US Medicare lays out timeline for third round of drug price negotiations
(Reuters) -The U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said on Monday that it would announce a list of 15 drugs eligible for a third round of Medicare price negotiations by early February next year.
For the first time, the list would include drugs payable under Medicare Part B - which covers medicines administered in a doctor's office or hospital - in addition to prescription drugs covered under Medicare Part D, CMS said.
WHY IT'S IMPORTANT
The drug price negotiation process was established under President Joe Biden's signature Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. The first round included drugs among the most expensive for Medicare insurance plans covering people aged 65 years and older or with disabilities.
After facing criticism from the pharmaceuticals industry, President Donald Trump's administration had previously promised "greater transparency" in the process.
CONTEXT
CMS announced prices for ten drugs in August 2024, in its first round of cuts following a year of talks. The second round, which includes negotiations for 15 drugs such as Novo Nordisk's blockbuster diabetes medicine Ozempic, is currently underway and a final decision on prices is due by November 30, 2025.
Negotiated prices for the third round will take effect on January 1, 2028. Additionally, CMS said it was seeking public comment on various topics to enhance transparency and reduce the administrative burden for participating manufacturers.
Earlier in the day, Trump signed a wide-reaching executive order directing drugmakers to lower their prices to align with what other countries pay, a measure that analysts and legal experts have cautioned will be difficult to implement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
Senate Democrats file bill to prevent ban on transgender military service
Democratic lawmakers will submit a bill in the Senate on Tuesday that would reverse the Pentagon's new ban on transgender military service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria who now face being forced out if they had not previously self-identified as transgender. The "Fit to Serve Act" would prohibit the Defense Department from banning transgender service members from serving in the military. If passed, the law would prevent the Defense Department from denying access to healthcare on the basis of gender identity, and it would also prohibit the military from forcing service members to serve in their sex assigned at birth. It would also make it illegal for the military to discriminate against service members on the basis of gender identity. The Defense Department's policy was required by an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office that banned transgender individuals from serving in the military. In outlining the policy in a memo issued in late February, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote that " individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service." "We recruit and train the best and bravest to protect our country -- losing highly qualified service members, who meet strict standards to join the military, makes us less safe," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who is the lead sponsor of the bill that is being filed in the Senate on Tuesday, which was first announced last month. "By prohibiting this discrimination on the basis of gender identity, this legislation will help to ensure transgender individuals who are qualified to serve may do so" said Sen. Marie Hirono, D-Hawaii, one of the bill's co-sponsors. Under the Pentagon's new policy, transgender service members had until June 6 to self-identify and begin the process of voluntary separation. With the passing of that deadline, the Pentagon has begun a process of involuntary separation of service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which is defined as "psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one's sex assigned at birth and one's gender identity." Ahead of that deadline, the Pentagon said more than 1,000 service members had self-identified as having been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. It is unclear whether that number increased ahead of the deadline or how officials had reached that estimate. National Guard and Reserve service members have until July 7 to self-identify for voluntary separation. The Pentagon's new ban went into effect in early May shortly after the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could enforce the ban on transgender people in the military while legal challenges to the ban proceed in lower courts. Navy Cmdr. Emily Shilling, who is a lead plaintiff in one of the legal challenges, told ABC News that she has chosen to voluntarily separate. "Yes I am 'volunteering' to retire but I do want to make it clear that myself and most others I have spoken to in SPARTA feel it is under duress," said Shilling who is the president of Sparta Pride, an organization advocating for 2,400 transgender people in the military. "For me, it's the only way I believe I can continue to uphold my oath," said Shilling. "I'm stepping away from active duty service, but not service to my country. My fight is only beginning." Defense officials have said that as of last December, about 4,240 current active-duty, Guard and Reserve service members had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. There are more than 2.1 million military service members serving on active-duty, Guard and the Reserves. Advocacy groups have put the actual number of transgender service members as being much higher, at around 15,000. Since 2014, the total number of diagnoses for gender dysphoria among service members was 5,773, with 1,000 of those having gone through gender-affirming surgery, according to a defense official. The total costs for treatments, hormones and surgeries during that time frame was $52 million, said the official. With the end of the voluntary separation period, transgender service members now face what could be a lengthy process that could end with their separation from military