Legal & Regulatory

Traceability

Trade & Brand Protection

Brand & Product Security

Business and Finance

Containers & Shippers

Devices

Software

Cold Chain

Commercial Channels

Artificial Intelligence

Digitalization

Real World Data

Data & Technology

Manufacturing & Packaging

Supply Chain

Logistics & Transportation

Commercialization

Pricing

Trade & Channel

Market Access

Opinion

Adherence

HUB Services

Patient Assistance Programs

Patient Support

News

Pharma Pulse

Academy

Publications

Partner Perspectives

Webcasts

Resources

Conferences

Conference Coverage

Conference Listing

Events

Videos

Podcasts

Editorial Podcasts

Subscribe

Business strategies and top news in the biotech / biopharma industry, including market access, supply chain distribution and more.

About Us

Advertise

Editorial

Contact Us

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Pharmaceutical Commerce

Instagram

Facebook

LinkedIn

Threads

Soundcloud

Spotlight

Digital Editions

Security

Topics

Data and Technology

Legal and Regulatory

Supply Chain Logistics

1rem

 interview, Vibhu Tewary, project director, IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science, discusses:

Highlights of the company’s report surrounding the “Long-term Market Sustainability for Infused Biosimilars in the US: Foundational Analytics on Emerging Risks to Sustainability”

The process that constructing and piecing together a report of this magnitude entails, along with where the idea itself came from

The ongoing challenges surrounding ASP-based reimbursement

A closed-door, multi-stakeholder virtual roundtable (based on his original report) that was previously held

Vibhu Tewary offers insight on this market segment, including a behind-the-scenes of what goes into designing a report. 

The Path Forward for Infused Biosimilars in the US

 interview, Mark Bouck, chairman and CEO of PharmAlliance, a pharmaceutical and life sciences services platform, dives into:

How PharmAlliance’s acquisition of Complete Health Economics Outcomes Research Solutions (CHEORS) helps expand global reach

The platform’s biggest goal to when it comes to CHEORS and market access services

How CHEORS helps navigate cost-effectiveness and market access hurdles

Acquisitions in the space that are currently in the works

Mark Bouck discusses PharmAlliance’s latest acquisitions, while reiterating its goals surrounding health economics and outcomes research.

Navigating Market Access Hurdles

 interview, Brandon Newman, Xevant’s CEO and founder, explores:

The implications of the Inflation Reduction Act’s price negotiation provisions, and how these could result in ripple effects across the healthcare system

The role that pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and other intermediaries' play when it comes to determining drug costs, and how spread pricing is involved

How Xevant helps improve drug cost transparency efforts

Strategies for affordability Newman would offer the pharma industry that can be implemented immediately

Brandon Newman joins The Pharmaceutical Commerce Podcast to discuss the evolving role of PBMs, including the importance of drug price transparency. 

A Further Examination of Pharmacy Benefit Managers

The thermal packaging company not only bolsters its APAC presence—it also grows its influence in the life sciences’ temperature-monitoring logistics sector.

Cold Chain Technologies Inks Deal for Global Cold Chain Solutions

The CRDMO’s acquisition of the Baltimore plant is expected to boost its biologics presence.

Syngene Purchases First US Manufacturing Facility for $36.5M

The partnership focuses on enhancing the patient experience by providing greater affordability and access to specialty meds.

PharmaCord, Mercalis Merge in an Effort to Support the Patient Journey

The updated tax on Canadian imports will rise from 25% to 50%, taking effect March 12.   

President Trump to Double Tariffs on Canadian Steel and Aluminum 

This link in the pharma supply chain is undergoing a major transformation propelled by technological advancements, regulatory changes, and evolving market dynamics, requiring industry leaders to adopt innovative strategies in order to remain competitive.

Strategic Trends in Pharmaceutical Manufacturing for Industry Leaders

Unlocking the Potential of Cell and Gene Therapies 

, Jason C. Foster, CEO of Ori Biotech, describes how the current state of cell and gene therapies (CGTs) shows promising potential, particularly in curing cancer and rare diseases. These therapies are safe and effective, with evidence demonstrating their curative capability. However, their widespread adoption is hindered by challenges in manufacturing at large scales and at affordable costs, limiting patient access. While three CGT products have advanced from last-line to second-line therapies, the number of patients receiving treatment has remained relatively unchanged, signaling that access, not prescription willingness, is the primary issue.

