HRSA says it is pleased with two court decision regarding the 340B contract pharmacy program, but "respectfully disagrees with” and “continues to evaluate its options” about a third decision.

HRSA Weighs in on Recent 340B Contract Pharmacy Court Decisions

The U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) said this morning it “respectfully disagrees with” and “continues to evaluate its options” about a federal district judge’s Nov. 5 finding that drug manufacturers Novartis and United Therapeutic’s 340B contract pharmacy policies “had not violated” the 340B statute.

HRSA also said it is pleased with two different federal judges’ opinions agreeing with HRSA’s findings that manufacturers Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi’s 340B contract pharmacy policies “have unlawfully restricted access to 340B discounted drugs by covered entities that dispense medications through contract pharmacy arrangements—the core finding of HRSA’s May 17, 2021, Violation Letters.”

The U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) said this morning it “respectfully disagrees with” and “continues to evaluate its options” about a federal district judge’s Nov. 5 finding that drug manufacturers Novartis and United Therapeutic’s 340B contract pharmacy policies “had not violated” the 340B statute.

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
Post Type Selectors
×

×

*Sign up for news summaries and alerts from 340B Report

Site Footer