Between a rock and a hard place: medical device stakeholders disappointed by cancelled CMS rulemaking02.14.18
Another attempt at bridging the gaping lag between FDA approval for medical devices and CMS’s Medicare coverage determinations has been struck down, after a nine-month standstill.
CMS’s proposed rulemaking included a promising new program called EXCITE, or expedited coverage of innovative technology. The proposed rulemaking had not been made public in substance, and the reasons for its cancellation are still unclear.
CMS officials confirmed that EXCITE was intended to improve access to innovative medical device technologies for Medicare patients.
Members of the medical device industry, however, believe that EXCITE was patterned after a 2016 industry proposal that had been presented to CMS to correct the backlog.
The 2016 proposal, known as PACER, or the provisional accelerated coverage to encourage research initiative, suggested that CMS grant provisional coverage under Medicare for FDA-approved devices. This would ensure that patients could access innovative technology, while CMS could gather the information necessary for its own approval process.
The provisional coverage would also alleviate pressure on device sponsors, who would not suffer from having to bankroll expensive and highly specific clinical tests before devices are even on the market.
EXCITE is not CMS’s first attempt to reduce the backlog between FDA and Medicare approval for medical devices.
This backlog, which can sometimes last years, results from the independent statutory mandates that tie the hands of the respective agencies. FDA must ensure that the drugs and devices it approves are “safe and effective,” while CMS can only approve products for Medicare coverage if the products are “reasonable and necessary.” This coverage determination requires CMS to evaluate the necessity of devices for typical Medicare patients, which are generally more medically complex than those of patients in FDA clinical trials.
In 2011, the Department of Health and Human Services attempted to address the lag between FDA and Medicare approval by initiating a parallel review program. This program focused on increasing communication between CMS, the FDA and device manufacturers, including providing medical device stakeholders and manufacturers with detailed information about the study data that each agency would require in the approval process.
It was believed that this would speed the review process by allowing manufacturers to tailor their studies to encapsulate necessary data for each agency. Lack of resources, however, largely doomed this program before it was effectively launched. Critics have condemned the program, which only resulted in two approvals by CMS.
CMS’s cancellation of the EXCITE program is a strong indication that, for at least the immediate future, medical device manufacturers will continue to suffer from the bottleneck between the FDA and CMS and experience lengthy delays between FDA approval and CMS reimbursement.
Thank you to Emmie Futrell, Belmont University College of Law, for her assistance in preparing this article.