Only about 10,000 patients were treated with CGTs in 2024, out of a much larger global pool of patients who could benefit, with access in the United States at just 20%, and far lower in other regions. The real obstacle is the inability to produce these living, often personalized therapies at the scale needed for broader distribution. Many existing production processes rely on outdated technology that cannot meet the demand or provide the level of access needed.

This situation creates a vicious cycle: limited access leads to doubts about the commercial viability of these therapies, affecting investment in future innovations. CGTs cost billions to develop, and investors and companies require financial returns to continue funding new therapies. If the therapies cannot reach the market or gain sufficient coverage, the commercial future of CGTs is uncertain, risking investment in this area and potentially diverting capital to other treatment modalities. Overcoming these manufacturing and access barriers is crucial for unlocking the full potential of CGTs and improving patient outcomes globally.

Foster also comments on the manufacturing bottlenecks; regulatory hurdles; role of automation; and economic and healthcare system challenges pertaining to CGTs.

you provide your perspective on the current state of CGTs, along with their potential for transforming medicine?

I think we've demonstrated beyond a doubt, the curative potential. These are safe products, these are effective products, and they offer the opportunity to cure cancer and rare diseases, and that's not really in dispute. I think everyone sort of agrees that that's the case. What's really holding the industry back today—and ultimately impacting access for patients—is that these products just can't be made in large enough quantities and at a cost that can make them widely available. Clinically, we have three products I believe that have moved from last-line therapy, where they started, to second-line therapy, so they moved up several rows or several lines of therapy, showing that they're clinically effective after those earlier patients. But still, the number of patients getting access has basically stayed the same, and that shows us that the constraint isn't actually necessarily prescribing or the willingness of physicians to use the products.

It's more about, how do we make the products available? To your point, in almost all the products that are available only in the US or in some small parts of Europe, all together, there are eight or nine approved cell therapies. I'm going to focus most of my comments on cell therapy—gene’s a little bit different—but both the comments apply to both. Across all of the approved cell therapies, we treated about 10,000 patients last year in 2024 and that is great for those 10,000 patients and their families, but unfortunately, that leaves hundreds of thousands of patients that didn't get treated. The numbers, the statistics you often see include that about 20% of patients in the US are able to get access to these therapies, which isn't a great number; one in five. Ultimately, most of these patients are very sick, and this is their last hope.

If only one in five can get access, clearly those other four out of five are having the worst outcome, which isn't what any of us want. In the rest of the world, it's far fewer than that. The global average is about less than 5% of patients get treated. That’s the current state of affairs. I think the challenge that we face is we're trying to apply lessons from small molecules and biologics to a totally new modality. These are living medicines. They're often personalized for that individual patient. This brings with it a whole host of unique challenges, and the platforms that were developed for regenerative medicine or other types of manufacturing just aren't good enough.

They haven't been able to solve the problem. In a lot of our processes found in currently available products, we're using 10-year-old or 15-year-old technology, which has proven it can't scale and proven it can't actually create the kind of access that we would want for patients. That's the big issue facing patient access today. Because of these challenges, there's kind of this, I don't know what the negative of a positive cycle is. It's the opposite of that, which is unfortunately because these products haven't been able to reach patients in large numbers, there's a question about their commercial viability.

You know very well that it costs $1 billion or $2 billion to develop a cell therapy or a gene therapy. There's a couple billion dollars potentially at risk, so the investors that put that capital up and the companies that spend 10 or more years developing it need to be able to make that money back and make a profit to invest then in the next wave of therapies. Unfortunately, the commercial viability of these products is in question. Can they actually reach the market? Can they actually get market access and get coverage? Will they get prescribed for patients, because if the answer is no to those questions, those early-stage venture capitalists might look elsewhere, in other modalities, for other types of therapies that could be developed, because ultimately, it's a business and it needs to deliver an ROI.

In the first part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Jason C. Foster, CEO of Ori Biotech, offers his perspective on the state of CGTs, along with their potential for transforming medicine.

