Menu Close

Tag: 2017 News

Supreme Court Ruling Expedites New Drugs

The U.S. Supreme Court cut the time it will take for copycat versions of biologic drugs to get to the market in a pivotal ruling about an expensive class of medicines that can yield billions of dollars in sales for drug companies.

The justices, in a 9-0 ruling, overturned a lower court decision that had prevented Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis AG  from selling its copycat version of California-based Amgen Inc’s Neupogen until six months after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved it.

The decision has major implications for the pharmaceutical industry because it will dictate how long brand-name makers of biologic drugs can keep near-copies, called biosimilars, off the market. Even the six months at issue in the case can mean hundreds of millions of dollars in sales.

Health insurers expect biosimilars to be cheaper than original brands, like generics, saving consumers billions of dollars each year.

The dispute involved a section of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, dubbed Obamacare, that created an expedited path for regulatory approval of biosimilars while trying to respect the patent rights of brand-name manufacturers.

Novartis complained that the 2015 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington handed Amgen an extra six months of exclusivity on top of the 12 years already provided under the law.

Rising drug prices are a matter of concern for patients and policymakers. President Donald Trump has criticized the pharmaceutical industry over pricing practices, promising to encourage competition and bring down drug costs.

Unlike traditional drugs, biologics are made from living cells and cannot be copied exactly to make generic versions. They are used to treat a range of conditions, including Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, rheumatoid arthritis, plaque psoriasis, breast cancer and diabetes.

Novartis unit Sandoz in September 2015 began selling Zarxio, the first biosimilar drug to win U.S. regulatory approval. Amgen’s Neupogen and Zarxio boost white blood cell counts in cancer patients to help fight infections.

After launch, Zarxio cost 15 percent less than Neupogen at list prices, according to Novartis. Sales of Neupogen, meanwhile, dropped from more than $1 billion in 2015 to $765 million last year, primarily due to competition in the United States, the company said in regulatory filings.

Biologics account for an ever-increasing share of U.S. prescription drug costs, according to an insurer trade group. It cited as an example AbbVie Inc’s Humira, which costs more than $50,000 per year.

Amgen sued Sandoz in 2014 in San Francisco federal court alleging patent infringement and violations of the Affordable Care Act provision governing biosimilars.

The companies disagreed on how to apply that law’s requirement that a biosimilar drug maker give the brand-name manufacturer 180 days notice before launching its copycat version.

In July 2015, the appeals court ruled that the 180-day notice must be given after FDA approval. Novartis appealed to the Supreme Court, with the Trump administration backing the company’s arguments.

Medical Device “Cash for Clunkers” Buy Back Proposed

In the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, Congress established the Health Care Industry Cybersecurity (HCIC) Task Force to address the challenges the health care industry faces when securing and protecting itself against cybersecurity incidents, whether intentional or unintentional.

It counts representatives from both private sector and public sector organizations as members, including the Chief Information Security Officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the CIO of Cook Children’s Health Care System, the Chief Technology Risk Officer of insurer Kaiser Permanente and representatives from testing organization Underwriters Lab and security companies including Symantec and FireEye.

The report released to members of both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives on Friday features more than 30 pages of recommendations and “imperatives,” some of which are bound to be the source of controversy. It concludes that the U.S. healthcare system is plagued by weaknesses, from the leadership and governance of information security within healthcare organizations, to the security of medical devices and medical laboratories to hiring and user awareness.

Many of the risks directly affect patient safety, the group found. It comes amid growing threats to healthcare organizations, including a ransomware outbreak that affected scores of hospitals in the United Kingdom.

The Task Force’s discussions resulted in the development of six imperatives along with cascading recommendations and action items. All of these reflect the need for a unified effort – among public and private sector organizations of all sizes and across all sub-sectors – to work together to meet an urgent challenge.

