Boots on the Ground: PIL Task Force Targeting Opioid Providers in the War on Drugs

by K&L Gates LLP
Contact

K&L Gates LLP

Introduction

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the creation of the Prescription Interdiction & Litigation (“PIL”) Task Force –– which Sessions described as a “new front in the war on the opioid crisis” –– in a February press release [1]. Notably, Sessions indicated that the PIL Task Force will specifically target distributors and pharmacies to “prevent diversion and improper prescribing.” Specifically, the PIL Task Force “will use the False Claims Act and other tools to crack down on pain-management clinics, drug testing facilities, and physicians that make opioid prescriptions.” [2]

Of the enforcement tools available to the PIL Task Force, the False Claims Act (“FCA”) is among the most powerful. It is also one of the most popular — qui tam plaintiffs have found great success using the FCA for civil enforcement [3]. Indeed, even before the PIL Task Force was formed, the FCA was featured in the United States Attorneys’ Bulletin as a mechanism to fight opioid abuse [4].

Since they are named as PIL Task Force targets, all doctors, pharmacies, and medical providers should be familiar with the FCA and how it has recently been used as a means of enforcement.

The FCA: An Overview

The FCA is violated when one “knowingly presents or knowingly causes to be presented” a false claim to the government or “knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to” a false claim to the government [5].

An FCA suit can be initiated by (1) a private citizen as a qui tam plaintiff or (2) by the government. An FCA suit initiated by a private qui tam plaintiff has three important features. First, the complaint is filed under seal, meaning that it is not publicly available unless and until it later becomes unsealed. Second, the complaint is not served on the defendant. Third, a copy of the complaint is delivered to the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) along with the evidence in the qui tam plaintiff’s possession. Once delivered, the DOJ has 60 days to decide whether or not it will intervene in the action, although this time period may be extended at the government’s request.

During this time, governmental agents from various departments may execute subpoenas or search warrants, perform document reviews, and interview witnesses to investigate the qui tam plaintiff’s case. Once the investigation is finished, the government will decide whether it wants to intervene in the case. If the government does not intervene, the qui tam plaintiff has the option to continue the suit on its own.

A Potential FCA Target: Off-Label and Off-Compendium Prescriptions

Physicians often prescribe medications, including opioids, to treat conditions and diseases not expressly approved by the Federal Drug Administration (“FDA”). This practice, known as “off-label” prescribing, is legal, and can even be the standard treatment for chronic and progressive medical conditions. However, Medicare Part D and Medicaid prohibit coverage of drugs for off-label use, unless evidence is produced that the off-label use is recognized by a specified drug compendia.

If the prescription is either expressly approved by the FDA (i.e., on-label) or recognized by a specified drug compendia (i.e., on-compendium), the prescription has been made for a “medically accepted indication” and may be eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D or Medicaid. However, where a prescription is both off-label and off-compendium (i.e., not made for a medically accepted indication), Medicare Part D and Medicaid disallow coverage entirely.

The FCA at Work: Analyzing Off-Label and Off-Compendium Prescriptions

Prescribing or dispensing opioids off-label and off-compendium for Medicare Part D and Medicaid beneficiaries can be a major FCA pitfall for providers. This is especially the case in light of the Supreme Court’s recent approval of the implied false certification theory for FCA violations [6].

According to the implied false certification theory, when a defendant submits a claim for payment, he or she impliedly certifies compliance with all conditions of payment [7]. Thus, if a claim for payment failed to disclose the defendant’s violation of a material statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement, then the defendant has made a misrepresentation that renders the claim “false or fraudulent” under the FCA [8]. Under this theory, a claim for payment for a drug that has been prescribed off-label and off-compendium may be an implied false certification because the claim fails to indicate that the prescribed drug is not approved for that particular use, a common precondition to payment [9].

Risk to pharmacists. On its face, the implied false certification theory could be used to target any pharmacist that –– even unwittingly –– fills off-label and off-compendium opioid prescriptions. However, the FCA requires that the claim be submitted knowingly  [10]. Generally, a pharmacist is unlikely to know or have reason to know whether an opioid was prescribed off-label and/or off-compendium. For example, under Medicare Part D requirements, dispensing pharmacists “are not required to contact each prescriber to verify [that] a prescription is being used for a medically accepted indication.” [11] In other words, a pharmacist may be able to successfully assert a defense of ignorance in response to purported FCA violations [12].