Streamlining Prescription Processes

, Tom Dorsett, CEO, RazorMetrics, describes how polypharmacy refers to the use of five or more medications by an individual, and it is becoming an increasingly prominent issue in the United States. Polypharmacy has been recognized for years but is growing more significant, especially within Medicaid, Medicare, and large commercial sectors, including self-funded employers.

One of the key drivers of this rise is the growing number of chronic conditions, which affect a large portion of the adult population. Around 40% of adults in the US have four or more chronic diseases, contributing to the increase in polypharmacy. Furthermore, among the working adult population between 40 and 79 years old, 24% are impacted by polypharmacy, a trend that continues to grow. This issue highlights the complexity and challenges of managing multiple health conditions and medications in an aging population, leading to potential risks related to drug interactions and overall healthcare management.

Dorsett also explains why he believes this concept is such an overlooked driver of unnecessary spending and adverse health outcomes, strategies that should be taken to overcome health information exchange blockages, and much more.

How can RazorMetrics’ solution help deliver better patient outcomes and substantial savings for healthcare plans, employers, and members alike?

 The reality is, when you go to your physician, or just someone who would prescribe—a general nurse practitioner, what have you—they have very little visibility to what medications are costing you and your health plan, because they typically don't have access to the formulary. Even with the advent of what are known as real-time benefit tools, they're supposed to be used at the point of care to give you access to that information. The data flowing into those is very unreliable, because the PBMs that drive the information and the formularies don't really like playing in the same sandbox together. Half the time, you may make a call to one of those real-time benefit tool systems and it just comes up blank. There's no data, so you're going to stop using it pretty quickly, because you're having to go through all these extra clicks. So even though those are out there, the adoption has been fairly low and disappointing, even though they were also mandated in the 21

We, on the other hand, have a retrospective model that is going through claims data for prescriptions that have already been prescribed, and what we do is we put the information at physician’s fingertips basically in existing workflows, so they're not having to go outside of those. If they're having to take more time or go outside of their traditional workflows, or they've got the muscle memory, it's a non- starter. It simply doesn't work. That's what we became very good at over the years.

We're essentially getting a change order into the EHR. That's an official change order that also gives them some options. Optionality is important. Physicians don't always love being told what to do culturally. Basically, it's going through the prescription refill request queue, and they have to address those anyway. They just simply sign off on it, select a medication or decline it. What we do see is a response rate on those change orders of 74%—so we're getting them back most of the time—and an acceptance rate of 33%, so it's very effective.

They don't always accept it. Maybe the patient tried the medication in the past and it didn't work or created some other sort of issues, so they decline it. That's the critical importance of having the prescriber driving this process, not the patient having to go and advocate for themselves. Along the way, this polypharmacy issue started coming up, and we looked at it and realized, we can have an impact there as well, because we're already communicating with the physicians. The problem is, they don't have access to all the medications. If we could fix that, we could go a long way towards fixing this problem. Because we have all the claims coming in for all the medications that they're being prescribed, we have a holistic view of that information, so we're taking that out to the prescribers, so they can review the list and see if the patient shouldn't be on any particular medication, or if there's duplication. We've had a tremendous response from it. It's super effective for our clients. We've saved 10s of millions of dollars across the board with it. Then what we do is follow up after we see that medications have been de-prescribed and just confirm basically. Then typically, the prescriber will reach out to the patient and consult with them on it as well.

In the final part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Tom Dorsett, CEO, RazorMetrics, describes how the software company’s solution can help deliver better patient outcomes and substantial savings for healthcare plans, employers, and members alike.

Will Tariffs Affect Branded Drug Prices?

, Geoffrey Joyce, PhD, director of health policy at the Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics at the University of Southern California (USC, describes how the 10% tax on Chinese goods and a potential 25% tariff on pharmaceuticals could have notable effects on the price, quality, and safety of generic drugs. He explains that while branded and generic drug markets operate differently, the cost of generics is typically much lower, with intense competition driving prices down. A 10% tariff on generics might not significantly impact costs because most of the price is tied to distribution, not manufacturing. However, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the risks of relying on countries like China and India for essential generics, which has led to a push to bring production back to the U.S.

A 25% tariff would likely make domestic production more attractive, but generics are low-margin products, so this may result in higher consumer prices. Joyce suggests that tariffs could disrupt supply chains but not lead to significant changes in US production in the short term. Additionally, the low-profit nature of the business could encourage foreign manufacturers to cut corners, potentially reducing drug quality. California's failed attempt to create its own generic drug industry illustrates the challenges in stimulating domestic production for these low-margin drugs.

