The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia March 31 vacated a Health Resources and Services Administration policy instituted in 2013 that restricted how certain 340B hospitals could make initial drug purchases. The case challenged a provision in the rule involving group purchasing organizations, known as the “GPO prohibition,” which bars disproportionate share hospitals from simultaneously buying outpatient drugs through the 340B Drug Pricing Program and a GPO. Although the court set aside the existing GPO prohibition as unlawful, it sent the question back to the agency for reconsideration. “In that process,” the court explained, "HRSA may adopt the same bottom-line view of the statute it did in the 2013 Policy, as long as the agency adheres to the APA [Administrative Procedures Act] and does not exceed its limited rulemaking authority over the Section 340B Program.”

Headline
Eli Lilly said June 1 it will deny 340B Drug Pricing Program discounts to providers that do not meet its documentation requirements by next week.In a statement…
Headline
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of AppealsMay 28 agreed to rehear challenges to 340B contract pharmacy laws from West Virginia and Maryland. In April, a three-judge…
Headline
The Wall Street Journal today published a letter to the editor from AHA General Counsel Chad Golder responding to a May 7 editorial criticizing the 340B Drug…
Headline
The AHA today urged Eli Lilly to abandon its 340B Drug Pricing Program claims-data policy and work with the AHA to develop a functional third-party…
Headline
The AHA again is asking the Health Resources and Services Administration to take action after Eli Lilly warned hospitals that they could lose access to…
Headline
The Washington Post yesterday published a letter to the editor from AHA President and CEO Rick Pollack responding to an April 18 editorial criticizing the 340B…