California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB621

Introduced
2/15/23  
Introduced
2/15/23  
Refer
2/22/23  
Refer
2/22/23  
Report Pass
5/1/23  
Report Pass
5/1/23  
Refer
5/2/23  
Report Pass
5/15/23  
Report Pass
5/15/23  
Engrossed
5/24/23  
Engrossed
5/24/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Report Pass
6/21/23  
Report Pass
6/21/23  
Refer
6/21/23  
Refer
6/21/23  
Report Pass
8/23/23  
Report Pass
8/23/23  
Enrolled
8/31/23  
Enrolled
8/31/23  
Chaptered
10/8/23  
Chaptered
10/8/23  
Passed
10/8/23  

Caption

Health care coverage: biosimilar drugs.

Impact

The amendments made by SB 621 specifically affect the existing regulations laid out in the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act and the California Insurance Code. One of the significant implications is that it reinforces the ability for health insurers to enforce protocols around step therapy, which may streamline processes but can also lead to delays in treatment access. The legislation is expected to generate cost savings for payers while potentially reshaping patients' experiences in terms of what medications they can access promptly.

Summary

Senate Bill 621, introduced by Senator Caballero, amends provisions related to health care coverage concerning biosimilar drugs. It specifies that health care service plans and health insurers can mandate patients to try a biosimilar drug before they can receive coverage for the equivalent branded drug. This legislative action is rooted in the intention to promote the use of biosimilars, which are often less costly while maintaining similar efficacy to their branded counterparts. By increasing the use of biosimilars, the bill aims to reduce healthcare costs and enhance accessibility for patients requiring these treatments.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 621 appears largely positive among proponents who perceive it as a means to foster a more cost-effective healthcare environment. Advocates are enthusiastic about the potential savings and better utilization of biosimilar drugs as a valuable therapeutic option. However, concerns have been raised by some patient advocacy groups and healthcare providers regarding the implications for patient access to necessary medications, emphasizing that while promoting biosimilars can be beneficial, it should not compromise patient care or treatment efficacy.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential for inequalities in treatment access that may arise as insurers implement these policies. Critics argue that requiring patients to try less familiar biosimilars prior to receiving established branded drugs may lead to adverse health outcomes for some individuals, particularly those with complex conditions who need continuity in their medication regimens. The balance between cost-efficiency and ensuring patient-centered care remains a central theme in the discussions surrounding this bill.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1880

Prior authorization and step therapy.

CA AB347

Health care coverage: step therapy.

CA AB2144

Health care coverage: step therapy.

NM SB135

Step Therapy Guidelines

KY HB346

AN ACT relating to biosimilar medicines.

AZ SB1164

Pharmacy benefits; coverage

AZ SB1102

Pharmacy benefits; prescribing; exemption