While tariffs might encourage some domestic production, it could come at the cost of higher prices and possibly lower drug quality. The overall impact on the drug supply chain remains uncertain, with concerns about reliability and safety, especially if foreign manufacturers face increased production costs.

Joyce also describes what makes the generic drug market susceptible to supply chain disruptions; how the tariffs can affect price or competition within the branded drug space; health policy developments that coming down the pike that the pharma supply chain should prepare for; and much more.

Do you anticipate the tariffs affecting price or competition within the branded drug space?

Why are brand drugs so expensive on patent drugs? Well, it's typically pharma companies— whether people are fond of them or not—they've made big investments, maybe a billion or a couple billion dollars before that drug makes it to market. When they hit home runs and they develop a good drug, they charge us whatever the market's willing to pay. What it means is the cost of producing the drug—the marginal cost—is quite low, even for branded drugs.

Why are prices high? Because it's a successful drug with little competition, let's say, in that therapeutic class. And all your costs are fixed. There are research and development costs. In addition, the ones that make it to market and are successful have to pay for all the losers that don't make it to the market. Like generics, the cost of producing an additional pill tend to be quite small. If the tariff is on the active ingredients and the import from overseas, it may not be that consequential to the end price, but yet it can throw disruptions on who's producing and the incentives of producers. I think during COVID, we realized we should have some drugs that we produce domestically, because we're vulnerable if we don't.

In the third part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Geoffrey Joyce, PhD, director of health policy at the Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics at USC, describes how the tariffs can affect price or competition within the branded drug space.

Impact of Tariffs on the Generic Drug Market

How will the 10% tax on goods from China—along with the potential 25% tariff on pharmaceuticals—impact the price, quality, and safety of generic drugs? Would the aforementioned tariff encourage domestic production?

We're speculating, but people don't realize there's two very different markets for branded drugs versus generics, different players, as you're aware. We have some of the highest branded drug prices in the world and some of the lowest generics. Generic competition in most cases—there are exceptions—is fierce. If you’ve been on the Mark Cuban website, Cost Plus Drugs, you look at the ingredient costs, it's a penny to five cents a pill for a lot of very common generics. Someone mentioned a 10% tariff on that where most of the cost of the drug is getting it from the manufacturer to the patients for generic drugs. I didn't think 10% would move the needle, even though, during COVID, we did see shortages of essential drugs. There was more of a realization in the US that we have to repatriate drug production for essential medications, because we could be vulnerable if we rely on India and China, etc., for supplying generic but essential medications.

The question is, would a 25% tariff encourage domestic production? It clearly tips the balance more so in the favor of domestic production, but these are really low margin products, so I think really the losers would be consumers in this case. Supply of drugs I think could be disrupted. I don't think we would see in the short term. We wouldn't see significant changes in production in the US. You do worry about if it's really a low margin business, and you've added tariffs that these foreign manufacturers are going to cut corners, and, like you mentioned, quality declines, and we've seen that. We have evidence of foreign manufacturers cutting corners and having less than high quality standards.

I think that's been the argument for repatriating, and California has tried to do that unsuccessfully. They said they're going to have their own generic industry. They basically get approval for two drugs, and really have not had great production of those to start with. So again, it's a low-margin business, making that attractive to the US. To US manufacturers: prices are going to be higher for sure. You worry that even if that's not enough to stimulate domestic production, it's going to have repercussions for the supply, the reliability of supply, and potentially the quality of drugs made overseas.

In the first part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Geoffrey Joyce, PhD, director of health policy at the Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics at USC, outlines how the tax on goods coming from China and potential 25% tariff on pharmaceuticals could influence generic drug prices. 

A Side Effect Cascade

Why do you believe polypharmacy is such an overlooked driver of unnecessary spending and adverse health outcomes?

 It's a significant problem because it creates several different scenarios. One of the biggest is a cascade of side effects. When you think about it, you're getting prescribed medications for each one of these chronic diseases, and if the physicians aren't necessarily following what's known as the Beers List [Criteria], which is a list of drugs that have well known, acknowledged drug-to-drug interactions, then you're going to end up with this cascade.