On the controversial issue of medical device security, the report suggests that the Federal government and industry might use incentives akin to the “cash for clunkers” car buyback program to encourage healthcare organizations to jettison insecure, legacy medical equipment. Medical device makers need to do a far better job designing products in line with accepted secure development practices and should be urged to publish a “bill of materials” with medical devices that accounts for all hardware and software used in a device, including open source software components.

FDA approval of medical devices can take six years or more, while devices have useful lives that may be measured in decades. Still, support by vendors like Microsoft, whose software is used to manage medical equipment, ends at around the eight year mark after initial release, resulting in products that are unsupported for much of their useful life..

Incidents like the WannaCry outbreak, which disrupted the delivery of medical care at scores of UK National Health Service facilities are shots over the bow, warning of what could be far more disruptive and widespread attacks said Joshua Corman, the Director of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at The Atlantic Council and a founder of the group I Am The Cavalry.

Healthcare organizations rely heavily on connected medical devices, but most are small and cash strapped organizations that lack expertise in information security.

Berkshire Hathaway Resolves Case With CDI

The California Department of Insurance has reached a settlement agreement with Berkshire Hathaway subsidiaries in the Shasta Linen case. The settlement includes a dismissal of the writ petition filed by the insures and the commissioner’s administrative decision in the Shasta Linen case will continue to stand as a precedent decision.

The company will however continue to sell a revised version of its controversial workers’ compensation insurance policies to California employers. The revised version will contain disclosures about the financial risks of Reinsurance Participation Agreements or RPAs,

Workers’ compensation insurance was partially deregulated by the legislature in the1990s and as a result, the insurance commissioner has only limited authority over rates and product features.

Commissioner’s regulatory authority over workers’ compensation rates is limited. The rates must be sufficient to make sure the companies remain solvent, The rates cannot tend to create a monopoly in the market. And they cannot be unfairly discriminatory.

Nonetheless, workers’ compensation insurers are required to file their policy forms with the department.  However, the commissioner has very limited authority over product features.

In May 2016, in response to a complaint by Shasta Linen, and after a hearing by an administrative law judge, the commissioner determined California Insurance Company and Applied Underwriters, both subsidiaries of Berkshire Hathaway, were selling a workers’ compensation product with illegal side agreements that modified the obligations of the parties under the policy.

Such agreements, known as Reinsurance Participation Agreements or RPAs, require department review and approval. But the Berkshire companies used the agreements without first obtaining the department’s approval.

The RPA did not disclose basic premium information, levied hefty penalties for policy cancellation, failed to disclose required binding arbitration outside the U.S., and obfuscated the methodology for calculating premiums, deposits, or other payments due.

The department concluded Applied Underwriters was trying to avoid regulatory oversight, as noted in their U.S. patent application where the company described how its patent purports to evade regulatory oversight and ostensibly allows the company to sell a complicated type of policy to smaller businesses, which most states prohibit.

The settlement effectively constitutes an acknowledgement that rates and supplementary rate information must be filed with the department consistent with longstanding insurance law. The settlement includes new disclosures that will provide policyholders with key details regarding the product.

However, the CDI claims that even the revised products are not appropriate for businesses unable to adequately evaluate the pricing, obligations, and risks of such a complex product. The department advises any employer considering such a complex product to consult an expert with legal and actuarial expertise in workers’ compensation products.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday declined to interpret whether a workers’ compensation policy executed by a Berkshire Hathaway insurance unit can be characterized as a swap, saying its interpretation could influence an ongoing $18 million suit concerning the policies.

The agency declined to issue a joint interpretation with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as to whether a “reinsurance participation agreement” executed by Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company Inc. is a swap, citing a suit filed by delivery service Breakaway Courier Systems.

Health Care Fraud Remains DOJ Priority

Combating health care fraud will continue to be a priority for the Jeff Sessions-led Department of Justice (DOJ).

DOJ Criminal Division’s Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Blanco, in a May 18 speech at the ABA’s Institute on Health Care Fraud, said that Attorney General Jeff Sessions “feels very strongly” that “health care fraud is a priority for the Department of Justice.”

