Global Healthy Living Foundation Peer-Reviewed Research Shows Hidden Risks of the Inflation Reduction Act's Drug Pricing Reform
UPPER NYACK, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Global Healthy Living Foundation (GHLF) has launched a research-backed public education campaign to raise awareness about the unintended consequences of drug pricing reforms under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). This initiative stems from a recent peer-reviewed paper co-authored by GHLF's Chief Science Policy Officer, Dr. Robert Popovian, Pharm.D., MS, published in the Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research (JHEOR). It includes a podcast episode, an infographic, and an article aimed at informing patients, caregivers, and policymakers.
they can shift the drug to a higher price tier where patients will pay more out-of-pocket
Share
'The IRA's 'maximum fair price' (MFP) policy was designed to reduce out-of-pocket costs for Medicare patients. However, it may lead to the opposite: higher out-of-pocket costs and increased health risks for vulnerable patients,' report author Dr. Popovian says
'By suppressing the retail price, CMS is reducing the profit margins and revenue for pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), which is good. Predictably, the PBMs will not stand pat—they can shift the drug to a higher formulary tier, where patients will pay more out-of-pocket to acquire the medicine so the PBM can protect its profit margin,' said Dr. Popovian in a recent episode of GHLF's Healthcare Matters podcast.
The study specifically modeled outcomes for two widely used blood thinners, Eliquis and Xarelto. If PBMs reclassify these drugs to higher cost tiers to compensate for lost profit, patients could face an estimated $688 million more in out-of-pocket costs. This cost-shift could result in over 320,000 patients abandoning treatment, potentially leading to 145,000 major cardiovascular events and up to 97,000 deaths.
'This research underscores a serious gap in how drug pricing reforms are being implemented and monitored,' said Dr. Popovian. 'Without proper oversight and transparency, policies that were meant to help patients could end up hurting them.'
The GHLF education campaign includes:
'This campaign is not about politics—it's about patients,' said Seth Ginsberg, GHLF Co-Founder and President. 'We want people to understand what's at stake when reforms don't account for the full complexity of our health care system.'
GHLF encourages policymakers, journalists, and patient advocates to explore these resources and consider how reforms like the IRA impact access to critical medications.
About GHLF
The Global Healthy Living Foundation is a U.S. based, 501(c)(3) nonprofit, international organization whose mission is to improve the quality of life for people with chronic illnesses by advocating for improved access to health care through education, patient-centered clinical research, support, advocacy, and economic and policy research. GHLF is also a staunch advocate for vaccines. The Global Healthy Living Foundation is the parent organization of CreakyJoints®, the international, digital community for millions of people living with arthritis and their supporters worldwide who seek education, support, activism, and patient-centered research in English, Spanish, and French. In addition to arthritis and autoimmune disorders, GHLF supports dermatology, gastroenterology, neurology, cardiology, oncology, infectious disease, rare disease, and pulmonary patients through a host of different programs and activities which draw more than 700,000 patients a month to GHLF websites and create more than 10 million impressions a month on seven social media platforms. In 2024, GHLF had more than 1 million views and listens with its patient-centered audio-visual content, found on YouTube and podcast platforms. GHLF never asks the public for donations, receiving funding instead through governments, non-governmental organizations, foundations, industry, family foundations, and GHLF Co-Founder Louis Tharp. Visit www.ghlf.org for more information.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
There's a new blood test for Alzheimer's. Here's everything you need to know.
