By Michael C. Barnes, Guest Columnist

After last month’s midterm elections, the U.S. Senate passed the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Expansion Research Act. The House had passed the bill in April, and President Biden signed it into law on December 2. The new law has been described as “modest” because it mostly facilitates research on marijuana and cannabidiol to support the development of medications for approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The law also eliminates a longstanding regulatory roadblock that has prevented marijuana research; hindered the development of marijuana-derived, FDA-approved medications; and led to 37 state-regulated markets for marijuana products that do not meet federal consistency, purity, and potency standards. New research can be expected to yield marijuana-derived medications that the FDA can approve.

There is another regulatory burden that the Senate must eliminate before the end of this year. This change in federal law would also be modest, but it would facilitate access to treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), which is essential amid the nationwide fentanyl poisoning crisis. S. 3257 would expand the time health care providers can hold long-acting, injectable buprenorphine (an FDA-approved medication for OUD) from 14 days to 60 days. It’s that simple. But like the new marijuana research law, the modest change will make a significant difference.

In the 12 months that ended June 30, 2022, 102,842 people died of a drug poisoning. Of those, 69,150 involved synthetic opioids, predominantly illegal fentanyl. Facilitating access to evidence-based treatment for OUD is more important now than ever. Changing the law cannot wait until the next Congress gets up and running.

S.3257 would amend the Controlled Substances Act, which currently requires that a health care provider administer injectable buprenorphine OUD medication to the patient named on the prescription within 14 days after the medication was delivered to the provider. The supposed purpose of the 14-day limit is to prevent the diversion of the medication to the illicit market.

But in 2020, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that “all of the provider groups GAO spoke with said that diversion of injectable … buprenorphine is unlikely, and representatives from three of the six provider groups said that the design of these formulations reduce opportunities for diversion due to how they are administered.”

For patients and providers, the 14-day limit is too short considering the coordination required to facilitate injectable buprenorphine prescribing, insurance coverage and payment, delivery and receipt, and appointment scheduling and attendance. Sixty days are necessary to ensure that medication administration may take place at a time when the patient, provider, and medication are available.

Additionally, the 14-day limit wastes valuable health care resources and places patients’ recovery and lives at risk. For example, if an insured patient is not able to attend a medical appointment on or before the 14th day after the injectable buprenorphine was delivered to his or her provider, the medication must be disposed of.

It is unlikely that an insurer would pay for a replacement product, and it is common for patients not to be able to pay for medications out of pocket. As a result, a patient may be forced to go without a week or months’ worth of medication for OUD. This situation can put the patient at risk for a recurrence of OUD symptoms, active substance use, poisoning by illicit substance, and death.

In June, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 7666 with broad bipartisan support. Section 264 of H.R. 7666 contains a provision expanding the 14-day limit to 60 days.

In passing the marijuana research act, the Senate proved itself willing and capable of enacting modest yet meaningful drug reforms during its lame-duck session. To prevent drug poisonings and avoid wasting lifesaving medications, the Senate must do so again by expanding the 14-day limit to 60 days.

Michael C. Barnes is the managing attorney for Sequel Health Law. He serves as counsel to Aimed Alliance, a not-for-profit health policy organization.

The goal of Aimed Alliance is to create a society in which consumers can make informed and individually appropriate decisions about their health care, without those decisions being overridden by third parties.