service. The process will begin with military commanders being told to identify people in their units who have a diagnosis or history of gender dysphoria or exhibit symptoms consistent with gender dysphoria. Once they have done that, a referral to an annual health checkup will be initiated, beginning what could be a lengthy process that could lead to their removal from the military. Pentagon officials have said those evaluations will be conducted during regularly scheduled annual physicals meaning it could be months before they take place. The Pentagon incentivized service members with gender dysphoria to voluntarily separate ahead of the June 6 deadline by offering benefit payment packages that would be more than double what would be received if they were to separate involuntarily. Those who voluntarily separated would not have to risk paying back the recruitment or retention bonuses they may have earned during their military service. The Democratic senators argue that instead of improving military readiness the implementation of the ban will have the opposite effect. "This ban undermines our military readiness and national security by removing thousands of talented, experienced service members and signaling to potential recruits that the military does not respect them, their colleagues, their family, or their friends simply because of who they are," said a description of the Fit to Serve Act. "It also wastes billions of taxpayer dollars invested in training these troops to become leaders to keep all of us safe." The bill is co-sponsored in the Senate by Warren, Hirono, Tammy Duckworth (Illinois), Kirsten Gillibrand (New York), Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin), Ed Markey (Massachusetts), Ron Wyden (Oregon), Jeff Merkley (Oregon),John Fetterman (Pennsylvania), Chris Van Hollen (Maryland), Bernie Sanders (Vermont), Andy Kim (New Jersey), and Cory Booker (New Jersey). Congressmen Adam Smith (Washington) Mark Takano (California), Chrissy Houlahan (Pennsylvania), Sara Jacobs (California), and Eric Sorensen (Illinois) are sponsoring the legislation in the House of Representatives. "By prohibiting this discrimination on the basis of gender identity, this legislation will help to ensure transgender individuals who are qualified to serve may do so," Hirono said. It remains to be seen how much bipartisan support the legislation could gain and whether it will be able to clear Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House. "If you are willing to risk your life for our country and you can do the job, it shouldn't matter if you are gay, straight, transgender, Black, white or anything else," said Duckworth who added that the ban "is disruptive to our military, hurts readiness and not only does nothing to strengthen our national security -- it actively makes things worse." "The Fit to Serve Act is a declaration that we will not stand by while our courageous troops are under political assault. Transgender service members meet the same rigorous standards, deploy worldwide, put in the same hard work and demonstrate the same dedication as any of their colleagues" said Jennifer Pike Bailey, Government Affairs Director of the Human Rights Campaign, one of the advocacy groups supporting the legislation. "President Trump and Secretary Hegseth are taking away their jobs, cutting off their health care benefits, and disregarding the immense sacrifices these service members and their families have made. It's a slap in the face to all who serve and puts our military readiness at risk," she added. "At a time when the United States faces growing threats around the world, banning them from the All-Volunteer Force will make Americans less safe," said Luke Schleusener, CEO of Out in National Security. "This legislation underscores that the fight to honor the service of thousands of transgender Americans in uniform -- and to strengthen America's national security -- is far from over."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Novo Nordisk Stock Climbs on Report of Activist Investor Parvus Building Stake
Novo Nordisk stock rose on Tuesday after the Financial Times reported that an activist investor is building a stake in the Danish drugmaker. Parvus Asset Management is reportedly looking to influence the hiring of Novo Nordisk's next CEO, the FT reported. The Ozempic and Wegovy maker has faced slowing sales growth and more effective rival weight loss drugs, and it announced last month that its CEO is U.S.-listed shares of Danish drugmaker Novo Nordisk (NVO) rose Tuesday following a report that an activist investor is building a stake in the Ozempic maker. Citing sources familiar with the matter, the Financial Times reported on Monday that Parvus Asset Management has bought up shares in Novo Nordisk, and is looking to influence the hiring of the drugmaker's next CEO. The fund has not disclosed the size of its stake because it is still under 5% of Novo Nordisk's total shares, the legal threshold requiring disclosure under Danish law, the Financial Times reported. The Novo Nordisk Foundation nonprofit owns the majority of voting rights in the weight loss giant, which the FT reported could make any activist pressure campaign difficult. Novo Nordisk's U.S.-listed shares have lost nearly half their value in the last 12 months as sales growth for its landmark weight loss drugs Ozempic and Wegovy have started to slow. Studies have also shown that Eli Lilly's (LLY) rival drugs, Mounjaro and Zepbound, are more effective at weight loss along with promising data for its next-generation drugs. Last month, Novo Nordisk cut its full-year sales and profit forecasts, and just over a week later announced that CEO Lars Fruergaard Jørgensen would step away from the company once it found a successor. Novo Nordisk and Parvus did not immediately respond to Investopedia's requests for comment. Novo Nordisk's American depositary shares were up more than 5% in Tuesday morning trading. Read the original article on Investopedia Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Health Line
2 hours ago
- Health Line
Do All Medicare Plans Cover Preexisting Conditions?
