Health Care

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a new pilot program on June 21, 2023 that gives sponsors of oncology products the opportunity to submit validation and performance data for laboratory developed tests (LDTs) intended to support patient selection for such drugs. Although the pilot is limited to only nine participants, it is unclear based on the requirements of the program whether it will generate sufficient interest among oncology product sponsors to meet the objectives that the agency has established for it.

Homeopathic drugs have an unusual status in the United States. On the one hand, they are incorporated into the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) within the definition of “drug,” which specifically includes articles recognized in the official Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States (a historical perspective can be found in this ScienceInsider article from 2015, when government scrutiny was beginning to increase). But on the other hand, there is growing consensus that the effectiveness of such products is not supported by scientific evidence and that they are, in many cases, mere placebos that do not actually treat the patient’s medical conditions; in the worst cases, they contain harmful ingredients that may cause serious injury.

A new Florida law will require certain Florida-licensed providers to ensure that patient information is physically maintained only in the continental United States and its territories or in Canada. Florida SB 264, which goes into effect July 1, 2023, amends the Florida Electronic Health Records Exchange Act, adding a ban on offshoring health information that goes beyond the requirements under HIPAA and most other generally applicable health privacy and security laws. Florida licensees to which the new requirements apply will need to attest upon initial licensure and any renewals that they are in compliance with the new requirements. Applicable licensees will also be required to ensure that no individual or entity with a controlling interest in the licensee has an interest in an entity that has a business relationship with certain foreign countries.

Bipartisan legislative activity related to pharmacy benefit manager oversight is at an all-time high in both the House and Senate. As we noted last week, several bills that address PBM activities are moving through the Senate and House committees with what appear to be high approval rates. There has also been an uptick in general investigations into PBM business practices. This post, which is the second of a two-part series, highlights recent House and federal agency activity targeting the PBM industry.

In a resounding unanimous 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that a defendant’s subjective belief is irrelevant under the False Claims Act (FCA) when evaluating whether a defendant “knowingly” submitted a false claim to the government for payment. On June 1, 2023, the Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in the consolidated cases U.S. ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc. and U.S. ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc. (SuperValu) and addressed the question of whether a defendant is liable under the FCA if its conduct is consistent with an “objectively reasonable” interpretation of ambiguous statutory or regulatory language. Justice Thomas, writing for the Court, held that an “objectively reasonable” interpretation does not provide a complete legal defense to liability under the FCA. Rather, a defendant meets the FCA’s intent (scienter) requirement if the defendant’s subjective beliefs indicate it had knowledge that its submission of claims was “false or fraudulent,” regardless of whether the defendant’s conduct could be supported by a later “objectively reasonable” interpretation of the ambiguous legal or regulatory issue. Further, the Court articulated new standards for what might constitute “deliberate ignorance” or “reckless disregard” under the “knowledge” prong of the FCA.

In conjunction with the surge in state legislative efforts to regulate the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) industry, Congress and federal agencies have ramped up PBM oversight efforts as part of the ongoing battle to lower prescription drug costs. Several bills that address PBM reporting requirements, including increased transparency as it relates to a PBM’s use of spread pricing and the retention of certain rebates and administrative fees, are moving through Senate and House committees. Further, last month the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed a rule to increase transparency related to spread pricing in Medicaid-managed care contracts with PBMs, and recently, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) expanded its ongoing investigation into PBM practices to include information requests from two group purchasing organizations.

This blog post highlights recent Senate activity as well as a proposed bipartisan Senate and House bill that would impact PBM activity in the Medicaid-managed care space. This blog post is the first in a series of two posts detailing recent federal activities aimed at increasing oversight of the PBM industry.

The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), the section of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) responsible for the regulation of medical devices, has issued a request for public comments on expanding patient access to medical technologies intended for use by patients in their homes.

Washington greatly expanded the protection for consumers’ identifiable health information by enacting the “My Health My Data Act” (MHMDA), in an effort to close the gap between HIPAA protections and the laws protecting the privacy and security of other consumer health care data. While MHMDA resembles the California Consumer Privacy Act as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (CCPA) and the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), it broadly applies to health information outside of traditional health care settings. Regulated Entities should consider undertaking additional steps that we outline now to prepare for the March 31, 2024, and June 30, 2024 (small businesses) compliance deadlines.

On May 3, 2023, New York joined Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and California in enacting legislation that increases oversight over certain health care transactions. Governor Kathy Hochul signed the Fiscal Year 2024 New York State Executive Budget (FY 24 Executive Budget) into law which enacted the final version of Article 45-A of the New York Public Health Law (PHL) titled “Disclosure of Material Transactions.” The law takes effect on August 1, 2023.

