Search Results

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease What They Are Saying About "Most Favored Nation" Since 2007, the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) has been an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease. The Problem: Preventable and Mismanaged Chronic Disease Chronic diseases, such as diabetes, COPD, cancer, depression, obesity and heart disease, are the leading causes of death and disability in the United States and account for the vast majority of health care spending. More than one in two American adults lives with at least one chronic condition and nearly one in three live with two or more chronic conditions. Chronic diseases are also the primary driver of health care costs—accounting for 90 cents of every dollar we spend on health care in this country. In 2011, this amounted to $2.3 trillion of the $2.7 trillion spent on health care. Despite these widespread problems, the issue of chronic disease does not register with large segments of the public and policymakers as an issue of primary concern. The Solution: A National Partnership Aimed at Fighting Chronic Disease As the CDC has said, “The United States cannot effectively address escalating health care costs without addressing the problem of chronic diseases.” Added to that, the World Health Organization estimates that as much as 80 percent of premature heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes, and 40 percent of cancers could be avoided entirely if Americans avoided tobacco, developed healthier eating habits, and were more physically active. That’s why a broad group of patient, provider, community, business and labor groups, and health policy experts, joined together to form the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD)—a coalition committed to raising awareness of the rising rates of preventable and treatable chronic diseases. Our Mission: Rising rates of chronic diseases pose an unsustainable burden on our health care system. The viability and strength of the system—now and in the future—rely on a willingness to enact policies that help Americans better prevent and manage chronic illnesses. As a result, the mission of the PFCD is to: Drive awareness of burden of chronic disease and solutions at work shown to improve health for individuals and communities Empower change in how we prevent and treat chronic disease in America to enhance health Challenge decision-makers to adopt policy changes necessary to prevent and lessen burden of chronic disease

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease Who We Are PFCD Team Kenneth Thorpe, PhD, Honorary Chair Candace DeMatteis, Vice President of Policy Jennifer Burke, Vice President of Communications PFCD Partners PFCD is a 501(c)4 not-for-profit organization. The following list includes organizations we have partnered with on various projects and programs since PFCD's inception in 2007 but does not imply support for all of our public policy initiatives. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) Alliance for Aging Research Alliance for Patient Access Alzheimer's Foundation of America American Academy of Family Physicians American Academy of Nursing American Association of Colleges of Nursing American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy American Association of Diabetes Educators American Association of Nurse Practitioners Autoimmune Association American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network American College of Lifestyle Medicine American College of Physicians American College of Preventive Medicine American Dental Education Association American Geriatrics Society American Kidney Fund American Medical Association American Medical Women's Association American Osteopathic Association American Pharmacists Association Foundation American Sleep Apnea Association American Society of Addiction Medicine American Society of Health-System Pharmacists America's Agenda: Health Care for All Arthritis Foundation Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies (APAICS) Association of State and Territorial Public Health Nutrition Directors Astellas Pharma Inc. Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America Biotechnology Industry Organization Building Healthier America Caregivers Action Network Community Health Charities The COSHAR Foundation Dialysis Patient Citizens Easter Seals Eisai Inc Eli Lilly Endometriosis Association FasterCures Genesis Philanthropy GlaxoSmithKline Healthcare Leadership Council HolaDoctor Integrated Benefits Institute International Association of Fire Fighters International Health, Racquet & Sportsclub Association Johnson & Johnson LeadingAge League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) The Leapfrog Group Lupus Foundation of America Marshfield Clinic Medical Fitness Association Men's Health Network Mental Health America Milken Institute NAACP National Alliance for Caregiving National Alliance of State Pharmacy Associations National Asian Pacific Center on Aging National Association of Chronic Disease Directors National Association of Manufacturers National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems National Association of VA Physicians and Dentists National Black Nurses Association National Caucus and Center on Black Aged National Coalition for Promoting Physical Activity National Community Pharmacists Association National Council for Mental Wellbeing National Forum for Heart Disease & Stroke Prevention National Health Council National Health Foundation National Health Policy Group / Special Needs Plan Alliance National Hispanic Council on Aging National Hispanic Medical Association National Indian Council on Aging National Kidney Foundation National Medical Association National Minority Quality Forum National Pharmaceutical Council National Recreation and Park Association NTM Info & Research (NTMir) The Ohio State University Ovarian Cancer National Alliance Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Pharos Innovations Pharmaceutical Industry Labor-Management Association (PILMA) Population Health Alliance Prevent Blindness America ProMedica RetireSafe Sepsis Alliance Sheet Metal Workers International Association Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association STOP Obesity Alliance Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S. Chamber of Commerce U.S. Preventive Medicine Vision Council of America WomenHeart YMCA of the USA

