California legislation that would limit the cost of a 30-day supply of insulin to $35 has passed the state Senate.
Beyond capping co-payments, the legislation also prohibits insurance companies from imposing a deductible, coinsurance, or any other cost-sharing on an insulin prescription drug. This means patients won’t have to meet a yearly deductible before benefiting from the capped monthly price.
Insulin prescription drugs are used to control blood glucose levels to treat diabetes, according to a Senate analysis of the bill. The medication is often prescribed to help cells use sugar for energy, according to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.
National surveys have shown that one-fourth of Americans who use insulin must ration the medication so they can pay for other essentials, like rent, food, and utilities, according to the diabetes association.
Although 20 states and the District of Columbia have capped copayments on insulin, devices, or diabetes supplies, California has not yet made a similar move.
In a 2021 study by the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit public policy think tank, researchers found drug companies charge more for insulin in the U.S. than in nearly three dozen other countries. The average list price for a vial of insulin in Canada was $12 compared to $98.70 in the U.S.
The cap went into effect Jan. 1 for Medicare Part D enrollees and is set to take effect July 1 for those enrolled in Medicare Part B.
“No one should be forced to choose between food and insulin,” Wiener said in a January statement. “If nonprofits like Civica Rx can sell insulin for $30, health plans and pharmacies have no business charging $400 for the same dose.”
According to Wiener, more than 4 million adult Californians have diabetes, with about 231,500 more cases diagnosed each year.
California has a $50 million contract with Civica Rx to produce the three most commonly used long-acting and rapid-acting types of insulin in vial and pen forms.
Federal approval by the Food and Drug Administration is expected next year and the products should be available publicly shortly after that, according to a Senate analysis.
The Association of California Life and Health Insurance Companies and the California Association of Health Plans oppose SB 90. Both groups expressed concern over mandating specific limits on prices, considering the recent spike in insulin costs by pharmaceutical companies.
“This bill mandating a specific limit on the cost-sharing of a very specific piece of the overall health benefit plan will not achieve the goal of affordable or sustainable healthcare for all,” the groups wrote, according to a Senate analysis.