Secret discounts paid by drugmakers to pharmacy benefit managers are going away so now what?

Source: Berkley Research Group and IMS Quintiles

Pfizer Inc. CEO Ian Read said on Tuesday July 31, 2018, “drugmakers will likely get rid of secret discounts to middlemen that have become a focus of the U.S. drug-cost debate.” What are these secret discounts and who are these middlemen to whom Ian Read is referring?

Rebates are secret discounts drugmakers use to compete for coveted spots on pharmacy benefit managers’ formularies or lists of covered drugs. The intent of these discounts is to help lower overall drug costs for third-party payers and patients.

Middlemen who negotiate drug rebates on behalf of employers and health plans but hide rebate revenue are called non-fiduciary pharmacy benefit managers or NFPBMs. Whether or not rebates, as a hidden cash flow, completely go away or how long it will take for drugmakers to get rid of them is unclear.

Let’s not be naive. If rebates go away do you believe for one second CVS Health’s or Optum’s PBM revenues will decline? Not a chance as they will shift your costs elsewhere. Here’s a look at some of the ways non-fiduciary PBMs will grow revenue despite the elimination of rebates.

1) There are plenty of other opaque discounts to be had. WAC is the list price for wholesalers yet they also receive volume discounts from drugmakers beyond WAC. A lower list price doesn’t necessarily translate into lowest “net” price to the self-insured employer. A PBM could negotiate a big discount yet not pass all of the savings on to the self-insured employer by billing a higher price, for example. In order to determine what the PBM actually pays, demanding radical transparency will be key.
2) Vertical Integration. It is cures or “near-cure” high cost medications driving integration. When PBMs and insurance carriers carve-in the medical and pharmacy benefit it often requires self-insured employers to relinquish flexibility and cost controls. Simply put, it’s going to be more difficult to get behind the curtain. For instance, plan members may pay U&C (usual and customary) prices.

3) Unsophistication. PBMs, and healthcare systems for that matter, are applying their drug management expertise to the medical side far more than they are letting on. Complicated algorithms determine which drugs stay on the medical benefit versus the pharmacy benefit, for example. The decision-making process as you might guess considers cost share. It took 20 years for rebates to come under serious fire. Non-fiduciary PBMs are counting on the unsophisticated plan sponsor to wait another 20 years before taking action on exorbitant drug prices on the medical side.

The Trump administration is weighing a proposal to overhaul regulations governing the rebates, which could limit their use and increase competition between drugmakers, while helping some patients. The federal anti-kickback statute allows “safe harbor” to protect the use of rebates. I can’t say that I blame the administration.

Non-fiduciary PBMs are pocketing the rebates and sharing them with insurers. Too little of that revenue goes to self-insured employers and even less, if any, to the patients whose prescriptions make the rebate revenue happen.

Even more, non-fiduciary PBMs generate the most rebate revenue on prescription drugs for the sickest patients. Of the more than $100 billion in brand rebate revenue non-fiduciary PBMs receive annually, half are from medicines for cancer, MS, HIV, hepatitis C, etc.

While non-fiduciary PBMs should be criticized, it’s important to note that they are playing with house money. That is, the rebate revenue comes from drugmakers. I believe more drugmakers will start passing rebates directly to third-party payers and patients in the form of lower list prices. Ultimately, lower list prices should reduce cost sharing, improve adherence and save lives.

“Don’t Miss” Webinar: How to Slash PBM Service Costs, up to 50%, Without Changing Vendors or Benefit Levels

How many businesses do you know want to cut their revenues in half? That’s why traditional pharmacy benefit managers don’t offer radical transparency and instead opt for hidden cash flow opportunities such as rebate masking. Want to learn more?


Here is what some participants have said about the webinar.

“Thank you Tyrone. Nice job, good information.” David Stoots, AVP

“Thank you! Awesome presentation.” Mallory Nelson, PharmD

“Thank you Tyrone for this informative meeting.” David Wachtel, VP

“…Great presentation! I had our two partners on the presentation as well. Very informative.” Nolan Waterfall, Agent/Benefits Specialist


A snapshot of what you will learn during this 30 minute webinar:

  • Hidden cash flows in the PBM Industry such as formulary steering, rebate masking and differential pricing 
  • How to calculate cost of pharmacy benefit manager services or CPBMS
  • Specialty pharmacy cost-containment strategies
  • The financial impact of actual acquisition cost (AAC) vs. maximum allowable cost (MAC)
  • Why mail-order and preferred pharmacy networks may not be the great deal you were sold
Sincerely,
TransparentRx
Tyrone D. Squires, MBA  
3960 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Suite 500  
Las Vegas, NV 89169  
866-499-1940 Ext. 201


P.S.  Yes, it’s recorded. I know you’re busy … so register now and we’ll send you the link to the session recording as soon as it’s ready.

Reference Pricing: “Gross” Invoice Cost for Popular Generic and Brand Prescription Drugs (Volume 230)

This document is updated weekly, but why is it important? Healthcare marketers are aggressively pursuing new revenue streams to augment lower reimbursements provided under PPACA. Prescription drugs, particularly specialty, are key drivers in the growth strategies of PBMs, TPAs and MCOs pursuant to health care reform.

The costs shared here are what the pharmacy actually pays; not AWP, MAC or WAC. The bottom line; payers must have access to actual acquisition costs or AAC. Apply this knowledge to hold PBMs accountable and lower plan expenditures for stakeholders.


How to Determine if Your Company [or Client] is Overpaying

Step #1:  Obtain a price list for generic prescription drugs from your broker, TPA, ASO or PBM every month.

Step #2:  In addition, request an electronic copy of all your prescription transactions (claims) for the billing cycle which coincides with the date of your price list.

Step #3:  Compare approximately 10 to 20 prescription claims against the price list to confirm contract agreement.  It’s impractical to verify all claims, but 10 is a sample size large enough to extract some good assumptions.

Step #4:  Now take it one step further. Check what your organization has paid, for prescription drugs, against our acquisition costs then determine if a problem exists. When there is a 5% or more price differential (paid versus actual cost) we consider this a problem.

Multiple price differential discoveries means that your organization or client is likely overpaying. REPEAT these steps once per month.

— Tip —


Always include a semi-annual market check in your PBM contract language. Market checks provide each payer the ability, during the contract, to determine if better pricing is available in the marketplace compared to what the client is currently receiving.


When better pricing is discovered the contract language should stipulate the client be indemnified. Do not allow the PBM to limit the market check language to a similar size client, benefit design and/or drug utilization. In this case, the market check language is effectually meaningless.