PDAB weighs diabetes drug affordability, as Moore weighs bill to expand PDAB
Medication vials marked for calibration await counting at the Exchange Pharmacy at Joint Base Andrews, Md., July 27, 2023. (Photo by Staff Sgt. Jared Duhon/U.S. Air Force)
A Maryland board tasked with bringing down prescription drug costs is working through a 'dossier' of a medication to treat type 2 diabetes — the first of many such reports to determine if there are ways for the state to save money on certain medications.
The Prescription Drug Affordability Board unveiled a 92-page draft report Monday for Farxiga, a brand-name medication for dapagliflozin, to help board members determine if the drug is 'unaffordable' for Marylanders.
It is the first of several dossiers analyzing the cost burdens of six popular prescription drugs in an effort to find avenues for the state to save on medications for those on the state's health plan.
PDAB staff have been working on the Farxiga dossier since November, according to Andrew York, executive director for the board. He hopes that future dossiers will be easier to pull together now that staff have a format to work with.
Six drugs were selected for 'cost review,' and address several conditions including Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease, eczema, Crohn's disease and more.
Dupixent
Farxiga
Jardiance
Ozempic
Skyrizi
Trulicity
'I think staff now knows the time it takes to put these dossiers together,' York told the board during the virtual Monday meeting. 'That organizational process and cross referencing to make sure that everything is available to the board — that took a lot of time and effort. But now that that template's in place, I think we'll be moving forward pretty quickly.'
Since the board's inception in 2019, it has been involved in a lengthy rule-making process to determine what drugs could be expensive for state employees and to establish methods to bring those costs down.
In March 2024, PDAB board members officially selected six drugs to undergo the 'cost review' process, part of which includes an information gathering period to develop a dossier on the drugs. But the board has yet to bring down costs for any drugs on the state health plan.
Meanwhile, Gov. Wes Moore (D) is expected to sign off on legislation Tuesday to expand the authority of the board to bring down costs for more Marylanders, not just those on the state plan.
Critics in the legislature and the pharmaceutical industry cited the pace of the board's progress to argue unsuccessfully against expanding PDAB's authority, but House and Senate bills to do just that passed by comfortable margins this year.
House Bill 424 and Senate Bill 357 would allow the board to establish what are called upper payment limits on the commercial market, to place a limit on how much the state is willing to pay for certain drugs. The board currently has that authority for state employees and others on the state health plan.
The expanded authority would only go into effect a year after the board has successfully placed upper payment limits for two drugs on state health plans – meaning it will still be some time before the state can wield its new authority on the commercial market.
But the dossier Monday sheds some light on different considerations that the board will use to determine if it will take action to reduce state spending on Farxiga — including overall state spending on the drug, prevalence of the diseases that the prescription drug treats, and costs of the disease to the health care system.
In Maryland, about 10.5% of adults aged 18 years or older had been diagnosed with diabetes as of 2022 data, the report says.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'In Maryland, for calendar year 2021, total and per-patient medical costs attributable to diabetes were $6.506 billion and $11,909, respectively,' the report says, citing data from the American Diabetes Association.
The dossier reports similar data for other conditions Farxiga is often prescribed to treat, such as heart failure and Chronic Kidney Disease.
From 2022 through 2023, Maryland spent $1.4 million on the most common dosage of Farxiga (10 MG) for those on the state health plan – about 289 Marylanders, according to the dossier.
The dossier reports that out-of-pocket costs for Farxiga can vary, depending on insurance coverage.
The median cost for 10 milligrams of Farxiga cost $160 for those with commercial insurance in 2023, but those on the state health plan paid $60 for the same dose. Meanwhile, those on Medicare paid a median of $158.90, according to 2022 data.
But portions of the report are redacted from the public due to confidentiality restrictions, and the dossier is not finalized yet. Following Monday's meeting, PDAB staff will make tweaks on the dossier to more clearly relay the information. The Farxiga dossier will then go up for a 15-day public comment period.
Staff is working on a dossier for another drug that helps treat type 2 diabetes called Jardiance, which should also be available for public comment soon, according to York.
