It's for the overall good of transparency," said state Sen. Ed Hernandez, a Los Angeles-area Democrat. "It's of more benefit to the public."
Not so, said Sara Radcliffe, CEO of the California Life Sciences Association, the biotech industry trade group based in South San Francisco.
"It requires a lot of paperwork for lawyers and accountants instead of researchers," Radcliffe said.
What's
more, she said, in the 60 days between drug makers reporting a price
and the actual increase, secondary distributors could corner the market
on a drug at the lower price and sell months later at the higher price.
That could lead to drug shortages in the interim, she said.
"It's a bad idea for patient access and safety," Radcliffe said.
CLSA is leading a digital campaign,
called "Protect Access & Innovation," that features patients and
nurses and other caregivers, specifically aimed at Hernandez' Senate
Bill 1010.
The California Senate last week approved the bill — supported by the California Labor Federation
and Health Access California, a consumer advocacy group — on a 25-10
vote. It now goes to the state Assembly and could land on Gov. Jerry
Brown's desk in late August.
While
the drug industry argues that the bill would bring more paperwork than
transparency, Hernandez said it would bring clarity around the role drug
prices play in the overall cost of healthcare. Several industry groups
have said drugs account for only 10 percent or so of health care costs,
other estimates have put it at about 20 percent.
"What
really is the cost of prescription medications? We should find that
out," Hernandez said. "They say 10 percent; I hear differently."
The
state Legislature has had to augment budgets for state programs,
including MediCal, Covered California and state prisons, by $224
million, Hernandez said, because they were blindsided by the cost of one
drug: Gilead's Sovaldi.
The
drug is as good as a cure for hepatitis C, a viral infection that often
leads to liver cancer and liver transplants. What's more, Sovaldi and
Gilead's other hep C tablet, Harvoni, can treat patients in a matter of
months, instead of patients receiving debilitating, year-long
injections.
Overall,
Foster City-based Gilead (NASDAQ: GILD) and other drug industry
executives have argued, the drugs offer long-term savings. But payers
claimed the costs came out of nowhere and stressed their budgets in the
short term.
Senate Bill 1010 would give California state payers more time to respond, Hernandez said.
"We're
not setting prices for them. There's absolutely no price fixing, no
regulating of drug prices," Hernandez said. "But we're putting sunshine
in the true cost of drugs and the percentage of premium dollars" for
which drug prices are responsible.
The
bill, CLSA's Radcliffe said, is well intentioned but in the end won't
help patients. What's more, she said, it also would take away drug
companies' flexibility to negotiate discounts with insurance companies
and other "partners."
Publishing
drug prices publicly means a system of crisscrossing rebates and
discounts — a confusing mishmash of health care prices negotiated
privately, even among public health plans — would no longer be effective
for drug makers/sellers.
In some cases, those discounts mean drug makers are providing drugs at less than their costs.
"The
whole market migrates to the same price and it defeats competition to
lower those prices," Radcliffe said. "A list could be exploited by
competitors in the market."
The
bill, she said, also doesn't address the underlying problem of
"discriminatory insurance design," where patients rather than hospitals
or insurers are hit with bigger out-of-pocket expenses.
"We
do understand Sen. Hernandez has a good intent here: trying to do
something for patients," Radcliffe said. "But this is a classic case of
the devil being in the details."
No comments:
Post a Comment