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently cleared a blood test that detects signs of Alzheimer's disease in the brain, according to multiple studies. This is the first-ever blood test available for this common form of dementia. Here's how the new blood test works and why it could be useful to patients. Alzheimer's disease is on the rise, in part because the age group most prone to dementia is growing larger. In the U.S., an estimated 7.2 million Americans ages 65 and older are living with Alzheimer's dementia in 2025. The percentage of affected people increases with age: About 5% of people ages 65 to 74 have Alzheimer's, compared with more than 33% of people ages 85 and older. At the point when a doctor has verified that a patient has cognitive decline, the blood test can be used in place of standard tests to see if they likely have Alzheimer's. Previously, gold-standard methods of diagnosing Alzheimer's have been more invasive and expensive, involving positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use radioactive substances; and lumbar punctures, (also called spinal taps) during which a clinician uses a needle to sample spinal fluid from the low back. Clinicians also sometimes use MRIs or CT scans to rule out other causes of cognitive decline. The new test measures the ratio of two proteins in human blood, and this ratio correlates with the presence or absence of amyloid plaques, a primary sign of Alzheimer's found in the brain. For people experiencing memory lapses that might be due to Alzheimer's, the first step is to see their primary care physician (PCP), who should do a cognitive test. If there are signs of cognitive impairment, the patient would then be referred to a neurologist for an in-depth evaluation. Both dementia specialists and PCPs will be able to order this blood test to help with diagnosis, said Dr. Gregg Day, a neurologist with the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida; Day led a study of the blood test published in June in the Journal of the Alzheimer's Association. A study published in 2024 in JAMA found that whether the test was ordered by a PCP or specialist, it was equally accurate at confirming suspected Alzheimer's diagnoses. PCPs could use the test results to decide whether to refer patients to a specialist, who could prescribe treatments such as lecanemab or donanemab, Day said. Or the PCP could personally prescribe a medicine like donepezil, which can help improve mental function in Alzheimer's. With FDA clearance, Medicare and private health insurance providers alike are expected to cover the new blood test, Day said. The test — called the "Lumipulse G pTau217/ß-Amyloid 1-42 Plasma Ratio" — is intended for people ages 55 and older who show signs and symptoms of cognitive decline that have been confirmed by a clinician. The test is designed for the early detection of amyloid plaques associated with Alzheimer's disease. (Amyloid plaques are unusual clumps found between brain cells and made up of a type of protein called beta-amyloid.) Related: Man nearly guaranteed to get early Alzheimer's is still disease-free in his 70s — how? Early detection is important, said Dr. Sayad Ausim Azizi, clinical chief of behavioral neurology and memory disorders at the Yale School of Medicine. That's because the Alzheimer's brain is like a rusty engine — the plaque is like rust settling onto the engine, interfering with the wheels' ability to turn, Azizi told Live Science. There are FDA-approved treatments that act like oil, helping the wheels to turn, but the medication does not remove the rust itself, he said. Available therapies can slow down the degradation of the brain by about 30% to 40%, studies show, so the patient can retain function for longer. "If you're driving now and living independently and you don't take the medicine, it's likely in five years you won't be able to do all these things," Azizi said, providing a hypothetical example. "If you take the medicine, the five years are extended to eight." If adopted as intended, the new blood test could help more people access these treatments sooner. The test is not recommended for the purposes of screening the general population. It is intended only for people who have been found by a doctor to exhibit signs of Alzheimer's disease, Day and Azizi emphasized. Some amount of amyloid is present in the brain during healthy aging, so its presence doesn't guarantee someone will later have Alzheimer's. If the test detects signs of amyloid plaques 20 years before any cognitive symptoms surface, Azizi explained, it would not make sense to treat the patient at that time. "The treatments are not 100% benign," he added. To receive lecanemab, for example, patients must be able to receive an infusion every two weeks at first and every four weeks later on; donanemab is given every four weeks. Both medications can come with infusion-related reactions, such as headache, nausea and vomiting. Rarely, the treatment donanemab can cause life-threatening allergic reactions, and both lecanemab and donanemab have been tied to rare cases of brain swelling or bleeding in the brain. These latter side effects are related to "amyloid-related imaging abnormalities," which are structural abnormalities that appear on brain scans. The new test can give false positives, meaning a person can potentially test positive when they don't actually have Alzheimer's. That's because the signs of amyloid that the tests look for can be tied to other conditions. For instance, amyloid buildup in the brain could be a sign the kidneys are not functioning optimally, Day said, so he recommends also doing a blood test for kidney function when ordering the Alzheimer's blood test. The Mayo Clinic study included about 510 people, 246 of whom showed cognitive decline; the blood test confirmed 95% of those with cognitive symptoms had Alzheimer's. About 5.3% of cases showed a false negative on the blood test, while 17.6% of cases gave a false positive, Day said. Most of the false-positive patients still had Alzheimer's-like changes in their brains, but their symptoms were ultimately attributed to other diseases, such as Lewy body dementia, Day said. The Mayo study found that the blood test helped doctors distinguish Alzheimer's from these other forms of dementia. As is true of many clinical trials, evaluations of