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease Resources RESOURCES > QUANTIFYING IMPACT OF ACCELERATED APPROVAL DRUGS ON MEDICAID SPENDING > FACES OF ACCELERATED APPROVAL Faces of Accelerated Approval Patient Stories #Fight4Health The Food & Drug Administration’s accelerated approval pathway has been essential for speeding up the availability of new and effective treatments for patients with serious and often-life-threatening diseases where there are no other treatments available. Right now, efforts are underway that would undermine the pathway and risk bringing us back to a time when promising therapies languished in regulatory limbo while patients waited without any treatment options. Patients’ voices are often absent from debates about the accelerated approval pathway, so we are sharing their stories. Learn how patients’ lives have been changed by treatments approved through the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. Ivy Elkins , Evanston, IL Lung Cancer Billy Ellsworth , Pittsburgh, PA Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Laura Kelly , Atlanta, GA Nontuberculous Mycobacteria (NTM) Jordan McLinn , Indianapolis, IN Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Geri Taylor , New York, NY Alzheimer's Disease Teonna Woolford , Owings Mills, MD Sickle Cell Disease Marc Yale , Ventura, CA Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid As we work with partners like the EveryLife Foundation for Rare Diseases to build greater understanding around these critical programs and to hold public and private payers accountable to their mission of providing health care access to America’s most vulnerable populations, PFCD encourages you to learn more by visiting our Accelerated Approval resource page which includes backgrounders, economic analyses, American Journal of Managed Care commentary, infographics, opinion editorials and more. To contribute a patient or provider story to this effort, please contact Jennifer Burke .

If you're one of nearly 200 million Americans living with a chronic disease, Medicare policy debates can often feel far removed from your daily life. But sometimes, a technical-sounding proposal can have real consequences for the treatments you rely on — and that's exactly what's happening right now. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is considering a change to how it classifies certain drugs under the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program (MDPNP) established under the Inflation Reduction Act. Specifically, the agency is looking at whether an IV infusion and a subcutaneous (under-the-skin) injection of the same medication should be counted as one product — not two – for the purposes of price setting. At first, that might sound like a bureaucratic accounting question. But for patients and caregivers, the stakes are very real. An IV infusion requires patients to travel to an infusion center or hospital outpatient facility, often for appointments lasting several hours. By contrast, a subcutaneous injection can be administered in minutes, typically in a doctor’s office or even at home. Giving patients the choice between treatments – and administration of treatments – is critically important. Injections are often less costly than IV infusions and far more accessible for many populations, including rural patients who may live hours from an infusion center, individuals without reliable transportation, and elderly patients and caregivers. When given the choice, 71% of patients prefer injection over IV administration (for a given therapy) – but this proposal from CMS effectively eliminates that choice for patients – and sends a signal that could discourage further innovation in this space. The implications of this proposed rule extend beyond patient experience. Developing an injectable alternative is not a simple modification—it requires years of research, substantial investment, and a separate FDA review process. The FDA, not CMS, has the scientific expertise and statutory authority to determine whether therapies are distinct medicines. When the FDA approves both an IV and a subcutaneous version as separate products, it does so based on independent evaluation of each formulation’s safety, efficacy, and delivery. Treating them as the same product under Medicare policy disregards these distinctions and the meaningful differences they represent for patients. It also risks exceeding CMS’s regulatory role while undermining FDA determinations. This issue is not about a single therapy or company. It is about the signal this policy sends to researchers and developers about which types of innovation are worth pursuing. Under the proposed rule, CMS would effectively eliminate financial incentives for pharmaceutical companies to develop more convenient, patient-friendly delivery options. If Medicare policy treats an improved delivery method the same as its predecessor, it raises a fundamental question: why invest in making treatments easier and safer for patients if those improvements are not recognized as meaningful advancements? The likely result is that resources will be redirected elsewhere. Over time, this could slow progress on innovations that make chronic disease more manageable. early evidence already suggests that the Inflation Reduction Act has had negative effects on research and development, which this policy could further exacerbate. Your voice matters CMS is accepting public comments on this proposal through August 17. That means patients, caregivers, providers, and advocates have a real opportunity to weigh in before decisions are made. Policymakers need to hear from the people who live these realities every day — not just the technical arguments, but the human ones. What does it mean to you to have a treatment option that fits your life? What would you lose if those options disappeared or stopped being developed? Innovation means finding better ways to deliver treatments with less burden, more flexibility, and greater dignity for the people who need them most. Medicare policy should reflect that. Comments on the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program for IPAY 2029 are open through August 17, submit comments here.