Basically, you start getting side effects from the adverse reactions between the drugs, and you prescribe a drug for the side effect, which creates more side effects and so on, thus creating that cascade. The more drugs, the more cost. These adverse events also drive up emergency room visits. They're a very significant driver of increased emergency room visits, which are typically the most expensive medical encounters that you can have that aren't in-patient. It’s highly problematic in those regards, plus, it just has patients feeling worse because of the events that take place—because of the interactions—so the healthier you can get the population, the less this happens, and the less chronic disease there is.

We're starting to also see this with the advent of GLP-1s. Dropping weight creates a domino effect with hypertension, diabetes, and any number of different chronic diseases. There's a whole lot of promise with newer indications of GLP-1s coming out in the future. As you've probably seen, they're popping up all the time, regarding new and different ways that GLP-1s can help, so that's exciting. That's some something we're seeing, but nevertheless, we're still seeing growth in polypharmacy generally.

In the second part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Tom Dorsett, CEO, RazorMetrics, comments on why he believes polypharmacy is an overlooked driver of unnecessary spending and adverse health outcomes.

Enhancing Pharma Supply Chain Transparency and Trust

, Laura Johnson, senior director of sales, life sciences, Loftware, discusses how supply chain collaboration is becoming increasingly important, particularly in the life sciences and pharmaceutical sectors. According to Johnson, the adoption of cloud-enabled collaborative supply chains is crucial for improving real-time data sharing. This enhances visibility and coordination among internal stakeholders, external suppliers, co-manufacturers, and co-packers, who all play a role in the complex supply chain process.

This collaboration leads to faster decision-making and reduces operational costs, resulting in greater agility. Pharmaceutical organizations are better able to respond to market changes, regulatory updates, label changes, and potential disruptions. In addition, cloud-based systems facilitate regulatory compliance and advanced analytics, enabling more accurate demand forecasting. These systems also optimize inventory management, which directly contributes to improving patient outcomes and accelerating the time to market for new therapies.

Ultimately, cloud-based collaborative supply chains help streamline operations, reduce costs, and improve the overall efficiency of the pharmaceutical industry, benefiting both companies and patients.

companies are exploring new ways to ensure that their products and shipments are protected, why the demand for supply chain transparency is continuing to gain momentum, and much more.

Why is the demand for supply chain transparency continuing to gain momentum, and what role are track-and-trace initiatives playing in that effort?

I've been in the industry for a while, so I was around doing and providing solutions to support, track and trace way back in the beginning. You mentioned RFID was certainly a hot topic, and it continues to be. I think that companies are continuing to embrace track and trace. There's a better understanding that the technology has certainly improved immensely over the past 10 to 15 years, so I think it's easier for them to adopt and get the support, and the funding and things that might be needed to deploy these types of systems.

In general, the adoption of track and trace in life sciences certainly enhances the supply chain transparency. It provides that real-time monitoring of products across the network, from production all the way to patient delivery. I think that's really what the intent of it was back when we started focusing on it, deploying sterilized product, as well as the tagging in different ways, whether it's RFID or two-dimensional barcodes, which are a little bit harder to counterfeit than a standard linear barcode. Getting back to track and trace, it certainly improves regulatory compliance as well, and if needed, it can lead to the ability for brand owners or manufacturers to be able to act very swiftly or quickly, should a recall or something else be needed.

In my opinion, by leveraging technology, organizations can improve data accuracy. They reduce inefficiencies often seen when a brand owner is working with a co-packer or another trading partner, and having track and trace across the entire network certainly helps to build trust with these different stakeholders and eventually the consumer.

In the third part of her video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Laura Johnson, senior director of sales, life sciences, Loftware, discusses why the demand for supply chain transparency is continuing to gain momentum, while also explaining the role that track-and-trace initiatives are playing in that effort.

Keeping a Finger on the Regulatory Pulse

chair of the FDA Regulatory practice at Lowenstein Sandler, discusses the potential impact of upcoming tariffs on pharmaceutical supply chains, focusing on Canada, Mexico, and China. He believes that tariffs on Mexico and Canada would have minimal effects on supply chains, as the pharmaceutical industry sources relatively little from these countries. The real concern lies with China, which is a major supplier of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and finished drug products. A significant portion of recent pharmaceutical deals has involved licensing Chinese drugs, which could be affected by tariffs if they disrupt supply chains.

