Policy & Compliance

Expert Analysis

• 2 Regulatory Approaches To Psychedelic Clinical Trials

  

  Comparing the U.S. and Canada's regulatory frameworks for clinical trials of psychedelic drugs can be useful for designing trial protocols that meet both countries' requirements, which can in turn help diversify patient populations, bolster data robustness and expedite market access, say Kimberly Chew at Husch Blackwell and Sabrina Ramkellawan at AxialBridge.

• 'Food As Health' Serves Up Fresh Legal Considerations

  

  The growth of food as medicine presents a significant opportunity for healthcare organizations and nontraditional healthcare players to improve patient outcomes and reduce costs, though these innovative programs also bring compliance considerations that must be carefully navigated, say attorneys at McDermott.

• DC Circ. Ruling Heightens HHS Contract Pharmacy Challenges

  

  The D.C. Circuit's recent ruling that the Section 340B program does not bar manufacturers from restricting deliveries of discounted drugs to contract pharmacies represents a second strike against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' current contract pharmacy policy and raises the stakes surrounding an upcoming Seventh Circuit ruling on the same issue, say attorneys at Foley Hoag.

• FTC Focus: Exploring The Meaning Of Orange Book Letters

  

  The Federal Trade Commission recently announced an expansion of its campaign to promote competition by targeting pharmaceutical manufacturers' improper Orange Book patent listings, but there is a question of whether and how this helps generic entrants, say Colin Kass and David Munkittrick at Proskauer.

• 3rd Circ.'s Geico Ruling May Encourage Healthcare Arbitration

  

  The Third Circuit's recent decision in Geico v. Mount Prospect, finding that claims under New Jersey's Insurance Fraud Prevention Act can be arbitrated, strengthens arbitration as a viable alternative to litigation, even though it is not necessarily always a more favorable forum, say Khaled Klele and Jessica Osterlof at McCarter & English.

• Proposed Cannabis Reschedule Sidesteps State Law Effects

  

  The U.S. Department of Justice's recent proposal to move cannabis to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act provides certain benefits, but its failure to address how the rescheduling would interact with existing state cannabis laws disappointed industry participants hoping for clarity on this crucial question, says Ian Stewart at Wilson Elser.

• A Changing Regulatory Landscape For Weight Loss Drugs

  

  As drugs originally approved to treat diabetes become increasingly popular for weight loss purposes, federal and state regulators and payors are increasing their focus on how these drugs are prescribed, and industry participants should pay close attention to rapidly evolving compliance requirements, say attorneys at Goodwin.

• Opioid Suits Offer Case Study In Abatement Expert Testimony

  

  Settlements in the opioid multidistrict litigation provide useful insight into leveraging expert discovery on abatement in public nuisance cases, and would not have been successful without testimony on the costs necessary to lessen the harms of the opioid crisis, says David Burnett at DiCello Levitt.

• How HHS Discrimination Rule Affects Gender-Affirming Care

  

  The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' new final rule, which reinterprets the Affordable Care Act's anti-discrimination provision, greatly clarifies protections for gender-affirming care and will require compliance considerations from sponsors and administrators of most group health plans, say attorneys at McDermott.

• FTC Noncompete Rule's Impact On Healthcare Nonprofits

  

  Healthcare entities that are nonprofit or tax-exempt and thus outside of the pending Federal Trade Commission noncompete rule's reach should evaluate a number of potential risk factors and impacts, starting by assessing their own status, say Ben Shook and Tania Archer at Moore & Van Allen.

• Key Takeaways From FDA Final Rule On Lab-Developed Tests

  

  Michele Buenafe and Dennis Gucciardo at Morgan Lewis discuss potential consequences of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's recently finalized rule regulating lab-developed tests as medical devices, and explain the rule's phaseout policy for enforcement discretion.

• Assessing HHS' Stance On Rare Disease Patient Assistance

  

  The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' recent advisory opinion, temporarily blessing manufacturer-supported copay funds for rare disease patients, carves a narrow path for single-donor funds, but charities and their donors may require additional assistance to navigate programs for such patients, says Mary Kohler at Kohler Health Law.

• Are Concessions In FDA's Lab-Developed Tests Rule Enough?

  

  Although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's new policy for laboratory-developed tests included major strategic concessions to help balance patient safety, access and diagnostic innovation, the new rule may well face significant legal challenges in court, say Dominick DiSabatino and Audrey Mercer at Sheppard Mullin.