Does Anyone Really Know What Price It Is?
It should be no surprise that Quallent Pharmaceuticals, the specialty distributor subsidiary of Evernorth, has decided to offer their private-label version of ustekinumab at neither a high nor a low wholesale acquisition cost (WAC). The private-label drug, which is based on Samsung Bioepis’ product, is being sold for 46% below the full WAC of Stelara.
This action mimics Quallent’s July 2024 introduction of its private- label versions of adalimumab (which is based on Cytelzo and Simlandi). How this plays out remains to be seen, but the distributor and its drug making partners did not see skyrocketing utilization of the adalimumab products last year. Also consider that Boehringer Ingelheim also offered a low-WAC, nonbranded version of Cytelzo last year, at a 81% discount. Neither did that product, also covered by Express Scripts, do well in 2024. On the other hand, Cordavis’ private-label version of adalimumab did see a fast, initial spike in sales from April to May of 2024.
Strangely, the new Stelara biosimilar pricing, directly conflicts with a September 5, 2024 press release from Evernorth (Quallent’s parent), which promised a price “more than 80% lower than Stelara’s list price.” This would have been in line with other ustekinumab biosimilar discounts.
What makes even less sense, however, is that Samsung Bioepis and its marketing partner Sandoz told BR&R previously that it will sell the branded product, Pyzchiva, at a discount of 80%. This would mean that a payer can obtain the branded biosimilar at a far lower initial price than for Quallent’s private-label version. What is the point of having a higher-priced Quallent version?
If so, this would also break with initial private label trends established with adalimumab: In those cases, the branded versions are offered at a much higher WAC compared with the corresponding private-label versions. It probably means that Quallent is providing large rebates, to bring the net cost down below that of the branded biosimilars. But still, what is the point?
Allowable Price Ceiling for Enbrel Proceeds in Colorado
A federal judge in Colorado has dismissed a suit from Enbrel’s manufacturer Amgen against the state, which intends to set a ceiling price on what it would pay for Enbrel. Enbrel biosimilars were first approved for use in 2016, but were prevented from launching owing to patents that are not scheduled to expire until 2029 (giving the product some 30 years of protection from price competition).
According to the Denver Post, the ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Nina Y. Wang allows Colorado’s Prescription Drug Affordability Board to initiate rulemaking in what would be a precedent-setting upper payment limit on Enbrel.
Amgen had argued that the Board’s action was unconstitutional, and that it would be harmed by the price cap. The Judge ruled that the price eventually set by the board may still be higher than what Amgen currently charges its own wholesalers for Enbrel.