May 20, 2026 (Washington, D.C.) The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) released the following statement in advance of this week’s anticipated Senate vote-a-rama on the reconciliation bill: “The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease urges Congress to carefully consider the unintended consequences that foreign drug pricing policies could have for Americans living with one or more chronic conditions. “Patients living with cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, autoimmune disorders, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and rare diseases depend on timely access to innovative medicines and individualized treatment options. Policies that tie U.S. drug prices to foreign government-controlled systems risk importing the same delays, coverage restrictions, and rationing practices that limit patient access in other countries. “Many of the countries used as reference points for Most Favored Nation (MFN) pricing proposals routinely restrict access to newer therapies and rely on cost-effectiveness measures, including the use of the quality-adjusted life year, or QALY, that can disadvantage older adults, people with disabilities, and patients with complex chronic conditions. The result is reduced treatment choices and delayed access to therapies that can improve or extend lives. “PFCD is also deeply concerned about the long-term impact these policies could have on medical innovation. Breakthroughs in cancer, cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, rare diseases, and other chronic conditions have transformed patient outcomes and created new hope for millions of families. Importing foreign price controls would weaken the research and development ecosystem that drives future cures and treatment advances. “Americans living with chronic disease deserve policies that improve affordability and strengthen access without sacrificing innovation, physician and patient choice, or future medical progress. Congress should reject foreign pricing policies that risk undermining patient care and instead pursue solutions that address the true drivers of health care costs while preserving access to life-saving treatments.” ###

April 17, 2026 (Washington, D.C.)  The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) released the following statement today in response to recent analyses related to Alzheimer’s disease. “The recent review of anti-amyloid Alzheimer’s therapies highlights the complexity of measuring progress against a devastating disease, but its conclusions should be viewed with important context. By combining older, unsuccessful therapies with newer treatments that have demonstrated the ability to slow cognitive decline, the analysis risks misrepresenting meaningful advances and diminishing what these medicines can offer patients and families today. “For those living with Alzheimer’s and related dementias, even modest slowing of disease progression, such as the reductions in decline observed in recent trials, can translate into more time with loved ones, greater independence, and a critical window for future breakthroughs. Dismissing these gains because they are not cures overlooks what matters most to patients and caregivers. “At a time when the burden of Alzheimer’s continues to grow, the answer is not to step back from innovation, but to build on it, advancing a range of scientific approaches, improving how we measure meaningful outcomes, and ensuring patients have access to emerging therapies. The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease remains committed to supporting continued research, thoughtful evaluation of evidence, and policies that accelerate progress for the millions of Americans affected by this disease.” ###