If the relationship between the United States and China worsens, tariffs could have a more substantial impact. Specifically, they might increase the cost of generic drugs, since China is a crucial supplier for these products. Despite this, Shehan notes that many generic drugs are already extremely cheap, with some prescriptions costing just a few cents. Even if prices doubled, it may not drastically affect consumers. Specialty generic drugs, however, could see more noticeable price increases.

He also points out that if trade tensions extend to regions like the EU, India, or Japan, the situation could change. A broader trade conflict could influence drug prices, especially for certain medications. Overall, while tariffs on China may increase drug prices in the short term, the full impact will depend on the nature of global trade relations and the extent of supply disruptions.

Shehan also comments on how he believes the new administration will influence FDA approval processes for commercial products, other specific regulatory updates that drug developers should be closely monitoring in the current landscape, and much more.

What other specific regulatory updates should drug developers be closely monitoring in the current landscape?

The biggest thing to me right now is that our understanding is that decisions aren’t being made at NIH. That is very disturbing because there's a lot of cooperation between the pharmaceutical industry and NIH: funding, scientific collaboration. If it's a temporary pause, 30 days, while people change processes, not a big deal. But if that indicates some kind of big change in how the process works, that is concerning—and maybe less so for the more established part of the industry—but for all the startups etc. that have cooperative research projects with NIH, that could be huge. You really could see a little bit of a drying up at the earlier levels of the pipeline. Not that NIH does much drug development on their own, but some of that earlier-stage scientific work that lays the groundwork is done there.

In the second part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Jim Shehan, chair of the FDA regulatory practice at Lowenstein Sandler, discusses some of the other specific regulatory updates that drug developers be closely monitoring in the current landscape.

How Tariffs Could Affect Generic Drug Prices and the Global Pharmaceutical Market

Moving forward, what should the approach of pharma companies be amid the latest/pending tariffs imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China? What is their potential impact on the pharma supply chain?

If they were to come to pass the tariffs on Mexico and Canada, I don't think it would have a huge impact on supply, etc., basically because we don't source a lot of drug and drug products from those two countries. A little bit more from Canada, is my understanding. That I would kind of put aside, but China's more interesting. We do know that a very large percentage of the recent deal making has been in licensing of Chinese drugs by the global pharmaceutical industry. If there's a supply aspect to that deal, I guess tariffs have an effect. If there isn't, I don't think it substantially reduces that.

Now, if relationships with China deteriorate and one country or the other decides that that's an area they want to meddle in, I think that would have a big impact, but we haven't seen that yet. Tariffs on China will make generic drug prices go up I assume because China is such an important supplier of active pharmaceutical ingredients, as well as finished products. On the other hand, a lot of generic drugs are so dirt-cheap right now. I’ve literally had prescriptions filled for two cents, which they list the prices at $1.08 or something, and I'm responsible for two cents. I don't know how anyone makes money on that, but if you double the price of that, you're probably not going to have a huge impact. Some of the specialty, generic products are more expensive, but in terms of your pills and tablets, I don't think there's much of a difference there. If a trade war continues and spreads to say the EU, India, and other places—but mainly the EU and Japan—I think you're talking a different story there that may have an impact on prices.

In the first part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Jim Shehan, chair of the FDA regulatory practice at Lowenstein Sandler, describes what the approach of pharma companies should be amid the latest/pending tariffs imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China, along with their potential impact on the pharma supply chain.

The Rundown on Rebates

, Ed Schoonveld, value & access advisor for Schoonveld Advisory and author of 

, points out that the latest 15 drugs chosen for price negotiations under Medicare Part Dare not "negotiations" but rather government-mandated price reductions, based on a percentage discount determined by how far a drug is beyond its patent expiration. While the government has shown restraint in previous rounds, it’s expected that as more drugs are added to the list, Medicare pricing will experience a significant impact.

