Cook, an expert in the 340B program as well as other Medicare reimbursement programs, said the 2019 changes allow for the above entities to continue to prescribe and dispense medications as needed for patient care, but expand the scope of the hospital locations subject to the Medicare payment cuts. “To the people who are prescribing the medications, these changes do not have a direct impact,” said Cook. “But the amount of payments that the hospitals receive for the drug is lower.” Patients may not see a meaningful difference in how much they pay for the medications, either.
But the entities who aren’t happy with 340B all have voiced their disapproval in the past. “There are competing interests, data, and ideas about who should get the benefits of the discounts,” said Cook.
Concerns from Oncology
While few physician groups have voiced feedback about the 340B changes slated for 2019, community oncologists have spoken out. According to recent congressional testimony about the 340B Program, one Texas-based oncologist submitted testimony that detailed her concerns that the 340B program might have unintended consequences that don’t necessarily serve the at-risk patients it is supposed to benefit. “Unfortunately, the lack of transparency, oversight, and accountability within the 340B program has led to unintended consequences, including excessive growth of the program, expansion of its reach, closure of private oncology practices, and the shift to a much more expensive site of service in hospitals,” said Debra Patt, MD, MPH, MBA, in a July 2018 meeting of an Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee meeting. Dr. Patt, a vice president of Texas Oncology and a practicing clinician based in Austin, also represented the Community Oncology Alliance in her comments. “When cancer care is shifted from private practices to the hospital outpatient department, the cost of care doubles,” she added.