Successful commercialization of our products depends, in part, on the availability and amount of third-party payer reimbursement for our products and related treatments and medical services in the markets where we sell our products. As our products mature, pricing pressures from private insurers and government payers often result in a reduction of the net product prices.
Legislative and regulatory actions affecting government prescription drug procurement and reimbursement programs occur relatively frequently. We may be adversely impacted by any such legislative and regulatory actions, though it is difficult to predict the impact, if any, on the use and reimbursement of our products.
In the U.S., the European Union ("EU") and other significant or potentially significant markets for our products and product candidates, government authorities and third-party payers are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate the price of medical products and services. The volume of drug pricing-related legislation has dramatically increased in recent years, including:
- U.S. Congress has enacted laws requiring manufacturer refunds on certain amounts of discarded drug from single-use vials and eliminating the existing cap on Medicaid rebate amounts beginning in 2024.
- U.S. Congress has enacted the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the "IRA"), which, among other changes, (1) requires the Department of Health and Human Services to "negotiate" Medicare prices for certain drugs (starting with 10 drugs in 2026, adding 15 drugs in 2027 and 2028, and adding 20 drugs in 2029 and subsequent years), which could also affect the Medicaid rebate obligations and the ceiling prices charged to covered entities under Section 340B of the Public Health Service Act ("340B") if such prices are lower than the Medicaid Best Price; (2) imposes an inflation-based rebate on Medicare Part B utilization starting in 2023 and Part D utilization beginning October 1, 2022; and (3) restructures the Medicare Part D benefit to cap out-of-pocket expenses for Part D beneficiaries beginning in 2024 and, effective January 1, 2025, increases Part D plans' contributions in the catastrophic coverage phase and increases manufacturers' discount contributions across coverage phases such that manufacturers must pay a 10% discount in the initial coverage phase and a 20% discount in the catastrophic phase on drugs utilized by all Part D beneficiaries, including low income subsidy patients. Although none of our products were selected by the Department of Health and Human Services for "negotiation" in 2026 or 2027, there is no assurance that our products will not be selected in the future. We continue to evaluate the potential impact of the IRA on our business. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS") has issued a number of guidance documents, but it remains unclear how certain provisions of the IRA will be implemented. Additional guidance, legislation or rulemaking may be issued that could change the scope or implementation of the IRA. In addition, multiple manufacturers and trade organizations have challenged the Medicare "negotiation" provisions of the IRA, and additional legal challenges may be filed in the future. While the full impact of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry remains uncertain at this time, we anticipate that the IRA will increase our payment obligations under the redesigned Part D discount program, limit the prices we can charge for our products, and increase the rebates we must provide government programs for our products, thereby reducing our profitability and negatively impacting our financial results.
- Many state legislatures are considering, or have already passed into law, legislation that seeks to indirectly or directly regulate pharmaceutical drug pricing, such as requiring manufacturers to publicly report proprietary pricing information, creating review boards for prices, establishing drug payment limits, and encouraging the use of generic drugs. For example, in August 2023, the Colorado Prescription Drug Affordability Review Board ("PDAB") selected Genvoya for an affordability review, and subsequently determined that Genvoya was not unaffordable. Additional state PDABs have or may in the future undertake similar affordability reviews of our products. A finding that one of our products is unaffordable could lead to legislative action to designate an upper limit on the amount certain purchasers and payors can pay for our products. These initiatives and such other legislation may cause added pricing pressures on our products, and the resulting impact on our business is uncertain at this time.
- Many countries outside the U.S., including the EU member states, have established complex and lengthy procedures to obtain price approvals and coverage reimbursement and periodically review their pricing and reimbursement decisions. The outcome of these reviews cannot be predicted and could have an adverse effect on the pricing and reimbursement of our medical products in the EU member states. Reductions in the pricing of our medical products in one member state could affect the price in other member states and have a negative impact on our financial results.
A substantial portion of our product sales is subject to significant discounts from list price, including rebates that we may be required to pay state Medicaid agencies and discounts provided to covered entities under 340B. Changes to the 340B program or the Medicaid program at the federal or state level could have a material adverse effect on our business. For example, the continued growth of the 340B program limits the prices we may charge on an increasing percentage of sales. Changes to the calculation of rebates under the Medicaid program could substantially increase our Medicaid rebate obligations and decrease the prices we charge 340B-covered entities.
In March 2022, we implemented a contract pharmacy integrity initiative for our branded hepatitis C virus ("HCV") products. This integrity initiative does not involve any products from Asegua Therapeutics LLC. Our integrity initiative requires covered entities that enter into 340B bill to/ship to arrangements with contract pharmacies for our branded HCV products to provide claims level data for units dispensed from such contract pharmacies; covered entities without an in-house pharmacy that choose not to participate in the initiative can designate a single contract pharmacy for shipment. Certain manufacturers that have implemented other contract pharmacy integrity programs have received enforcement letters from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") asserting that those programs violate the 340B statute, have been referred to the HHS Office of Inspector General for assessment of civil monetary penalties, and have been subject to administrative dispute resolution proceedings brought on behalf of covered entities. Some of these manufacturers are challenging HHS' position in litigation. Certain states have also enacted laws requiring manufacturers to provide 340B pricing through contract pharmacy arrangements, and additional states may adopt similar laws; we believe these laws, which are being challenged in ongoing litigation, are invalid but we have carved out covered entities in certain states from our integrity initiative while litigation challenging these laws proceeds. We also believe that our integrity initiative complies with the requirements of the 340B statute. However, additional legal or legislative developments with respect to the 340B program, including potential litigation with HHS or other stakeholders, may negatively impact our ability to implement or continue our integrity initiative.
In addition, standard reimbursement structures do not always adequately reimburse for innovative therapies. For example, beginning in fiscal year 2021, CMS established a new severity-adjusted diagnosis-related group ("DRG") 018 for Medicare inpatient reimbursement of CAR T-cell products such as Yescarta and Tecartus. While the new DRG has a significantly higher base payment amount than the prior DRG 016, the payment available may not be sufficient to reimburse some hospitals for their cost of care for patients receiving Yescarta and Tecartus. When reimbursement is not aligned well to account for treatment costs, Medicare beneficiaries may be denied access as this misalignment could impact the willingness of some hospitals to offer the therapy and of doctors to recommend the therapy. Additionally, in the EU, there are barriers to reimbursement in individual countries that could limit the uptake of Yescarta and Tecartus.
Moreover, we estimate the rebates we will be required to pay in connection with sales during a particular quarter based on claims data from prior quarters. In the U.S., actual rebate claims are typically made by payers one to three quarters in arrears. Actual claims and payments may vary significantly from our estimates.