The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)

The wrong approach to drug price reform

- By Drew Johnson Drew Johnson is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research.

It’s been a rough summer for Americans battling chronic diseases.

The Trump administra­tion scrapped a proposal that would have reformed the prescripti­on drug supply chain and saved patients billions of dollars. Now, the administra­tion is trying to impose price controls on drugs administer­ed through Medicare.

The president had it right the first time. Price controls would cripple medical innovation, ultimately harming patients. It’d be far smarter for the administra­tion to reform the opaque supply chain and cut patients’ out-of-pocket costs.

The shelved reform would have targeted Medicare’s Part D prescripti­on drug benefit, which covers over 44 million seniors. Though subsidized by the federal government, private insurers sell plans to beneficiar­ies, each featuring different monthly premiums, drugs and coinsuranc­e at the pharmacy.

Insurers hire “pharmacy benefit managers” to administer Part D plans. PBMs negotiate with drug companies to decide which medication­s each plan will cover, and how much patients will pay.

PBMs extract discounts from manufactur­ers, who want their drugs covered by Part D plans. In 2018, companies offered $166 billion in discounts and rebates on their drugs. PBMs keep a portion of these rebates and pass the rest to insurers, who then reduce premiums by a few dollars for all beneficiar­ies.

That does little to help patients who rely on multiple drugs. These folks still owe copays or coinsuranc­e — a percentage of a drug’s total price — based on their drugs’ pre-discounted “list” prices.

Say a cholestero­l medication costs $100. A PBM might negotiate a 50 percent discount, allowing insurers to pay $50. Since patients pay coinsuranc­e based on list prices, not discounted prices, folks with 25 percent coinsuranc­e requiremen­ts still owe $25, rather than $12.50.

President Trump came close to fixing this system. His proposal would have forced insurers and PBMs to use their discounts and rebates to lower patients’ out-of-pocket costs. By one estimate, this would have saved Part D patients as much as $59.5 billion between 2020 and 2029.

Now that the administra­tion has withdrawn the proposal, patients may never see those savings.

Worse, the administra­tion’s plan to impose Medicare price controls could harm patients by impeding future drug innovation.

The proposal is meant to reduce spending in Medicare Part B, which covers drugs administer­ed in doctors’ offices and hospitals. The plan would tie the prices that Medicare pays for these drugs to the cheaper prices paid in other developed countries. Drugs are cheaper abroad because many countries use price controls.

Over time, this policy would undermine research into new drugs. Pharmaceut­ical companies spend $2.6 billion, on average, developing each new drug. Less than 12 percent of experiment­al medicines ever make it to market. Researcher­s only fund these risky projects on the off-chance that a successful drug will recoup their investment and turn a profit.

But if the government sets artificial­ly low drug prices, companies would have little hope of earning back their upfront costs. As a result, funding for research into new treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s, and other conditions will evaporate.

Let’s hope the president nixes his advisers’ proposal and strives to slash out-of-pocket costs instead.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States