Here is what some participants have said about the webinar.

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

Click to Learn More

CVS’s proposed deal with Aetna has received a lot of attention. If the deal goes through, experts believe patients could end up paying more, not less. A company with such leverage will make it challenging for new organizations offering insurance coverage to enter the market and compete.

Furthermore, many employers and other health care purchasers have enjoyed the flexibility of offering medical benefits and pharmaceutical benefits to their members through separate companies. By keeping medical benefits and pharmaceutical benefits separate, employers and other purchasers have been able to shop around, gaining leverage as competitors know prospective customers have multiple choices.

Without the option to offer these benefits separately, purchasers will have to look for which singular health plan offers the best combination of medical and pharmacy benefit management. This might leave them compromising on one to ensure the other meets their needs.

[Read More]

Radical transparency in pharmacy benefits management  starts with training and education. Click here to begin yours.

Well not quite bankrupting costs for companies like Amazon, Berkshire Hathway or JPMorgan Chase, but high enough for each to forgo the status quo and walk a new path together. The challenges associated with specialty drugs requires a whole new playbook, one with collaboration as the organizing principle. Third-party payers must be proactive in working with providers and PBMs, in several areas, to rein in specialty drug spend.

Appropriate sites of care. When it comes to specialty drugs, the driver of total cost is not just in the unit pricing but also in how and where those drugs are administered. Working jointly to steer patients to the most effective sites will boost total effectiveness and help control costs.

Clinical management. Given the rapid evolution of the pharmaceutical market, the question is no longer whether a treatment exists for a condition, but how effective it is. The pace of innovation and approvals puts a premium on keeping up with the incoming waves of new research, driving drug choice and adherence to cost-effective protocols, and engaging with patients so they follow treatment as prescribed.

Cost containment. When it comes to pharmaceutical cost and trend, misaligned incentives can get in the way of optimal solutions. Third party payers and providers must streamline their processes, especially as they pertain to medications, and wring out unnecessary expenditures whenever possible. Reducing costs can involve many levers, including standardizing therapies and negotiating prices accordingly, expanding the use of generics and exploring biosimilar alternatives.

To the naked eye what I’ve shared here might be overlooked, yet I can’t stress enough how important sites of care, clinical management and cost-containment are for plan sponsors. We recently worked on a medical Rx claim case for IL-2 (Interleukin-2) where our cost was $51,300 compared to the billed amount of $549,920 for a potential savings of $498,620!

Click to Enlarge

Express Scripts Holding Co. built a multi-billion enterprise pressuring drug companies to lower their prices for U.S. patients. Now it is quietly building a side business: getting paid to help drug companies dispense a new generation of high-priced drugs.

Express Scripts is in talks with biotechnology companies Biomarin Pharmaceutical Inc., Spark Therapeutics Inc. and Bluebird Bio Inc. to have its specialty pharmaceutical business exclusively distribute their new hemophilia therapies when they are expected to become available in 2019 and 2020, Chief Medical Officer Steve Miller told Reuters in an interview.

Tyrone’s Commentary:

The shift is on! Non-fiduciary PBMs are giving more transparency, on the pharmacy benefit, only to shift [pharmacy] cost to the medical benefit. Vertically integrated carriers are preaching the benefits of their business models and in some cases rightfully so. But, if integrating the medical and pharmacy benefit requires that you relinquish flexibility and cost controls, the disadvantages of integration far outweigh the advantages. Disadvantages may include:

1. Plan members may pay U&C (usual and customary) prices, which are higher than discounted prices
2. Formulary and rebate arrangements may not be available or are significantly limited
3. Plan sponsors lack authority and flexibility and are typically unable to adjudicate plan limitations, plan exclusions, enforce generic dispensing mandates or validate appropriate drug pricing

Biomarin, Spark and Bluebird confirmed to Reuters that they were speaking to payers, a group generally defined as pharmacy benefit managers, health plans and government agencies, about pricing models for future therapies. Analysts project those drugs could top $1 million to $1.5 million in price.

Rather than rail against the drugs’ expected high prices, Miller echoes the familiar drug company argument that the potentially curative therapies will likely be worth the high cost if they supplant the hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual medical costs to treat ailments such as hemophilia, which affects about 20,000 people in the United States alone.

[Read More]

Radical transparency in pharmacy benefits management  starts with training and education. Click here to begin yours.

Ohio’s Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) charged the state a “spread” of more than 31 percent for generic drugs – nearly four times as much as the previously reported average spread across all drugs, according to a new report by Ohio Auditor of State Dave Yost.

An analysis conducted by Auditor Yost’s staff found PBMs collected $208 million in fees on generic Medicaid prescriptions, or 31.4 percent of the $662.7 million paid by managed care plans on generics during the one-year period April 1, 2017 through March 31, 2018.

The Auditor’s review, conducted at the request of state lawmakers, largely confirmed the findings of a private consultant hired by the Ohio Department of Medicaid to examine the state’s system of managing its pharmacy plan. Specifically, lawmakers wanted to know how much PBMs are paid through the “spread” – which is the difference between what the state’s managed care plans pay the PBMs and what the PBMs pay pharmacies to dispense drugs.

Tyrone’s Commentary:

On the heels of terminating two large PBM contracts, the State Auditor of Ohio released this bombshell report detailing the financials which prompted terminating said contracts. Why do you think Chase Bank, Amazon and Berkshire Hathaway have taken matters into their own hands? Self-insured employers must first make sure all vendors and advisers interests are perfectly aligned to theirs. Second, get self-educated AND (not or) hire an expert with a proven track record whose interests too are perfectly aligned. I can assure you these qualifications makes the list of qualified candidates much smaller than you think. The bottom line – trailing public entities in how you manage pharmacy benefits is no longer sustainable.

“The more we learn, the more troubling this becomes,” Yost said. “Our review has answered many of the questions presented by state lawmakers, but the lack of information from the PBMs limits the depth of our work. Without more information – on what’s happened in the past and what is planned for the future – Ohioans will never know if they’re getting a fair price. They deserve an accurate accounting of this work.”

[Read More]