Managed Care - May 2008 - (Page 17) MEDICATION MANAGEMENT FDA Considers Implementing Behind-the-Counter System Other countries do it, and the FDA is thinking about creating a class of drugs that would not require a doctor’s prescription but would require a pharmacist’s approval By Martin Sipkoff he Food and Drug Administration is considering creation of a behind-thecounter (BTC) class of drugs that would require only a pharmacist’s approval for distribution to patients. It is a controversial idea, with pharmacists favoring it and doctors saying it would be unsafe for patients Insurers are caught in the middle. In a letter to the FDA dated April 25, 2008, America’s Health Insurance Plans took a stand against the idea. The trade organization raises concerns about coverage and access, and warns of the law of unintended consequences. “We believe there is insufficient evidence that BTC would provide significant benefits over the current over-the-counter system. AHIP cannot endorse FDA development of a BTC status at this time…. If BTC drugs are not covered, patients could choose to pay for BTC drugs outof-pocket, find the cost prohibitive, and not continue therapy, or switch back to alternative prescription drugs that are covered under their pharmacy benefit plan.” AHIP recommended that if the FDA wants to study the concept, it should “develop a BTC pilot program that could be launched in one or two states.” There are several candidates for BTC status, if it is created. Statins, which were recently turned down by the FDA for an appeal for OTC status, are a possibility. The FDA noted in its ruling that if a BTC classification is established it might consider statins for that class. Many allergy medications, such as nasal steroids, would also be potential BTC candidates. The dilemma for managed care companies could be related to the transfer between classes of a specific drug; that is, whether it went from T “Although some insurance companies do not cover OTC medications in their prescription plans, others are willing to reimburse patients for the cost of certain OTC medicines,” says Daniel A. Hussar, PhD, at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia. over-the-counter (OTC) to BTC or from prescription to BTC, says Perry Cohen, president of the Pharmacy Group, a consulting company. “If a drug is going from OTC to BTC, an MCO might not be that crazy about it because it could increase the cost of care, and pharmacists will want a consulting fee,” he says. “Unless, of course, there’s a safety issue. Then they would probably support the idea. And if a drug goes the other way, they’d probably support the idea because it eliminates an office visit.” The first scenario — OTC to BTC — worries some drug manufacturers. A new class is simply unnecessary, says the Consumer Healthcare Products Association. “We believe that existing law and regulation provide sufficient flexibility for companies to work with FDA to explore new or different approaches to moving prescription medicines to nonprescription status,” according to the CHPA. The trade organization points to Plan B, orlistat, and nicotine replacement drugs as examples of where OTC manufacturers have voluntarily put their products behind the counter for public safety reasons. Plan B and pseudoephedrine Recent events have created a de facto set of BTC drugs in this country. One example is Barr Laboratories’ emergency contraceptive product Plan B, which is sold BTC. And in 2006, Congress passed a law that required that the decongestant pseudoephedrine be made available BTC because it can be converted to methamphetamine. But there is no BTC class of drugs. Creating such a category, also called a “pharmacist class,” would allow the FDA to build a specific set of regulations. The agency is feeling some pressure from drug companies, pharmacists, and some consumer groups to make such a move. Contributing Editor Martin Sipkoff is a long-time health care journalist. MAY 2008 / MANAGED CARE 17
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.