A group of labor unions is launching a campaign that accuses CVS Caremark of violating patient privacy and improperly pushing docs to prescribe Merck's expensive Januvia diabetes pill,The Wall Street Journal writes.
Change to Win, a group of unions that represents about six million workers, said CVS's pharmacy benefits manager has been urging docs by way of a letter to add Januvia to specific patients' treatments. The letter, obtained by the union group, said CVS identified the diabetes patients through a review of prescription-drug claims processed by its Caremark unit.
A line at the bottom of the letter says Merck paid for the mailing. Neither Merck nor CVS would say how much Merck paid, and the drugmaker also declined to say whether the mailing boosted Januvia sales, the Journal writes.
CVS maintains the union group's actions are rooted in a dispute about workplace rules. The unions represent several thousand CVS workers, and the retailers says the unions have been attacking CVS for more than a year, including objecting to two recent acquisitions. UPDATE: Here is the AlarmedAboutCVSCaremark web site and a statement from Care To Win.
Januvia is as much as eight times more expensive than many other diabetes treatments, according to a recent study. Some medical experts say patients may not need the drug and may respond just as well to older, cheaper treatments, the Journal writes.
Change to Win says the Januvia letter is an example of CVS putting its interests ahead of the businesses that pay it to manage employee prescription-drug benefits. CVS became a big player in the pharmacy-benefits business when it acquired Caremark, then the nation's second-largest PBM, for about $27 billion in 2007, the paper reminds us.
A Merck spokeswoman tells the Journal the drugmaker paid for the mailing "to help inform physicians about additional treatment options, and adds that "no personal information about patient participants in the plan are provided to Merck." The letters were sent by CVS Caremark, not Merck.
CVS argues it does not improperly try to switch patients to more expensive drugs and protects the privacy of plan participants' health info. As for the Januvia mailing, CVS tells the paper it was part of a program to provide info to docs, who make ultimate prescribing decisions.
In recent years, PBMs have been accused of favoring drugs that generate rebates and high profit margins. Six years ago, some patients complained about a letter from Longs Drug Stores urging the patients to switch to a new version of the osteoporosis treatment Fosamax. That mailing also was paid for by Merck, the Journal writes.
The union campaign, set to be announced Friday, comes as CVS's PBM business has struggled. In its most recent quarterly earnings report, announced last month, revenue in the PBM unit fell about 1% to $10.6 billion.
Change to Win's executive director, Chris Chafe, tells the paper the goal of the CVS campaign is to change state laws to force PBMs to disclose to customers all payments or rebates they receive from drugmakers; limit the amount of patient information the PBMs can disclose; and require that any switching of drugs results in lower costs for PBM customers.
Chafe adds that CVS was targeted because of its large role in the retail drug business and the PBM industry, and because the company manages prescription benefits of many union members. Change to Win's members include the Teamsters and the Service Employees International Union.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
5 Comments
This is terrible. Congress should investigate.
Ed:
This is just a new variation on an old ploy. About 9-10 years ago, the Marketing department at Knoll Pharmaceuticals got ahold of Michigan pharmacy customer mailing lists and pre-emptively tried to warn patients about allowing their Synthroid prescriptions switched to another brand, even though there were no AB rated equivalents at the time. The complaints then poured in to the company over the next week. I know this because I was the "chief complaint receipt officer" at the time although I was not in Marketing.
Neil,
The big difference between what Knoll did and this instance is that the pharma comapny (Merck) did not have any patient information. As the PBM, CVS Caremark rightfully has access to pharmacy claims data and can legally use it to communicate to physicians regarding individual patients. Of source, this doesn't answer the question about the clinical value of this particular communication. In the end, assuming that CVS as the employer in this case is responsible for medical and pharmacy costs, it does seem as though the union dispute is at the root of the complaint.
Atlex
Here's an update:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Change-Win-Coalition-Launches-National/story.aspx?guid=%7BA435AE0F-DEDF-42C2-9035-7BEE5AA164A0%7D
the blue cross blue shield med. plan has always been a somewhat rip. off but with cvs now owner. has put the low income ond older americans at a dead end in health care. i have to give up on my non generic med due to cost.