The board still has to officially determine if Farxiga or Jardiance pose an 'affordability challenge' before board members can consider next steps to bring down costs, which could include setting upper payment limits. Savings for the state health plans still appear to be a ways off.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
20 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
New Englanders clash over Trump's sweeping health reforms
And he is not alone. In a recent Globe survey of 11 New Englanders across the political spectrum, all seven respondents who voted against Trump said they worry that basic health insurance and many vaccines will be harder to obtain for those who need them if the Big Beautiful Bill becomes law. The four respondents who voted for Trump, despite being unfamiliar with many of the legislation's specifics, said they support changes to health care programs to repair what some of them called a broken, bloated system. Advertisement The voters were surveyed as part of an ongoing Globe series on their views on the first year of the Trump administration, with previous installments centered on The cost of health care has been a major focus for Trump, who has said he wants to eliminate waste and fraud from programs such as Medicaid. The president has said he wants the legislation passed before July 4. But along with savings, Trantham noted, many experts predict that more Americans will end up uninsured if Trump's vision becomes the new landscape of national health care. Advertisement 'There will be more people who can't afford their medications. There'll be more people who avoid going to the doctor because they don't have the money,' said Trantham, who is an unenrolled voter and voted for former vice president Kamala Harris in 2024. 'And then they'll end up needing a higher level of medical care, which then puts a broad burden on the rest of us,' he added. Related : Trump's passed by the House, many The agency also predicted that 4 million people could see their access to food stamps reduced or eliminated. In addition to benefit cuts, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the House bill would increase the US deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. And on Thursday, Joann Flaminio, 69, a retired Democrat from Providence, said she is concerned that few people are aware of the myriad dangers tucked into the sprawling bill. 'The devil really is in the details. And one of the proposals in the Big Beautiful Bill — that requires Medicaid recipients to re-enroll every six months — is a draconian measure designed to deny services to those most in need,' said Flaminio, who served as retirement administrator for the state of Rhode Island. Advertisement 'My sister was on Medicaid in the final years of her life, and I know what the application process is like in order to get somebody approved. Many people hire a lawyer in order to do that, but it can be arduous, and it certainly is,' she added. The president's bill also would impose work requirements on Medicaid recipients, from ages 19 to 64, who would need to work at least 80 hours per month if they did not qualify for exemptions. From her experience, Flaminio said, linking benefits to work requirements is impractical. 'We tried to mandate work requirements ... for those people who are on disability benefits,' Flaminio said. 'And I would say, for the most part, it's a waste of time and effort. The vast majority of recipients, an estimated 96 percent, cannot work, which is the reason why they apply for Medicaid in the first place.' But for the survey's Trump supporters, trimming the Medicaid rolls is worthwhile if it rids the system of fraud and abuse. Seth Sole-Robertson, a 45-year-old Republican from Medway, was asked if Medicaid cuts concern him. 'I'd be concerned if I was an illegal alien,' Sole-Robertson answered, 'and I'd be concerned if I were committing fraud.' The goal is to strip benefits from 'people who are ineligible or taking it in two different states,' said Sole-Robertson, who owns a marine repair business. 'There's lots of hoopla or fake news about what's going on with Medicaid.' Karen Sysyn, 54, an unenrolled Trump supporter from Londonderry, N.H., said she wasn't sure where the bill was headed or what was in it. 'I hear a lot of rumors that they're looking at cutting Social Security and disability and stuff like that,' she said. Advertisement If people are able to work, taxpayers should not bear their burden, said Sysyn, who is searching for work after losing her job as a housing inspector. But if people are genuinely in need of support from Social Security or Medicare, they should receive support, she added. Another unenrolled Trump supporter, 56-year-old Brian Jankins of Sutton, was asked what he knew about the bill. 'Full disclosure, very little,' said Jankins, who works in banking. However, he added, 'our current health care system is broken and dysfunctional ... I'm not versed in what this bill does to address that, but it is broken.' Related : Respondents' opinions about Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health and human services secretary, also were sharply divided, with Trump supporters endorsing his stance against vaccines, among other initiatives, and the president's opponents saying Kennedy was endangering lives. 