This scenario played out in United States ex rel. Fox Rx, Inc. v. Omnicare Inc [13]. In Omnicare, qui tam plaintiffs alleged that specialty pharmacies had violated the FCA by seeking “reimbursement for non-covered prescriptions from the Medicare Part D program.” [14] The pharmacy-defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that they had not acted “knowingly” in submitting the claims for payment [15]. The court agreed and granted summary judgment, holding that “[t]he undisputed evidence here does not support that the Defendants or their employees knew or had access to information that allowed them to know if doctors had prescribed off-label use of [antipsychotics], and there is no evidence or authority to support that Defendants had a duty to undertake this evaluation.” [16] Of course, Omnicare only illustrates the application of the FCA’s “knowledge” requirement in the Medicare Part D context; it does not absolve, eliminate, or diminish any pre-existing obligation of pharmacists to challenge scripts that appear patently false.

Risk to doctors. In contrast, prescribing doctors may not be able to assert a defense of ignorance because they will likely be deemed to have constructive knowledge of the contents of publicly available compendia. In fact, a doctor who prescribes opioids off-label and off-compendium to a Medicare or Medicaid patient may be liable under the FCA by virtue of writing a prescription, even though the doctor does not ultimately submit the claim for payment [17]. 

This was the case in United States ex rel. Watson v. King-Vassel [18]. In King-Vassel, a qui tam plaintiff alleged that a psychiatrist prescribed off-label psychotropics to a minor in violation of the FCA [19]. The trial court ruled in favor of the defendants in part because the dispensing pharmacy, and not the physician, was the “cause” of the false claim since the pharmacy submitted the claim for payment [20]. The plaintiff appealed, and the Seventh Circuit reversed the decision, holding in part that notions of proximate causation may form the basis for the psychiatrist’s FCA liability [21]. Therefore, intervening events do not necessarily break the causal chain for prescribing physician FCA liability [22].

Conclusion

Although off-label prescriptions are legal, the legality of the prescription does not necessarily mean that the government is obligated to pay for a beneficiary’s off-label and/or off-compendium prescriptions. And submitting claims for payment to the government for off-label and/or off-compendium prescriptions may violate the FCA. With Attorney General Sessions’ indication that the PIL Task Force has set its sights on opioid-related health care fraud as the next target in the war on drugs — specifically mentioning providers — physicians and pharmacists should exercise caution when prescribing or dispensing opioids if it is for an off-label and/or off-compendium use to limit FCA exposure.

Specifically, before writing an off-label prescription, physicians should consider referencing the specified compendia and noting if the prescribed use is recognized or informing the patient that the prescription may not be covered by his or her insurer. Also, before filling prescriptions, pharmacists would be well advised to watch for indicators of abuse, such as frequency of prescriptions and atypical dosages or dosage schedules. While the FCA does not itself establish new standards for opioid providers, it is a powerful tool for enforcing existing standards of which providers should be mindful.

Notes
[1] Office of Public Affairs, Attorney General Sessions Announces New Prescription Interdiction & Litigation Task Force, DEP’T OF JUST. (Feb. 27, 2018), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-sessions-announces-new-prescription-interdiction-litigation-task-force.
[2] Id.
[3] “Qui tam” suits are those initiated by private citizens on behalf of the government. They are explicitly permitted by the FCA.
[4] Roger Wenthe, Fighting Opioid Abuse under Federal Health Programs with the False Claims Act, 64 U.S. Att’ys Bull. 93 (2016).
[5] 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(A), (B).
[6] Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, 136 S. Ct. 1989 (2016).
[7] Id. at 1996.
[8] Id.
[9] See id. at 2000.
[10] 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(A), (B).
[11] MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT MANUAL, Chapter 6 – Part D Drugs and Formulary Requirements, Section 10.6 (Rev. 18, Jan. 15, 2016).
[12] E.g., United States ex rel. Fox Rx, Inc. v. Omnicare, Inc., 2014 WL 2158412 (N.D. Ga. May 23, 2014) (holding that a dispensing pharmacy was not liable under the FCA for dispensing a drug off-label and off-compendium where it had neither actual knowledge nor reason to know of those facts).
[13] Id.
[14] Id. at *1.
[15] Id. at *4.
[16] Id. at *6.
[17] See, e.g., United States ex rel. Watson v. King-Vassel, 728 F.3d 707 (7th Cir. 2013) (reversing summary judgment for psychiatrist in an FCA claim alleging off-label and off-compendium prescribing of psychotropic medications).
[18] Id.
[19] Id. at 709.
[20] Id. at 714.
[21] Id. at 715.
[22] Id. at 714–15.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© K&L Gates LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

K&L Gates LLP
Contact
more
less

K&L Gates LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.