Analysis

The latest Drug Channels commentary — PBMs, 340B, specialty pharmacy, and the contracts that move the money.

Showing 31–40 of 2721

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

  • Medicare Embraces Site-Neutral Payments. Why Haven't Employers?

    By Bryce Platt, PharmD

    Provider-administered drugs are one of the fastest-growing and least-managed cost drivers for commercial plan sponsors.

    Despite that, recent data from the Pharmaceutical Strategies Group show that only 35% of commercial plan sponsors currently have a site of care (SOC) program in place for specialty pharmacy. That result is surprising given the size of the savings at stake.

    Medicare has figured this out and started site-neutral payments over a decade ago, but the employers who fund the bulk of commercial health spending largely haven't.

    The evidence supporting SOC management is no longer the story. The real question is why so many commercial plans continue paying hospital prices when lower-cost alternatives already exist.

    Posted by BTP on Tuesday, July 14, 2026

    Labels: Benefit Design, Buy-and-Bill, Hospitals, Specialty Drugs

Friday, July 10, 2026

  • When Access Tightens, Prior Authorization Execution Becomes the Differentiator

    Today's guest post comes from Megan Wetzel, Vice President of Product, Access and Affordability at CoverMyMeds.

    Megan examines how prior authorization execution has become a strategic differentiator for biopharma brands as formulary changes and expanding utilization management put more pressure on access. She argues that building consistent, scalable prior auth execution can reduce therapy delays, improve determination time, and strengthen brand performance across the product lifecycle.

    To learn more about CoverMyMeds' prior authorization solution, download their case study: From Decline to Growth: How One Brand Expanded Access in Late Lifecycle.

    Read on for Megan's insights.

    Posted by BTP on Friday, July 10, 2026

    Labels: Guest Post, Sponsored Post

Wednesday, July 8, 2026

Monday, June 29, 2026

Friday, June 26, 2026

Tuesday, June 23, 2026

Thursday, June 18, 2026

Wednesday, June 17, 2026

Tuesday, June 16, 2026

  • The IRA Fixed One Medicare Part D Distortion—But Patients Now Face New Tradeoffs

    By Bryce Platt, PharmD

    For years, Medicare Part D plans often preferred high-list/high-rebate branded multiple sclerosis (MS) drugs over lower-cost generics. That was rational behavior inside an irrational system.

    The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) offers one example of how incentives can change behavior in the system. New research in JAMA Health Forum reveals a significant reversal in Medicare Part D formulary coverage for MS drugs. After years of plans favoring brand-name drugs over generics, 2025 formularies shifted to near-universal generic coverage.

    However, in return patients got narrower formularies, higher upfront costs, and way more taxpayer dollars spent than expected.

    While this wasn’t the case for all drug classes, in MS, the IRA Part D redesign has forced plans to care more about net drug spending. Below, we analyze the formulary data and explain why the coverage patterns changed so abruptly—and what new tradeoffs have emerged.

    Posted by Drug Channels Institute, an HMP Global company on Tuesday, June 16, 2026

    Labels: Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Medicare Part D, Benefit Design

Friday, June 12, 2026

  • Minnesota’s 340B Hospitals Make One Billion More From 340B Than They Spend on Uncompensated Care (rerun)

    This week, we’re rerunning some popular posts while we prepare for today’s live video webinar: 340B in 2026: Market Shifts, Policy Battles, and What They Mean for Stakeholders.

    Click here to see the original post from April 2026.


    By Bryce Platt, PharmD

    Minnesota’s new 340B data reveal a growing disconnect between the program’s size and the value Minnesotans receive in return.

    In 2024, nonprofit hospitals generated more than $1.3 billion in 340B net profits—nearly a billion dollars more than they provided in uncompensated care. At the same time, these same institutions already benefit from substantial tax exemptions tied to their not-for-profit status and charitable mission.

    The gap between 340B profits and charity care isn’t a rounding error or a one-off anomaly. The 340B Drug Pricing Program has evolved into a significant profit center for hospital systems. This is another layer on top of existing public subsidies, not a substitute for them.

    As you’ll see below, our analysis describes a 340B program that generates financial gains far in excess of any contribution back to the people of the state. There is also no clear accountability for how those dollars are used.

    Posted by Drug Channels Institute, an HMP Global company on Friday, June 12, 2026

    Labels: 340B, Costs/Reimbursement, Hospitals