West SBV Times

U.S. Rep. Norma Torres (D-CA-35) thanked President Joe Biden for “finally enabling the government to negotiate prescription drug prices,” but a California health analyst said this law could “be detrimental to seniors who could miss out on treatments for cancer, Alzheimer's disease, and more.”

“Promises Made, Promises Kept,” Torres posted on X. “Thanks President Biden for finally enabling the government to negotiate prescription drug prices like capping insulin at $35 a month.” 

“Seniors need and deserve a president fighting for them!” said Torres. 

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022, contained a provision that allows the federal government to negotiate the prices of 20 drugs covered under Medicare. In his State of the Union address last night, the president proposed expanding that provision.

“It’s time to go further and give Medicare the power to negotiate lower prices for 500 drugs over the next decade,” said Biden.

Sally Pipes, president of the California-based Pacific Research Institute (PRI), said that these proposed expanded Medicare drug price negotiations would be “detrimental” to research and development for “future cures.”

“Biden claims he wants to control the prices of even more drugs, slashing our ability to fund #RnD for future cures,” Pipes posted on X. “500 additional drugs over the next decade!”

“That would be detrimental to seniors who could miss out on treatments for cancer, Alzheimer's disease, and more!”

The IRA's drug-pricing provisions, "or more accurately, price controls — will most certainly impact our ability to fight many types of cancers,” Pipes told South SFV Today last month, saying these provisions "discourage investment in the development of new treatments.”

She said "small-molecule penalty" contained in the IRA "will have an outsized impact on our efforts to develop treatments for cancer."

Under the IRA, the brand-name drugs for which Medicare "negotiates" prices are split into two categories: small-molecule drugs and biologics. The IRA makes small-molecule drugs eligible for "negotiation" nine years after their approval, compared to a 13-year exemption period for biologics.

“This disparity encourages investors and researchers to turn away from developing small-molecule drugs in favor of biologics, given the lengthier period they will have to recoup their investments,” said Pipes. 

“While both small-molecule drugs and biologics are essential for cancer treatment, small-molecule drugs are the only way to target some forms of breast, lung, colon, and other cancers,” she said. 

Pipes also said that this will discourage companies from investing in research into additional indications for an approved drug.

“Why spend money seeing if a drug that works for one form of cancer can work for another form, with the threat of price controls looming?” said Pipes.

She referenced an October 2023 paper, authored by University of Chicago economists, which said that “price setting under the IRA undermines existing intellectual property laws, reducing incentives for investment in research and development (R&D) that discovers new drugs and identifies new uses and populations who can benefit from already-approved drugs.”

“We conservatively find that the IRA’s policy to set prices at 9 years after market entry for select small molecule drugs will reduce their expected revenues in the U.S. market by 8.0%, which implies a reduction in R&D investment of almost 12.3%, or $232.1 billion over 20 years,” wrote the paper’s authors. “Over the same time frame, we conclude that there will be 188 fewer small molecule treatments, including 79 fewer new small molecule drugs and 109 fewer post-approval indications for these drugs.”

Rather than drug-pricing provisions like the ones contained in the IRA, Pipes said out-of-pocket costs could be reduced and transparency increases by "reforming the practices of PBMs."  

“Our current PBM system directly contributes to drug price inflation,” said Pipes. “PBMs receive rebates based on a drug's list price, so they're economically incentivized to design formularies that promote higher-cost, brand-name drugs and steer patients away from generics and biosimilars.”

Pipes said Congress could direct PBMs to be “more transparent” and “require them to pass discounts and rebates along to patients.”

Torres first won election to California's 35th Congressional District in 2014, defeating fellow Democrat Christina Gagnier in the General Election by a vote of 63.5% to 36.5%.

She previously represented District 32 in the California State Senate from 2013 to 2014, and served in the California State Assembly from 2008 to 2013.

A native of Guatemala, Torres worked as a 911 dispatcher with the Los Angeles Police Department for 17 years.