Blanco called health care fraud “despicable” and said, “the investigation and prosecution of health care fraud will continue; the department will be vigorous in its pursuit of those who violate the law in this area.”

Blanco continued, “I can tell you that [Attorney General Sessions] has expressed this to me personally.”

According to the report in the National Law Review, his speech appeared to be designed to address concerns that changes in emphasis in the DOJ Criminal Division towards immigration and violent crime would come at the expense of health care fraud investigations.

He cited three tools that the Justice Department has used for the past several years when discussing the Department’s full-court press to prosecute corporations and individuals who orchestrate and benefit from fraudulent health care schemes:

(1) recent work of the Health Care Fraud Unit, a specialized unit within the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section,
(2) the importance of cooperation between the Medicare Fraud Strike Forces, U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and state and federal investigative agencies, and
(3) the commitment to the use of in-house, real-time data analytics to review CMS data to detect fraudulent billing and emerging fraudulent schemes.

By emphasizing the DOJ’s commitment to combating health care fraud, Mr. Blanco dispelled speculation that the Department might divert resources from this fight, even as Attorney General Sessions prepares to re-order the DOJ’s prosecutorial initiatives.

To illustrate this point, Blanco highlighted recent enforcement actions by the DOJ’s Health Care Fraud Unit against a number of companies and individuals.

DWC Suspends Pasadena Psychiatrist

The Department of Industrial Relations and its Division of Workers’ Compensation have suspended Pasadena psychiatrist Jason Hui-Tek Yang from participating in California’s workers’ compensation system.

Dr. Yang was convicted in Riverside County Superior Court for his involvement in an insurance fraud conspiracy that referred patients for unnecessary care to justify workers’ compensation billing.

He was implicated in a second round of charges that expanded a Riverside County case against Peyman Heidary, a chiropractor accused of masterminding a legal and medical scheme to maximize profits by recruiting injured workers and giving them a one-size-fits-all battery of medical treatments. Prosecutors claimed Heidary ran an operation that paid people referred to as “cappers” $100 per patient to recruit injured workers who were provided the same medical care regardless of their injuries.

Heidary and three associates were initially charged in July 2014.  Later charges were filed filed against an additional six people, including three physicians. The 26 page grand jury indictment accused Yang of referring patients for unnecessary care to justify billing for “med-legal” reports, costing about $1,000 each.  Several carriers were specifically named as victims.

Dr. Yang is a 1995 graduate of the University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine. He was licensed in California in 1998. The Medical Board of California records show his license is still active, and there is no record of disciplinary action.

DWC issued a Notice of Suspension, which Yang appealed. The appeal was heard in April by Hearing Officer William E. Gunn, who issued a recommended determination and order on May 25. The recommended decision was adopted by DWC Acting Administrative Director George Parisotto and the suspension confirmed on June 1. Dr. Yang has over 2,000 active workers’ compensation liens with an estimated total claim value of more than $13.7 million.

AB 1244 (Gray and Daly) requires the DWC Administrative Director to suspend any medical provider, physician or practitioner from participating in the workers’ compensation system in cases in which one or more of the following is true:

1) The provider has been convicted of a crime involving fraud or abuse of the Medi- Cal or Medicare programs or the workers’ compensation system, fraud or abuse of a patient, or related types of misconduct;

2) The provider has been suspended due to fraud or abuse from the Medicare or Medicaid (including Medi-Cal) programs; or

3) The provider’s license or certificate to provide health care has been surrendered or revoked.

DIR’s fraud prevention efforts are posted online, including frequently updated lists for physicians, practitioners and providers who have been issued notices of suspension, and those who have been suspended pursuant to Labor Code §139.21(a)(1).

Gravlin Appeal Process Continues at WCAB

Yesterday we reported that the Petition for Review of the WCAB decision in Robert Gravlin’s claim against the City of Vista which was filed by Gravlin on May 10, 2017 in the 4th Appellate District, Division 1, was dismissed on June 6.