In this round, weight loss drugs like Ozempic, which have proven effective in managing diabetes, controlling HbA1c, and providing cardiovascular benefits, are included. However, these drugs are not yet approved for weight loss in Medicare patients, so their future role remains uncertain. While this could significantly affect Medicare pricing, Schoonveld notes that the private market is unlikely to be directly impacted by these changes in the short term. The government, however, influences physician fees for Medicare patients, which tend to be lower than those charged for privately-insured patients. This dynamic has led to the private sector subsidizing Medicare patients through premiums.

This trend may extend to drug pricing, where companies might raise prices in the private market to compensate for the government-mandated discounts in Medicare. Such changes could further strain the private sector, especially as employers and insurers are already expressing concerns about rising premiums and drug costs. Additionally, there is ongoing debate around potential restrictions on drug rebates, further complicating the financial landscape for both private insurers and consumers.

Schoonveld also offers a teaser on what to expect in his upcoming February “Value and Access” column.

What can readers expect from you February column?

 So my next column is going to talk about rebates. It's going to talk a little bit about, why are rebates bad? Why else would drug price controlling by the government be better? What are some of the drawbacks? What have we learned from some of the systems around the world? What are some of the drawbacks of that, and what are the points that we need to keep an eye on? What should be the focus of those programs, to make sure that we are keeping the patient in mind?

In the final part of his video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Ed Schoonveld value & access advisor for Schoonveld Advisory and author of The Price of Global Health, previews his upcoming February column.

How Trade Strategy Impacts Business Success

, Amanda Salindong, associate director of channel & distribution at Alnylam Pharmaceuticals

explains how she participated in two key sessions: “Trade 101” and “Women in Trade.” The former, which she presented at both this year and last, is designed for those new to the trade function in biotech and pharma. It offers a high-level overview of the trade function, explaining its role in connecting various business areas such as revenue, contracting, pricing, supply chain, and finance. The session is beneficial for individuals from different backgrounds, including those transitioning into trade from other roles. Salindong enjoys the opportunity to meet attendees, engage in discussions, and help newcomers better understand the trade function. Audience feedback indicated that attendees found the session helpful in building foundational knowledge and sparking further questions.

The “Women in Trade” session, which Salindong co-hosted with colleagues from both the manufacturing and vendor sides, focused on career development, networking, and leadership. The session was intimate and inclusive, featuring both women and men from diverse experience levels. It allowed for open discussions on topics like allyship, career growth, and leadership development. Participants appreciated the chance to engage in meaningful conversations in a more personal setting, unlike larger networking events where deeper discussions can be difficult. Feedback from attendees was positive, as they valued the opportunity to share experiences, exchange best practices, and foster connections with others in the trade industry.

Overall, both sessions were well-received, offering valuable insights, networking opportunities, and practical takeaways for individuals at various stages of their careers in trade. She emphasized the importance of fostering relationships and creating spaces for open dialogue within the trade community.

Salindong also speaks on her day-to-day workflow of that involves supporting her organization’s channel strategy, the factors she believes that manufacturers should consider when selecting a third-party logistics provider, and much more. 

A portion of your day-to-day workflow involves supporting your organization’s channel strategy. What does that entail?

 It is a bit of a smaller company, but I do focus on the channel strategy and operations of the company. As I mentioned before, trade is a nexus of various business functions—you get involved with anywhere from pricing to contracting and revenue, so it's key that the person in trade has a seat at the table to be able to contribute toward broader discussions of an organization's initiatives.

There's a lot of heavy collaboration with the internal stakeholders, and other members—whether it be a market access team or another team—to be able to make sound business decisions to accomplish the company's goals. One of my roles is introducing trade terms and the trade business, and to be able to consider certain factors within the trade and channel to help support a business decision. Thinking bigger picture, whether it be being involved with strategic account initiatives or a revenue business school, it's really important for the trade person to come and bring in how the channel will impact that decision, considering all different factors. How is that going to positively and or negatively impact the business?

That area is where I heavily support within channel. Also, a lot of times in trade, the ultimate goal is to ensure that there's seamless distribution of products to the channel to provide optimal product access. You want to make sure patients get treated, so in order to do that, that involves a lot of contracting, fostering relationships, as well as making sure that the business with other collaborators is running smoothly, whether it be within supply chain or finance.

In the second part of her video interview with Pharma Commerce Editor Nicholas Saraceno, Amanda Salindong, associate director of channel & distribution at Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, describes how she supports her organization’s channel strategy.

Business and Finance

Latest News