Congress has left Capitol Hill after the Congressional election on November 8. The Wall Street Journal reports from the Congressional campaign trail.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court opens its October 2023 Term. The Journal discusses the legal issues that the Court will be considering this term.
Amy Howe adds
When the justices return to the bench next week to begin the 2022-23 term, members of the public will be able to attend oral arguments for the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020. The court also announced on Wednesday that it will continue to provide a live audio feed of oral arguments, a practice that it began during the pandemic.
Masking will be optional at oral arguments, the court said in a press release, and the court’s building will otherwise remain closed to the public.
From the Omicron and siblings front, Forbes reports
As COVID-19 regulations continue to ease across the U.S., some Americans want more protection. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of adults familiar with the recently updated booster shot, which specifically targets the virus’ Omicron variant, say they are likely to get one.
That’s according to the latest Forbes Health-Ipsos Monthly Health Tracker, which polled 1,120 adults between Sept. 27 and 28, 2022. Of those in favor of the new shot, 25% say they are “somewhat likely” to get it, while 38% indicate they are “very likely” to get the booster.
Additionally, about 9% of polled individuals have already received the latest booster, and 28% say they aren’t likely to get this particular booster at all.
Perhaps it’s time for health plans to reach out to members on the bivalent booster.
From the healthcare costs front, the Congressional Budget Office offers “Policy Approaches to Reduce What Commercial Insurers Pay for Hospital and Physician Services.” How timely!
From the Rx coverage front —
Fierce Healthcare tells us
A new report finds that 1,216 pharmaceuticals increased their prices past the inflation rate of 8.5% from July 2021 to July 2022, with an average hike of 31.6%.
The report and a second report on price trends released Friday by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) underline how a new provision in the Inflation Reduction Act—an inflationary cap on Part D costs—will affect prices right as the cap is implemented Oct. 1.
NPR shots provides patient and expert reaction to the FDA’s decision to approve a new drug to treat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (“ALS”).
The Food and Drug Administration has approved a controversial new drug for the fatal condition known as ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease.
The decision is being hailed by patients and their advocates, but questioned by some scientists.
Relyvrio, made by Amylyx Pharmaceuticals of Cambridge, Mass., was approved based on a single study of just 137 patients. Results suggested the drug might extend patients’ lives by five to six months, or more. * * *
A much larger study of Relyvrio, the Phoenix Trial, is under way. But results are more than a year off.
The Institute for Clinical and Economic (ICER) review adds
Yesterday, the FDA approved Relyvrio, Amylyx Pharma’s therapy for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). According to ICER’s analysis, the therapy would only achieve traditional thresholds of cost-effectiveness if priced between $9,100 to $30,700 per year.
We also recommended that manufacturers should seek to set prices of new medications that will foster affordability and access for all patients by aligning prices with the patient-centered therapeutic value of their treatments, and not based on the price of existing ALS medications. This is especially important for ALS since new drugs are anticipated to be used in combination with other very expensive drugs, creating the highest risk for financial toxicity due to health care costs.
From the telehealth front, mHealth Intelligence informs us
While researching the effects of telehealth and in-person care within a large integrated health system, a study published in JAMA Network Open found that virtual care methods can expand healthcare capabilities, performing on par or better than in-person care on most quality measures evaluated.
Researchers conducted a retrospective cohort study that included 526,874 patients, 409,732 of whom received only in-person care, and 117,142 participated in telehealth visits. Of those who received only in-person care, 49.7 percent were women, 85 percent were non-Hispanic, and 82 percent were White. Of those who received care via telehealth, 63.9 percent were women, 90 percent were non-Hispanic, and 86 percent were White.
Researchers noted that patients in the in-person-only group performed better on medication-based measures. But only three of the five measures had significant differences: patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) receiving antiplatelets, those with CVD receiving statins, and those with upper respiratory infections avoiding antibiotics.
Researchers also noted that patients participating in telehealth performed better than those in the -person-only group on four testing-based measures. These four measures included patients with CVD with lipid panels, patients with diabetes with hemoglobin A1c testing, patients with diabetes with nephropathy testing, and blood pressure control.
Further, those participating in telehealth performed better than their counterparts on seven counseling-based measures, including cervical cancer screening, breast cancer screening, colon cancer screening, tobacco counseling and intervention, influenza vaccination, pneumococcal vaccination, and depression screening.
Based on these study findings, researchers concluded that telehealth could augment care for various conditions, especially chronic diseases. The study also supplies information that could assist providers in determining an ideal ratio of in-person and telehealth visits.
But researchers also noted several limitations associated with the study. These included their inability to control for the number of in-person and telehealth visits, potential inaccuracies associated with the EMR data used, and sampling limitations.