STAT+: Pharmalittle: We’re reading about legal battles over state PBM laws, Merck pulling an application and more
Gilead Sciences will still supply its twice-yearly HIV prevention shot in low-income countries if it wins FDA approval
And so, another working week will soon draw to a close. Not a moment too soon, yes? This is, you may recall, our treasured signal to daydream about weekend plans. Our agenda is still shaping up. We plan to hang with one or two of our short people, catch up on our reading, wander about nearby gardens and hold another listening party, where the rotation is likely to include this, this, this, this and this. And what about you? If the weather cooperates, all sorts of possibilities may present themselves – you could stroll along a coastline or lakeside or steer your motorcar through the countryside. If not, you could play chef and cook a favorite dish, or maybe take in a moving picture show. Or if gazing into the future is your thing, you can plan the rest of your life. Well, whatever you do, have a grand time. But be safe. Enjoy, and see you soon…
In a boost for pharmacy benefit managers, the U.S. solicitor general advised the Supreme Court not to review an appeals court ruling that struck down key parts of an Oklahoma law regulating retail networks created by these controversial middlemen in the pharmaceutical supply chain, STAT tells us. The law, which was enacted in 2019, was designed to ensure that pharmacy benefit managers maintain access to a large number of pharmacies and do not steer patients to favored outlets, among other things. But a trade group for pharmacy benefit managers filed a challenge and last year, a U.S. appeals court struck down key parts of the law, ruling it was preempted by federal law. The court also decided the Oklahoma law went beyond a similar law in Arkansas, which reins in pharmacy benefit managers by governing reimbursement rates paid to pharmacies. Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner Glen Mulready petitioned the Supreme Court to review the appeals court decision, but the solicitor general agreed with the appeals court on three provisions of the state law that the trade group had challenged.
CVS and Express Scripts filed separate lawsuits seeking to overturn an Arkansas state law set to go into effect next year that would ban pharmacy benefit managers from owning pharmacies, Reuters reports. The lawsuits (here is one and here is the other) claims the law puts an unconstitutional restriction on interstate commerce by burdening out-of-state companies. The companies, which are among the nation’s largest pharmacy benefit managers, both seek a declaration that the law is unconstitutional and an order barring its enforcement. The first-in-the-nation law, which goes into effect in January, prohibits pharmacy benefit managers from operating both retail and mail-order pharmacies, a move designed to eliminate a conflict of interest that has been blamed for boosting the price of medicines and forcing independent pharmacies to close. At issue is an ongoing concern that the largest pharmacy benefit managers — which are controlled by CVS Health, Cigna, and UnitedHealth Group — favor their own pharmacy operations. Critics say that by doing so, these companies not only dominate the design of health plans for tens of millions of Americans, but also distort the distribution and pricing for prescription medicines.
