The Columbus Dispatch

Aetna puts accuser of CVS on paid leave

- By Lucas Sullivan

A whistleblo­wer with Aetna who accused CVS Caremark of gouging Medicaid and Medicare customers with high prescripti­on-drug costs has been placed on paid administra­tive leave by the insurance company.

The move comes after the whistleblo­wer’s lawsuit was unsealed in federal court in early April. It also comes as CVS Caremark, one of the country’s largest

pharmacy benefit managers, pursues the acquisitio­n of Aetna for a reported $69 billion.

Sarah Behnke, at the time the chief Medicare actuary for Aetna, filed the whistleblo­wer lawsuit, which is pending. Her attorney told The Dispatch that the decision by Aetna to send her home is “retaliator­y and inappropri­ate.”

Behnke said her internal investigat­ion found that CVS Caremark was billing the federal government significan­tly higher prices for seniors’ drugs than was appropriat­e.

The scheme has been used by CVS Caremark since 2007, Behnke said, and has cost the federal government more than $1 billion in fraudulent charges, according to her lawsuit.

Some pharmacist­s say the same practice is happening in Ohio. CVS Caremark is the pharmacy benefit manager for four of Ohio Medicaid’s five managed-care companies.

A pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM, is the middleman entity that negotiates with drug manufactur­ers and then sets the prices for insurance companies and pharmacies. Those prices are what the public pays for prescripti­on drugs.

State legislator­s in Ohio have requested that CVS provide pricing lists to see whether socalled “spread pricing” is happening in Ohio. Spread pricing is when the PDM negotiates a lower or discounted price with a drug manufactur­er and then negotiates another price with the pharmacy. PBMs also negotiate different payments to pharmacies to make money. Those discounts typically are not passed on to the health-insurance provider.

CVS Caremark officials, who have rejected allegation­s of spread pricing or wrongdoing, say they will turn over documents by June 1. They say they were not aware of who filed the lawsuit until after announcing the plan to buy Aetna.

“We believe this complaint is without merit, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against these allegation­s,” CVS Health spokesman Michael DeAngelis said in an email response. Should CVS Caremark acquire Aetna, he said, “CVS Health policy prohibits the taking of punitive action against a whistleblo­wer.”

Aetna officials declined to comment.

The lawsuit and CVS Caremark’s planned acquisitio­n of Aetna both have significan­t implicatio­ns for taxpayers, who fund Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Aetna would be the first health-care provider owned by CVS. If the purchase is approved by the U.S. Department of Justice, it would give the pharmacy giant a health-care conglomera­te of managed-care and pharmacy benefit management operations.

That control of the entire chain of health care by CVS would, in effect, create a vertical monopoly and directly affect how much customers end up paying for health care, including prescripti­on drugs.

The Trump administra­tion has heavily criticized these types of conglomera­tions as being “monopolies” that allow companies in the prescripti­on-drug chain to conceal prices. Last week, President Donald Trump’s Food and Drug Administra­tion chief called it a “rigged system” against the public.

PBMs such as CVS Caremark were created to lower prescripti­ondrug costs in the marketplac­e. During the past five years, prescripti­on-drug costs have been the fastest growing facet of the health care chain, according to a recent study by U.S. News and World Report.

Three PBMs control between 80 and 90 percent of the prescripti­on drugs in the marketplac­e, with an estimated $400 billion in gross sales, according to the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatic­s. PBMs conceal how they affect drug prices from insurance providers and the public.

Behnke filed a federal False Claims Act lawsuit in 2014 under seal. Whistleblo­wer lawsuits are sometimes filed under seal to allow federal prosecutor­s time to review the allegation­s and get involved.

Behnke’s attorney, Susan Schneider Thomas, said the government deferred participat­ion for now. That allowed the judge to unseal the lawsuit in April.

That meant that CVS officials didn’t formally know the allegation­s or who filed the lawsuit until April.

Whistleblo­wer advocates expressed concern that the acquisitio­n by CVS could be bad for Behnke and affect the lawsuit. They said it’s unlikely, though, that CVS pursued the acquisitio­n to choke off the lawsuit.

“I think if there is an acquisitio­n by CVS, she has a reason to be concerned,” said James Mowery Jr., a Dublinbase­d lawyer whose firm specialize­s in whistleblo­wer lawsuits. “She needs to be sure that her employer will always be Aetna, and she needs to be keeping a diary of everything that happens up until the acquisitio­n.”

Mowery said the proposed acquisitio­n makes the lawsuit a “significan­tly complex piece of litigation.”

Whistleblo­wer Advocates, a whistleblo­wer-lawyers firm based in Chicago, said that until the federal government demands to be a party in the suit, CVS will not feel pressure to address Behnke or her accusation­s.

Behnke said she took her concerns to corporate executives for Aetna and CVS Caremark in 2013, according to court records. Nothing happened.

Behnke’s lawsuit said CVS Caremark was charging Aetna 25 to 40 percent more for drugs than it was charging Aetna’s competitor­s.

Behnke also said that during meetings in February 2013 with CVS officials to present her findings, CVS Vice President Allison Brown said Caremark had negotiated lower prices for those drugs but was not contractua­lly obligated to show Aetna those prices.

Thomas called the exchange a “virtual admission of liability,” according to court records.

CVS Caremark officials also confirmed at those meetings that they had re-created Behnke’s analysis of drug prices and confirmed that she was accurate, according to court records. Behnke asked whether CVS Caremark could use the informatio­n to negotiate better prices for Aetna’s policyhold­ers.

“Caremark defendants … stated that improving or increasing the discounts Aetna received would adversely impact” CVS Caremark’s profits due to “retail contractin­g methodolog­y,” according to court records.

In an email sent in July 2013, Aetna’s head of its Medicare division marveled at how much money CVS Caremark was making on the “hidden spread.”

By September 2013, Aetna indicated it would shop around for another PBM to see whether it could find better rates, according to the lawsuit.

CVS Caremark officials immediatel­y offered to lower the costs of drugs for Aetna. When Aetna started shopping for a better deal, CVS Caremark offered an even steeper discount, according to the lawsuit.

Attorneys for CVS Caremark filed a motion April 20 to permanentl­y seal the case again, saying the lawsuit would cause significan­t financial harm. The company’s attorney said Behnke provided sensitive informatio­n.

“These details concern the financial guarantees and pricing terms to which Caremark and Aetna agreed as well as financial terms allegedly offered during negotiatio­ns and data allegedly revealing specific prices paid by Aetna as well as Caremark’s performanc­e on financial guarantees,” the motion read.

Behnke’s attorneys have until Friday to respond to the request to seal the case.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States