Original Medicare covers preexisting conditions, while Medicare Part D covers medications for those conditions. Medigap and Medicare Advantage plans generally cover preexisting conditions with some exceptions. Original Medicare — which includes Part A (hospital insurance) and Part B (medical insurance) — covers preexisting conditions. Medicare Part D (prescription drug insurance) will also cover the medications you're currently taking for your preexisting condition. Keep reading to learn more about which Medicare supplement plans cover preexisting conditions and what situations might prevent coverage. Do Medicare supplement plans cover preexisting conditions? Medicare supplement plans, also called Medigap plans, are offered by private companies approved by Medicare. Medigap plans cover some of the costs not covered by Original Medicare, such as deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments. If you purchase a Medigap plan during your open enrollment period, even if you have a preexisting condition, you can get any Medigap policy sold in your state. You cannot be denied coverage, and you will pay the same price as people without preexisting conditions. Your open enrollment period for Medigap coverage starts the first month you are 65 years old and also enrolled in Medicare Part B. Can you be denied Medigap coverage? If you apply for Medigap coverage after the open enrollment period, you might not meet medical underwriting requirements and could be denied coverage. Does Medicare Advantage cover preexisting conditions? Medicare Advantage (Part C) plans are offered by private companies that have been approved by Medicare. These plans bundle the coverage of Medicare parts A and B with additional coverage, such as prescription drug coverage and dental, hearing, and vision care. You can join a Medicare Advantage plan if you have a preexisting condition, even if that preexisting condition is end stage renal disease (ESRD). However, if you have ESRD, it is best to ensure that your current services are in-network with the plan. Medicare Advantage special needs plans Medicare Advantage special needs plans (SNPs) include Medicare parts A, B, and D and are only available for people with certain health conditions, such as: autoimmune disorders, such as celiac disease, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis cancer certain disabling behavioral health conditions chronic cardiovascular disease chronic drug dependence or alcohol use disorder chronic heart failure chronic lung disorders, such as asthma, COPD, emphysema, pulmonary hypertension dementia diabetes mellitus end stage liver disease ESRD requiring dialysis HIV or AIDS hematological disorders, such as deep vein thrombosis (DVT), sickle cell anemia, and thrombocytopenia neurological disorders, such as epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) stroke If you become eligible for an SNP and there's a local plan available, you can enroll anytime. If you no longer qualify for a Medicare SNP, you can change your coverage during a special enrollment period. This time period starts when you are notified by your SNP that you're no longer eligible for the plan and continues for 2 months after coverage has ended. Takeaway Original Medicare (Part A and Part B) — covers preexisting conditions. Medicare Part D covers any needed medications for a preexisting condition. If you have a preexisting condition, consider signing up for Medicare supplement insurance. Medigap plans cover some of the out-of-pocket costs of Original Medicare, such as deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments. Medigap offers an open enrollment period during which you cannot be denied coverage, and you will pay the same price as people without preexisting conditions. You might not be able to get coverage if you enroll outside of your open enrollment period. If you're considering a Medicare Advantage plan, depending on your preexisting condition, you may be eligible for a Medicare Advantage SNP. The information on this website may assist you in making personal decisions about insurance, but it is not intended to provide advice regarding the purchase or use of any insurance or insurance products. Healthline Media does not transact the business of insurance in any manner and is not licensed as an insurance company or producer in any U.S. jurisdiction. Healthline Media does not recommend or endorse any third parties that may transact the business of insurance.
