In a blog posted last summer we highlighted why advocacy partnerships are so important to the HIV/AIDS community, and how these partnerships advance public policies designed with patients' interests in mind. Last week, we were reminded...AGAIN...why there is an inherent value in advocacy partnerships. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("CMS") released its Final Rule on Medicare Part D, which did not include potential harmful changes to its six protected drug classes ("6PC").
 |
| Photo Source: indystar.com |
The 6PC "protects vulnerable seniors and low-income beneficiaries with serious and complex health conditions, while also allowing Part D insurance plans to use the tools they need to control costs. Medicines for some of the sickest patients in Part D are covered within the six protected classes, including those for cancer, epilepsy, HIV/AIDS and mental illness. Many of these conditions require patients to attempt a variety of therapies before they and their doctor settle on the most appropriate treatment, so there is no one-size fits all medicine for these conditions."[1]
The current Administration had proposed to weaken these drug class protections, but their attempt was met with fierce opposition from the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocacy groups, and numerous powerful trade associations. Fortunately, in the end, CMS decided to walk back from their short-sighted proposal.[2]
The ADAP Advocacy Association discussed the issue at its recent HIV/AIDS Fireside Chat retreat in California, we all as endorsed numerous national sign-on letters and continually Tweeted to @CMSGov about the potential harm to people living with HIV/AIDS.
Reaction to the news was universally positive!
"The epilepsy community spoke up loudly against this proposal and we are grateful that the Administration heard us," said Philip M. Gattone, M.Ed., president and CEO of the Epilepsy Foundation. "For people living with epilepsy, there is no 'one-size-fits-all' anticonvulsant, and treatment is highly individualized. People with epilepsy need access to the full range of anticonvulsants so that they — along with their healthcare provider — can identify and remain on the medication(s) that helps them achieve seizure control. Preserving this important policy will enable that to happen."[3]
Altha Stewart, M.D., President of the American Psychiatric Association, said, "With adherence to medications already a challenge, this proposal would have added additional utilization management burden which contributes to burnout for clinicians, as well as confusion for patients trying to navigate an already complex system. This rule protects patients by ensuring they receive lifesaving medications through the protected classes."[4]
“Medicare beneficiaries with the most complex, chronic conditions are breathing a sigh of relief,” said Chuck Ingoglia, executive director of the Partnership for Part D Access, a coalition of drug makers and patient advocacy organizations that also opposed the proposal. “This rule cements Medicare’s protected classes policy as an essential patient safeguard in Medicare’s prescription drug program.”[5]
In 2014, like this year, advocacy partnerships also squashed attempts by the previous Administration to weaken Medicare Part D's 6PC. It demonstrates that stakeholders can from time to time, unite behind common goals. In the case of the 6PC proposals in 2014 and 2019 it was patient protections that won the day.
CMS's Final Rule also prohibits the use of step therapy for patients who are stable on their current treatment.[6] Yet another win for patients, which was achieved by different stakeholder groups uniting against the dangers of step therapy.
Advocacy partnerships prove that stakeholders don't have to agree on everything, yet can come together to advance (or protect) common interests. What happened last week with the CMS announcement shows that people living with HIV/AIDS are well-served by such collaboration. Chalk one up for us, finally!
__________
[1] Johnson, Juliet (2019, January 31). New Research Shows Changes to the Six Protected Classes Would Harm Most Vulnerable Patients and Are Unnecessary. ADAP Blog. Retrieved online at https://adapadvocacyassociation.blogspot.com/2019/01/new-research-shows-changes-to-six.html.
[2] Owermohle, Sarah, and Sarah Karlin-Smith. (2019, May 17). Patient groups, pharma cheer CMS retreat on protected class change. POLITICO. Retrieved online at https://www.politico.com/newsletters/prescription-pulse/2019/05/17/patient-groups-pharma-cheer-cms-retreat-on-protected-class-change-437838.
[3] Epilepsy Foundation. (2019, May 17). Epilepsy Advocates and Partners Successfully Preserve Medicare's Six Protected Classes Policy. Business Insider. Retrieved online at https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/epilepsy-advocates-and-partners-successfully-preserve-medicare-s-six-protected-classes-policy-1028210785.
[4] American Psychiatric Association. (2019, May 17). APA Commends CMS for Maintaining Medicare's Six Protected Classes Policy. Retrieved online at https://www.psychiatry.org/newsroom/news-releases/apa-commends-cms-for-maintaining-medicare-s-six-protected-classes-policy.
[5] Florko, Nicholas. (2019, May 16). Trump administration backs off a proposal to let Medicare plans exclude certain drugs. STAT. Retrieved online at https://www.statnews.com/2019/05/16/trump-backs-off-protected-classes/.
[6] Biotechnology Innovation Organization. (2019, May 20). Final Medicare Rule Improves Patient Rx Access, But Challenges Remain.
No comments:
Post a Comment