If a bipartisan group of U.S. House members has its way, at least some of the legislation congressional committees have passed to target pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) practices could yet make it into law this year. That is if congressional leaders listen to the rank-and-file members.

The Biosecure Act missed its expected ride through the U.S. Congress via the National Defense Authorization Act, but it may not be the end of the road for the bill that would prohibit direct or indirect U.S. government contracts with listed “biotechnology companies of concern.”

Seeking accelerated approval as a fallback when clinical evidence is not quite strong enough for traditional approval appears destined for the dustbins of history.

Novartis AG lost its bid, at least for now, to delay generic competition to its blockbuster heart drug, Entresto (sacubitril, valsartan), on the basis of patent infringement.

The U.S. CMS has negotiated outcomes-based agreements with Bluebird Bio Inc. and Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. to make their costly sickle cell gene therapies the first treatments to become available through the voluntary Medicaid Cell and Gene Therapy Access Model.

The congressional finger-pointing at pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) continues. The latest singling out is in a bipartisan letter from four House members calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate and hold PBMs accountable for the role they played in the nationwide opioid crisis.

Kiromic Biopharma Inc. and two former senior officials have settled with the U.S. SEC to resolve charges involving nondisclosure of U.S. FDA clinical holds on two cancer candidates before and after a July 2021 follow-on public offering that raised $40 million the company desperately needed.

A proposed rule to implement the five-year-old Medicaid Services Investment and Accountability Act would expand the U.S. Health and Human Services’ (HHS) permissive exclusion authority to biopharma manufacturers that misclassify outpatient drugs supplied under agreements with federal health care programs.

When U.S. CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure announced Nov. 26 that the agency is “reinterpreting” the law in proposing a rule allowing Medicare and Medicaid to cover obesity drugs beginning in 2026, she called it a “historic step.” The rule, if finalized, could make obesity drugs like Novo Nordisk A/S’ Wegovy (semaglutide) and Eli Lilly and Co.’s Zepbound (tirzepatide) available to millions more Americans and further invigorate development of other obesity drugs. But given the lateness of the day in the Biden administration, the proposal may be more symbolic than historic.

With the U.S. Congress sitting on its hands on reforms to the 340B drug discount program, states are stepping into the gap. While most state efforts have been aimed at forcing biopharma companies to give the federally mandated drug discounts to an increasing number of contract pharmacies, California is looking in a different direction. According to unofficial election results, a slim majority of the state’s voters said yes to Proposition 34, which would require certain providers that benefit from the drug discounts to spend at least 98% of their 340B revenues on direct patient care.