As we previously covered, in March 2023, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) announced a proposed rule on prescribing controlled substances via telehealth, aimed at addressing the “telehealth cliff” that was expected to occur once the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE) ends on May 11, 2023. The proposed rule provided some flexibility, but required a much more restrictive framework for prescribing controlled substances via telehealth compared to the flexibilities available during the PHE. During the 30-day comment period following the announcement of the proposed rule, the DEA received over 38,000 comments, which the agency says it is closely reviewing. Many commentators across the health care industry criticized the proposed rule because the in-person examination requirement would limit access to care. The DEA, working with the Department of Health and Human Services, is also considering revisions to the proposed rule. 

Governor Gavin Newsom signed multiple pieces of mental health treatment-related legislation into law in 2022 that have or will begin to go into effect this year. These laws address mental health commitment timing and hearing rights, involuntary mental health treatment, the CARE program, and substance use disorder treatment client rights. This is a good time for relevant facilities and groups to audit the effectiveness of updated policies and evaluate and address any operational issues that may have cropped up during implementation.

The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General (OIG) announced on April 24, 2023 that it will soon issue long overdue updates to its compliance program guidance documents (CPGs).  First introduced in 1998, the CPGs are a series of voluntary guidance documents, each tailored to a specific segment of the health care industry. While the CPGs include important insights on specific risk areas and how to apply the seven elements of an effective compliance program to particular types of health care entities, they are ripe for modernizing. OIG will publish a General CPG (GCPG) applicable to all individuals and entities involved in the health care industry by the end of 2023, followed by industry-specific CPGs (ICPGs) in 2024. Of note, the OIG announced that its first two ICPGs will address Medicare Advantage and Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs), perhaps signaling the OIG’s priorities. The OIG’s updates to the CPGs are part of the OIG’s Modernization Initiative first announced in September 2022.

On April 25, 2023, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders and Ranking Member Bill Cassidy introduced a package of legislation aimed at lowering prescription drug prices. The package includes four bills, each proposing changes that would address a different piece of the pharmaceutical supply chain. This post focuses on the Pharmacy Benefit Manager Reform Act (PBM Reform Act), which proposes to increase oversight of entities providing pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) services to group health plans and health insurance issuers (i.e., employer-based health insurance coverage).

In April, 2020, in an effort to facilitate a national pivot to telehealth in light of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE), the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced a policy of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) enforcement discretion for regulated health care providers (Covered Entities) implementing communications technologies that weren’t fully compliant with HIPAA or using those technologies in a manner that didn’t comply with HIPAA. Examples of flexibilities included allowing technology providers access to protected health information (PHI) without a HIPAA Business Associate Agreement (BAA). OCR’s enforcement discretion enabled Covered Entities to minimize the need for in-person visits for all kinds of health care services, not just COVID-19 related care. OCR also implemented flexibilities to promote public health during the COVID-19 pandemic; for example, it allowed for Business Associates to share COVID-19 data with government agencies for such purposes without specific authority to do so under BAAs.  

With less than two weeks left until the end of the federal COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE), which is set to expire on May 11, 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is preparing to transition certain COVID-19 flexibilities. On February 9, 2023, HHS released a COVID-19 PHE Transition Roadmap, which provides guidance on what to expect beyond the emergency phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. While many of the relaxed rules and regulations that helped facilitate an efficient and timely response during the PHE have been permanently signed into law, others, some of which are discussed below, will soon expire.

On March 22, 2023, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued updated guidance for home dialysis services performed in a skilled nursing facility or nursing home (the Updated Guidance). CMS first issued guidance addressing home dialysis services provided to nursing home residents on April 17, 2018 (the Original Guidance). The Updated Guidance incorporates responses to comments, questions, and feedback received during the ensuing five years from state survey agencies, dialysis providers, and other stakeholders, and current models of home dialysis care of a nursing home resident.

On April 13, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission put approximately 670 advertisers on notice that they should avoid deceiving consumers with advertisements that make product claims that cannot be backed up or substantiated.

In response to concerns about the confidentiality of protected health information (PHI) related to reproductive health care less than one year after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, and the prospect of such PHI being weaponized by states and used against patients, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has proposed amendments to the HIPAA Privacy Rule to protect that information.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently published the Advancing Interoperability and Improving Prior Authorization Processes Proposed Rule (Prior Authorization Proposed Rule), and, if certain components are finalized, impacted payors will be required to be in compliance by January 1, 2026. The Prior Authorization Proposed Rule is meant to build upon the CMS Interoperability and Patient Access Final Rule (Patient Access Final Rule) and includes five proposals aimed at, according to CMS, increasing efficiency, reducing overall payor and provider burden, and improving patient access to electronic health information (EHI). Impacted health care payors include Medicare Advantage (MA) Organizations, Medicaid Managed Care Plans and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Managed Care Entities, State Medicaid and CHIP Fee-for-Service (FFS) Programs, and Qualified Health Plan (QHP) Issuers on the Federally Facilitated Exchanges (FFEs). Among the more significant changes in the rule was the inclusion of MA Organizations as impacted payors.