'I think more Americans are going to die under some of the changes that he's making around vaccinations,' said Vanessa Coppola, a 42-year-old Democrat from North Yarmouth, Maine. Over the administration's first five months, Kennedy became a lightning rod for controversy because of his antivaccine stance, his references to autism as a preventable disease, and his ouster and replacement of the entire immunization advisory panel for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coppola, a job coach and consultant, is particularly worried about Kennedy's proposal to eliminate the COVID vaccine recommendation for healthy pregnant women. Those vaccinations provide coverage for newborns, who are particularly vulnerable to respiratory disease, she said. Anand Sharma, 53, a Democrat from Shrewsbury and electrical engineer, called the rolling drama at the Department of Health and Human Services part of 'the chaos [that] is everywhere right now.' Advertisement And Justina Perry, a 37-year-old Democrat from New Bedford, denounced Kennedy's antivaccine agenda. 'Viruses are going to love this,' said Perry, who runs a physical therapy clinic. 'They're going to be able to spread and spread, and they win in this situation because we're pulling back vaccine access. So the only one who should be excited about this is a virus.' But Darryll White, an unenrolled Trump voter from Skowhegan, Maine, supports Kennedy's efforts to change government guidance on vaccines. Kennedy's work is 'a long-haul scenario — to make America healthy again,' said White, 66, who added that efforts by the news media to 'demonize' the secretary have made his job harder. 'People have to understand that Robert Kennedy is under intense pressure,' added White, the director of a nonprofit community park. White said he supports Kennedy's proposal to upend the government's vaccine guidance. 'That's exactly what needs to happen,' said White, who believed the government was not transparent during the pandemic about possible adverse effects of the COVID vaccine. The respondents were sharply divided yet again about the administration's drastic cuts in medical research grants, and those views aligned with whether they had voted for the president. The cuts have had an outsize effect on universities and other research institutions in the Boston area, particularly at Harvard University, where the government has canceled about $2.6 billion in awarded grants. 'He's cutting off his nose to spite his face,' Rosemary Shea, 62, an unenrolled voter from Hampton, N.H., said of Trump, who she voted against. 'I mean, Harvard is not just doing this research for themselves. They're doing it for the world.' Advertisement 'These universities are doing great research for diseases that are still out there that we have not cracked yet — Parkinson's, cancer, all different types of cancers," Shea added. 'He's just decided 'nope.' And I haven't even heard a logical explanation for it.' Sole-Robertson, the Medway Republican, offered a sharply different take on the government's role in funding medical research. 'A lot of this needs to be shifted back to private industry and raising funds in the private sector,' he said. 'I think a lot of it is just pure nonsense.' Brian MacQuarrie can be reached at
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Oregon Democratic state Rep. Hòa Nguyễn returns to House following cancer diagnosis
Rep. Hòa Nguyễn, D-Portland, speaks on the House floor on June 20, 2025, her first day back in the Capitol since leaving to undergo cancer treatment in February. (Screengrab from Oregon legislative broadcast) Rep. Hòa Nguyễn, D-Portland on Friday returned to the Oregon House in her first official public appearance since announcing she was undergoing treatment for advanced cancer in February. 'I felt like I have a second chance at life now, by some miracle, whatever, all the prayers and affirmations really help,' she said on the House floor on Friday, surrounded by many of her colleagues and staff wearing face masks. 'I think it's the community, it's all of you here and the support that really, really pushed me through.' The representative comes back to the Legislature at a critical moment for Oregon Democrats, who are working with slim margins in both legislative chambers to pass a transportation package in the face of staunch opposition from Republicans and some Democrats concerned about the tax increases and scope of the proposed measure. In its latest form, the proposal would raise an estimated $14.6 billion over the next 10 years. Any tax increases require 36 votes, and Democrats need Nguyễn if they're not able to sway any Republicans. Nguyễn's seat came under the spotlight in February after she revealed that she was beginning chemotherapy treatments for stage 4 cancer, an explanation for why she had already missed weeks of legislative business. A stage 4 diagnosis is the most intense stage of cancer, when the disease has spread to other parts of the body and is harder to treat. During her remarks, Nguyễn thanked her colleagues for the courtesies they had extended to her aunt, brother and sister when they were recognized on the House floor in May. She called herself 'a fighter' and said she is ready to get back to work at some point, but didn't say for how long she would return or the extent to which she had recovered. Nguyễn was excused for the House's afternoon session on Friday. 'She is taking the session day by day at this point, and we're focused on her health above anything,' said a spokesperson for the House Majority Office in a Friday statement. Nguyễn in a February statement said her staff would provide critical constituent services, vowing to continue her efforts to address chronic absenteeism and improve child care access. She previously served as vice chair of the House Early Childhood and Human Services Committee and a member of the House Education Committee and Ways and Means subcommittee on education, but Speaker Julie Fahey gradually removed her from those rules during her treatment. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
