Monday Roundup

David Ermer–COVID-19 testing, Medicare, Rx coverage, U.S. Healthcare–
Photo by Sven Read on Unsplash

Another Monday, another COVID-19 vaccine — the newest from Oxford University (UK) and Astrazeneca. The Times of London reports that

Oxford University scientists said this morning that they had created “a vaccine for the world” as trial results showed that their Covid-19 jab worked well enough to apply immediately for regulatory approval.

The vaccine involves two injections, administered at least a month apart, and the results suggest that using a lower first dose could boost efficacy to 90 per cent. However, that finding relied on limited data and may be amended.

Overall, a trial involving 24,000 people suggested that the vaccine was about 70 per cent effective.

It prevented severe disease and the need to be admitted to hospital, and there are promising early signs that it might also block transmission of the virus. No dangerous side-effects were reported, and the British medical regulator has begun to review safety and efficacy data.

Britain has ordered 100 million doses, and Astrazeneca, the drug company that is working with Oxford, said this morning that four million of those would be ready to be sent to care homes, GP clinics and other vaccination centres by the end of the year.

The Oxford vaccine can be stored in a normal fridge, making it easier to handle than Pfizer’s competing inoculation, which must be stored at about minus 70C. It is also considerably cheaper, costing a few pounds per dose. It is possible that the first doses could be administered before Christmas.

The FEHBlog heard on Fox Business this morning that a separate phase three trial for the Oxford vaccine is ongoing in our country. Oxford and Astrazeneca will present an emergency use authorization request to our Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) based on that as yet uncompleted trial. The trial referenced in the Times of London article was conducted in the United Kingdom and Brazil. The FDA does not require that the phase three trials be conducted in the U.S. For example, the agency approved the Ebola vaccine based on a phase three trial conducted in Africa, but of course there’s no problem finding COVID-19 patients here.

Reuters reports that the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will meet on December 10 to review the Pfizer / BioNTech emergency use application for its COVID-19 vaccine. The FDA is not bound by the Committee’s recommendation. Here is a link to the full FDA press release.

A friend of the FEHBlog recommended the 20 minute long Journal podcast interview with the founder of BioNTech Dr. Ugur Sahin. The FEHBlog found that podcast fascinating listening.

Govexec.com reports that “The departments of Defense and State, as well as the Veterans Affairs Department’s Veterans Health Administration, the Bureau of Prisons and Indian Health Service, will all receive a direct allocation of vaccines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The plan was spelled out in a COVID-19 Vaccination Program Interim Playbook, which was first reported by CNBC.” 

Following up on the major Health and Human Services rule makings on Fridays here are article with industry reaction:

  • As the FEHBlog expected, Fierce Healthcare reports that “A hurried final rule aimed at tying drug prices to those paid by foreign countries could lead to providers paying more for drugs than what they will get reimbursed by Medicare, according to several providers and experts.” It really makes you wonder why the American Medical Association’s House of Delegates conditionally endorsed adding a public option to the ACA marketplace earlier this month.
  • Fierce Healthcare further informs us that “CMS’ Stark, anti-kickback updates draw praise from hospitals, concern from physician groups.”
  • Health Payer Intelligence discusses the Medicare rule restricting the use of prescription drug rebates in Medicare Part D effective January 1, 2022. The FEHBlog cannot understand why if drug manufacturers want to end the rebate practices, it does not assure (with an enforcement mechanism) the health insurance industry and the government that the price reductions will balance out the lost rebates.