The dispute at trial was to resolve issues raised by applicant’s contention that one cumulative trauma case is properly applied to both the admitted injury to the skin and to the injury to the heart, and defendant’s contention that there were separate dates of injury for the injury to the heart and for the injury to the skin, and “Anti-Merger,” presumably in reference to the provisions of section 3208.2.

Reconsideration was granted on March 27, 2017, and the WCJ’s decision was rescinded in the split panel decision of Gravlin v City of Vista. New findings were entered that applicant sustained two separate cumulative injuries, one to the heart/ hypertension and the other to his skin. The different dates of injury support separate awards of permanent disability for those separate conditions, which resulted in a lower financial award for Gravlin.

The Order dismissing his Petition in the Court of Appeal seemed like the end of the road for his appeal.

But further information has surfaced (thanks to one of our readers) showing that this is not the case.

The Labor Code provides that the first step in the appeal process is to file a Petition for Reconsideration when a litigant becomes an aggrieved party “for the first time.”

In this case Mr. Gravlin was not an aggrieved party when the WCJ ruled in his favor, and did not become aggrieved until March 27, 2017 when the split WCAB panel reversed the decision which was previously in his favor. The correct appeal procedure on that day was for Mr. Gravlin to file his own Petition for Reconsideration since he was then an aggrieved party for the first time.

Instead he filed a Petition for Review with the Court of Appeal.

Apparently in response to his pending case in the Court of Appeal, the WCAB issued an Order Granting Reconsideration on Board Motion on May 26, 2017 “in order to further study the legal and factual issues” he raised in the Court of Appeal.

The WCAB notified the Court of Appeal of its Order, and requested that the pending petition be dismissed. The Clerk of the Court notified the parties of this request by letter, and it appears he agreed to the dismissal.

Mr. Gravlin’s case is now back at the WCAB level for further review on Reconsideration. It will likely remain in this process for the next several months. Following the next decision of the WCAB, the aggrieved party – whomever it might be at that point – will likely proceed back to the Court of Appeal asking it to hear the case.

It can be assumed that a final determination of the apportionment issue will not be resolved until 2018, or perhaps later.

Data Analysis Uncovers More Fake Medical Studies

John Carlisle, a consultant anesthetist at Torbay Hospital in the UK, used statistical tools to conduct a review of thousands of papers published in leading medical journals. While a vast majority of the clinical trials he reviewed were accurate, 90 of the 5,067 published trials had underlying patterns that were unlikely to appear by chance in a credible dataset.

While some of these errors may be the result of “misinterpretation, statistical error, or plain simple mistakes,” Carlisle says in a press release emailed to The Scientist, it’s likely that some of the research in question “may have been deliberately falsified.” He published his results on June 5 in the medical journal Anaesthesia.

The tool works by comparing the baseline data, such as the height, sex, weight and blood pressure of trial participants, to known distributions of these variables in a random sample of the populations.

If the baseline data differs significantly from expectation, this could be a sign of errors or data tampering on the part of the researcher, since if datasets have been fabricated they are unlikely to have the right pattern of random variation.

“This study is about working to correct the scientific record,” Andrew Klein, the editor-in-chief of the journal, said in a press release. “The new Carlisle screening tool has been developed here in the U.K. and it is now clear that it should be used by medical publications around the world. The integrity of medical science demands that we do everything we can to ensure complete accuracy in the publication of research.”

In the case of Japanese scientist, Yoshitaka Fuji, the detection of such anomalies triggered an investigation that concluded more than 100 of his papers had been entirely fabricated.

The latest study identified 90 trials that had skewed baseline statistics, 43 of which with measurements that had about a one in a quadrillion probability of occurring by chance.

The published review includes a full list of the trials in question, allowing Carlisle’s methods to be checked but also potentially exposing the authors to criticism. Previous large scale studies of erroneous results have avoided singling out authors.