California will see 'devastating' healthcare cuts under GOP bill, Newsom says
As many as 3.4 million Californians could lose their state Medi-Cal health insurance under the budget bill making its way through the U.S. Senate, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Friday. Newsom said the proposed cuts to healthcare in the "one big, beautiful bill," a cornerstone of President Trump's second-term agenda, could force the closure of struggling rural hospitals, reduce government food assistance for those in need and drive up premiums for people who rely on Covered California, the state's Affordable Care Act health insurance marketplace. "This is devastating," Newsom said. "I know that word is often overused in this line of work, but this is, in many ways, an understatement of how reckless and cruel and damaging this is." Medicaid provides health insurance for about 1 in 5 Americans and generally uses income, rather than employment, as a condition for enrollment. Roughly 15 million Californians, more than a third of the state, are on Medi-Cal, the state's version of Medicaid, with some of the highest percentages in rural counties that supported Trump in the November election. More than half of California children receive healthcare coverage through Medi-Cal. The Senate is still debating its version of the bill. But the current version would require many Medicaid recipients to prove every six months that they work, volunteer or attend school at least 80 hours per month. States would be required to set up their work eligibility verification systems by the end of 2026, just after the midterm elections. States that do not set up those systems could lose federal Medicaid funding. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters last month that the aim of the policy was to encourage poor Americans to contribute and "return the dignity of work to young men who need to be out working instead of playing video games all day." The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated this month that the requirements would cut about $344 billion in Medicaid spending over a decade and leave 4.8 million more people uninsured. Health policy experts warn that work requirements can lead to people who are eligible, but can't prove it, losing their benefits. Newsom said 5.1 million people in California would need to go through the work verification progress and about one-third would "likely" meet the requirements. The other two-thirds would "go through the labyrinth of manual verification," Newsom said. He said 3 million people in California could lose coverage through the new Medicaid work requirements, and 400,000 more could lose their insurance if they were required to re-verify their eligibility every six months. Newsom said that the state's estimate was based on the number of people who dropped off Medicaid in New Hampshire and Arkansas after those states briefly implemented their own work requirements. Last year, California became the first state in the nation to offer healthcare to low-income undocumented immigrants. The expansion, approved by Newsom and the Democratic-led Legislature, has cost the state billions and drawn sharp criticism from Republicans. Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher (R-Yuba City), who has previously called on Newsom to walk back that coverage, said on social media Friday that Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders had "obliterated" the healthcare system. Newsom's budget proposal in May proposed substantial cuts to the healthcare program for undocumented immigrants, including freezing new enrollment in 2026, requiring adults to pay $100 monthly premiums and cutting full dental coverage. Lawmakers ultimately agreed to require undocumented immigrant adults ages 19 to 59 to pay $30 monthly premiums beginning July 2027. Their plan adopts Newsom's enrollment cap but gives people three months to reapply if their coverage lapses instead of immediately cutting off their eligibility. Democrats agreed to cut full dental coverage for adult immigrants who are undocumented, but delayed the change until July 1, 2026. In Congress, the GOP bill could also pose a serious threat to 16 struggling hospitals in 14 rural counties, which received a $300-million lifeline in interest-free loans in 2023, Newsom said. He said the Republican members of Congress in California who supported the bill and represent rural parts of California, including Central Valley Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) and Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), are "gutting an already vulnerable system." Some senators are pushing to change a requirement that would require states to freeze and cut by half the tax they impose on Medicaid providers, slashing a key source of funding for rural hospitals. Michelle Baass, the director of the California Department of Health Care Services, said that change could be "fatal for the many rural and critical-access hospitals that are already financially strained." Newsom said in aggregate, the cuts could threaten California's progress in reducing the share of residents without health insurance, which stands at about 6.4%. Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
