United Therapeutics’ denials of and restrictions on 340B pricing involving contract pharmacies are illegal and jeopardize patient care, six hospital groups have told a federal district judge.

Hospital Groups Back Feds in United Therapeutics 340B Contract Pharmacy Case

Drug manufacturer United Therapeutics’ (UT) denials of and restrictions on 340B drug discounts when covered entities use contract pharmacies are illegal and jeopardize patient care, six hospital groups have told a federal district judge in Washington, D.C. The groups—American Hospital Association, 340B Health, America’s Essential Hospitals, Association of American Medical Colleges, Children’s Hospital Association, and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists—urged U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich in an Aug. 10 “friend of the court” brief to reject UT’s argument that the 340B statute does not require manufacturers to offer 340B discounts when drugs are dispensed by contract pharmacies. Friedrich is letting the hospital groups participate in an advisory role in UT’s lawsuit against the federal government.

Please Login or Become a Paid Subscriber to View this Content

If you are already a paid subscriber, please follow the steps below.
If you are not yet a paid subscriber, please Subscribe now.
For questions about subscriptions or technical assistance, please contact Reshma Eggleston at reshma.eggleston@340breport.com.
« Read Previous Read Next »
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content