Relevant journal editors were informed last month, and the editors of the six anesthesiology journals named in the study said they plan to approach the authors of the trials in question, and raised the prospect of triggering in-depth investigations in cases that could not be explained.

The flagged studies came from eight journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine, Anaesthesia, and JAMA. As Klein tells Retraction Watch, all the journals responded “swiftly and positively” to Carlisle, who reached out with the findings of his study. Six of the journals in the new analysis are in anesthesiology, where Carlisle has focused his efforts for several years, refining the method since 2012.

That earlier work led to the revelations that much of Yoshitaka Fujii’s research was fraudulent, and Fujii now has made 183 retractions of his voluminous “research”. The method has also been used by others to identify issues in more than 30 papers by bone researcher Yoshihiro Sato.

Gravlin Petition for Review Dismissed

The decision in Robert Gravlin’s claim against the City of Vista will balance the apportionment of permanent disability rules in favor of employers – unless he succeeds in his efforts to overturn the WCAB.

A Petition for Writ of Review was filed by Gravlin on May 10, 2017 in the 4th Appellate District, Division 1, case D072155. His Petition was dismissed on June 6. Unless the California Supreme Court intervenes, the Decision after Reconsideration will become final.

Gravlin was employed by the City of Vista as a firefighter from January 6, 1975 until January, 2005.

He filed claims for several industrial injuries sustained during the course of that employment including alleging cumulative trauma injury to the heart/hypertension and to the skin (skin cancer).

The dispute at trial was to resolve issues raised by applicant’s contention that one cumulative trauma case is properly applied to both the admitted injury to the skin and to the injury to the heart, and defendant’s contention that there were separate dates of injury for the injury to the heart and for the injury to the skin, and “Anti-Merger,” presumably in reference to the provisions of section 3208.2.

The WCJ accepted applicant’s contention and found one cumulative trauma injury causing injury to the heart and skin.The recommended permanent disability rating for the heart injury is 55% and the recommended permanent disability rating for the skin injury is 35%. Under the MDT, the two ratings combine for a single rating of 74% permanent disability.

Reconsideration was granted and the WCJ’s decision was rescinded in the split panel decision of Gravlin v City of Vista. New findings were entered that applicant sustained two separate cumulative injuries, one to the heart/ hypertension and the other to his skin. The different dates of injury support separate awards of permanent disability for those separate conditions, which resulted in a lower financial award for Gravlin.

Commissioner Newman dissented. He would uphold the decision of the WCJ for the reasons expressed in her Report.

Thus far Gravlin has not been successful in reversing the WCAB, and his chances are now more remote now that the Court of Appeal has declined to hear the case.

“Recovery” Center Owner and Capper Arrested

A Murrieta woman is accused in an insurance fraud case that allegedly netted her more than $230,000. Brooke Elizabeth Best-Freeman, 34, operated a licensed alcohol and drug treatment program in the Murrieta and Temecula areas, according to the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office.

The charges against Best-Freeman, who had run Best New Life Recovery since 2015, include four felony counts of insurance fraud and one felony count of solicitation or referral for purposes of insurance fraud – which is sometimes known as “capping.” She’s also facing a sentence-enhancing white collar crime allegation.

Her co-defendant, 49-year-old Robert Cramer of Lake Elsinore, is charged with one count of referral of a client for purposes of insurance fraud, and is the alleged “capper” in the case. He remains at large.

According to prosecutors, Best-Freeman came under investigation last September after the D.A.’s office was contacted by fraud investigators from Health Net Inc. who had flagged multiple billings from the defendant’s business, Best New Life Recovery.

The treatment facility, originally located in Murrieta, then Temecula, was licensed by the California Department of Health Care Services in 2015.

Prosecutors allege that, over a nine-month period, Best-Freeman submitted claims to Health Net and Cigna for treatments that were never provided to patients. The defendant also allegedly misclassified other services, forging or otherwise altering documents to commit acts of fraud, according to the D.A.’s office.