the test have primarily included populations that are healthier than average, Day said. These individuals are not only healthier at baseline, but are more likely to have health insurance and be white and non-Hispanic. So when the blood test is used in a broader population, there may be people with sleep apnea or kidney disease who test positive despite not having Alzheimer's, Day said. Some people with these health problems may also experience memory issues or cognitive impairment that's not caused by Alzheimer's disease. If the blood test points to amyloid buildup, doctors could order additional tests and ask patients about their sleep to help rule out these other possibilities. RELATED STORIES —Could vaccines prevent and treat Alzheimer's disease? —Study unravels whole new layer of Alzheimer's disease —Alzheimer's comes in at least 5 distinct forms, study reveals The test will give researchers a more precise idea of how a patient's clinical symptoms relate to the findings on their blood test, Azizi said. "It's a great way of using a biomarker [measurable sign of disease] in the blood to make an earlier diagnosis to give a drug" to slow disease progression, he said. Azizi added that this blood test could help track whether a treatment for Alzheimer's disease is working, which would be useful both for patients receiving approved medicines and those in trials of new drugs. Looking forward, researchers will also be able to evaluate how well blood-based testing works in more diverse populations, Day noted. This article is for informational purposes only and is not meant to offer medical advice.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Providence cuts 600 roles amid restructuring
This story was originally published on Healthcare Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Healthcare Dive newsletter. Renton, Washington-based nonprofit Providence cut 600 jobs this week in a business-wide restructuring. In a statement Thursday, the troubled system said proposed cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, ongoing payment denials and delays from insurers, and higher labor and supply costs necessitated the cuts. The layoffs affect less than 1% of Providence's total workforce and impact mostly nonclinical, administrative functions, Providence said. However, some patient care roles were impacted. By its own account, Providence has had a difficult start to 2025. The 51-hospital system began the year by streamlining and reducing its executive team by 46 positions. Providence's new CEO, Erik Wexler, said the cuts were necessary as the system prioritized 'focus and discipline.' Then in April, the health system said it would freeze nonclinical hiring and cut some discretionary spending, including nonessential travel and future sponsorship of major league sports teams, due to a 'perfect storm' of economic pressures. At the time, Wexler said he had hoped Providence, which hasn't posted a profit in four years, would break even in 2025. 'We were on track to finally break even this year. But just as we were nearing that goal, the external economic conditions in 2025 took a sudden turn,' Wexler said in an April email to staff. Pressures include cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, which Wexler said have cost the health system $500 million. Additional cuts proposed by Congress could cost the system an additional $1 billion annually. Tariffs could also cause supply costs to shoot up by tens of millions of dollars. The health system is also taking a hit from new state-level regulations, including stronger charity care laws and staffing legislation in Oregon, according to a financial report. The regulations have decreased revenue and driven up staffing costs. Other one-time costs include impacts from a 46-day nurses strike in Oregon and lost revenue from the Los Angeles wildfires. The expenses have taken a toll: Operating revenues rose by 1% year over year during the first quarter, while operating expenses increased by 6%. Providence said the most recent layoffs are part of the health system's effort to restore its finances. 'These difficult but necessary steps are part of a comprehensive approach to financial sustainability that will enable our family of organizations to better reinvest in and revitalize the front lines of care, including the people, programs, equipment and facilities needed to serve our communities,' Providence COO Darryl Elmouchi said in a statement. Other nonprofits have recently conducted large, swift rounds of layoffs. Boston-based Mass General Brigham laid off 1,500 employees in two rounds conducted over a matter of weeks. In contrast, Providence cut executive roles and froze hiring before conducting its own mass layoffs. The phased-in approach may have allowed the health system to be more precise about where it reduced headcount, however, drawing out workforce changes over several months holds risks for employee morale, said Andy Challenger, senior vice president of outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. 'It does have a legitimate effect on people's psyche, on their morale and on their willingness to stay at the company,' Challenger said. 'While you can be a lot more precise as an organization if you do your cuts that way — you can take the scalpel to [layoffs] instead of a butcher's knife and make sure that you're not overcutting... you can also create a real culture of panic for months and months on end.' Recommended Reading Providence freezes nonclinical hiring amid financial 'perfect storm' Sign in to access your portfolio
Boston Globe
3 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wants health agencies to use a lot more AI. After the MAHA report, experts have some concerns