Cramer, the alleged “capper,” was tasked with finding prospects willing to go along with the conspiracy. He was promised $2,000 for his part, according to the prosecution.

Health Net lost just over $195,000 paying the alleged bogus claims, while Cigna suffered a $36,000 loss, according to court papers.

Ten Work Comp Attorneys Face Fraud Charges

The Orange County District Attorney’s Office filed felony fraud charges against 10 attorneys and 6 others Monday in what prosecutors say is a massive workers’ compensation-referral scheme with more than 33,000 patients and an estimated $300 million-plus in insurance payouts received.

The Orange County Register reports that the attorneys charged Monday were: Jon Woods, 56, of Cypress; Payman Zargari, 49, Sherman Oaks; John Jansen, 49, Santa Ana; Fari Rezai, 39, Irvine; Lionel Eduardo Giron, 49, Pomona; Dennis Ralph Fusi, 73, Lakewood; Jorge Humberto Reyes, 39, Los Angeles; Rony M Barsoum, 43, Los Angeles; Robert Irving Slater, 67, Encino; and Robin Jacobs, 52, Sherman Oaks.

The alleged cappers charged on Monday are Boris Mikhayovich Dadiomov, 31, of San Diego; Soraida Veronica Castro, 42, Imperial Beach; Tania Arguello-Plasencia, 31, Tustin; and Dulce Gallegos, 30, San Ysidro.

District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said the charges were the start of an investigation by his office and the California Department of Insurance, which scrutinizes the role medical providers played in an alleged fraud ring that targeted mostly Spanish-speaking communities.

Prosecutors allege that at the center of the ring were businesses run by Carlos Arguello III, 35, of Tustin and Edgar Gonzalez, 50, of Anaheim. In 2005, Arguello formed an advertising company, Centro Legal Internacional, which Rackauckas accused of setting up illegal contracts with 20 to 30 attorneys who focused on workers’ compensation and personal injury.

The attorneys allegedly agreed to contract with companies owned by Arguello and Gonzalez, in return for employees, known as cappers, delivering the attorneys a minimum number of clients per month.

Attorneys are allowed to advertise, the district attorney explained, but the use of cappers to directly recruit for lawyers or medical providers is against the law.

Prosecutors allege that the cappers distributed a variety of fliers and business cards in predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods and at swap meets offering “free consultations” for those who believed they had suffered workplace injuries.

Those who called the listed toll-free numbers reached a call center in El Salvador.

Within 48 hours, cappers sent recruiters out to the prospective patients’ homes to have them sign legal papers, without any contact or input from the actual attorneys, prosecutors said. Rackauckas said the cappers forwarded the legal forms to the attorneys and to participating medical providers. The attorneys also allowed the cappers to submit documents the attorneys had not actually prepared or looked over to insurers, the district attorney added.

The attorneys paid the cappers monthly fees for the recruitment efforts, prosecutors alleged, while the attorneys received a percentage of the settlements from the insurance companies.

It isn’t clear how much of the $300 million insurers ended up paying out to those accused of being linked to the alleged scheme went toward the treatment of illegitimate workplace injuries, Rackauckas acknowledged. But because the use of cappers would be illegal, all of the insurance payouts would be considered part of a fraud ring, Rackauckas said.

No medical providers were charged Monday. But investigators are looking into the possibility that some may have paid for patients recruited by the cappers.

Insurers suspicious of seemingly cut-and-paste paperwork reached out to the Orange County District Attorney’s Office, which teamed up with a California Department of Insurance fraud unit for a three-year investigation.

The 16 charged on Monday face a variety of felonies, including conspiring to refer clients for compensation, referring patients with reckless disregard for the commission of fraud and insurance fraud.

If convicted, Arguello faces up to 29 years and eight months in prison, Gonzalez up to 20 years and eight months.The various attorneys face seven years to nearly 26 years in prison.