Advertisement And with the apparent inclusion of material imagined by AI, referred to as hallucinations, in the 'Make America Healthy Again' report, they see an ominous sign for the administration's ability to deploy it safely. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'If they were proceeding more apace, and I'm not talking about glacial government pace, I'm talking about responsible pace, this wouldn't happen,' said Oren Etzioni, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington and entrepreneur who studies AI. 'The presence of these embarrassing missteps just shows that it's amateur hour.' Kennedy has expressed ambitious but vague plans, usually in the context of cutting costs. He has outlined his vision during several congressional hearings, including one to replace the use of animals in experimental testing and some steps in clinical trials. 'We're phasing out most animal studies . . . because we can accomplish a lot of those goals on safety and efficacy with AI technology,' Kennedy said. Advertisement He also mentioned using AI to analyze data that HHS and other agencies have collected on patients, such as people on Medicare and Medicaid. He said they've recruited experts to 'transform our agency for a central hub for AI.' So far, the Food and Drug Administration has announced computer and AI modeling. 'In the long-term (3-5 years), FDA will aim to make animal studies the exception rather than the norm for pre-clinical safety/toxicity testing,' the FDA said in its road map. But the mistakes in the 'Make America Healthy Again' report have experts skeptical of HHS's ability to use AI correctly. The report cited sources that do not exist and had garbled footnotes, The agency declined to answer definitively whether AI was used on the report and why it contained nonexistent citations, but rather only highlighted the substance of the report. It also did not offer specifics about protocols for responsible AI use. 'HHS is addressing the risk of AI-generated errors through rigorous validation, human oversight, and strict quality controls,' a spokesperson said in a statement. 'AI tools are designed to support — not replace — expert judgment.' Advertisement Experts say the specifics of how AI is implemented will bethe true measure of whether the efforts at HHS will succeed or end up being harmful. 'I'm actually deeply optimistic about what [AI] can do in a lot of areas, including the ones that the secretary mentioned,' said Ziad Obermeyer, a physician and researcher at the University of California Berkeley who studies AI in biomedicine. 'What my research has shown is that it actually comes down to some of the really boring details that make the difference between a good, powerful algorithm that helps people, and one that really messes things up.' Republicans who work on AI issues in the Senate supported Kennedy's goals but also agreed on the importance of rolling it out with the right protections. 'This is going to be the future,' said Indiana Senator Todd Young. 'I mean, we'd be doing something wrong if, if the head of our health agency wasn't talking about using AI.' The two general use cases that Kennedy has mentioned, replacing steps in clinical trials and analyzing patient data, have some potential issues in common, including that AI can generate false information. But they also have risks unique to each case. Privacy, for example, is a serious concern with patient data. If not properly stripped of identifying factors, even supposedly anonymized data can be re-identified, as has happened in some cases. 'The most secret private information that people have is their health care data, and so AI should not be used in any way that does not have the strongest possible safeguards,' said Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, a Democrat. 'We could have an absolute privacy catastrophe.' Advertisement Harvard Law School professor I. Glenn Cohen, who studies medical ethics and AI, said that the idea holds great potential, but that the administration would need to be very transparent about how it is protecting data and would be wise to run smaller pilot studies first. 'The 'move fast and break things' ethos of Silicon Valley may be appropriate in some parts of life — I don't really care if you're doing it for the order of Instagram postings," Cohen said. 'But it's not a philosophy we advocate for physicians or an attitude I think most people want health care to take.' The key limitation of AI is that it is only as good as the dataset used to build it. In specific areas where scientific data is really good and outcomes are predictable, such as in the structure of proteins, scientists have built powerful AI tools. AI can also help doctors and patients assess symptoms. But those are different from the discovery of new information, experts say, which is what a lot of science and clinical trials for novel treatments are designed to explore. Allison Coffin is a researcher at Creighton University who studies hearing loss, including that caused by certain medicines. She uses mostly zebra fish in her work, but also rodents. She says her lab is working on AI tools to help identify potential toxins in order to conduct more targeted research. But, she said, AI would always be used as an idea generator for testing in animals, not to replace them. 'That's an excellent case for AI, because AI can rapidly assess millions of potential drug structures. But you would still want to test their efficacy for new therapies in an animal,' Coffin said. 'I would never want to take a medication that hadn't been given to a living creature before, and I would think most people wouldn't. Do we want to be the first to take medication because a computer model says that it's safe?' Advertisement Other scientists questioned the ability of the government to do the cutting-edge research necessary after the administration's deep cuts to research funding and staff. 'Honestly I'm struggling for what to say,' wrote Sean Eddy, a Harvard scientist who works on building computer models for biology and genomic research. 'I just don't see how it makes sense for HHS to talk about delivering innovative technological breakthroughs while they're destabilizing and belittling the US scientific research enterprise. . . . Every lab at Harvard that does this kind of research, including my own, has had all their federal funding terminated.' Experts also question whether Kennedy understands where AI technology actually is today versus its potential capacities. Many cited cautionary tales of much lower-stakes AI deployment gone wrong, such as companies that 'Doing things like simulating an entire body in order to save clinical trials is just grossly unrealistic where we sit right now,' said Gary Marcus, a professor emeritus at New York University and critic of AI enthusiasm. 'If we're lucky, we can do it in 40 [years], but we certainly can't now. That's just a pipe dream.' Advertisement Tal Kopan can be reached at
