Privacy concerns have been raised about a bill moving through the California Legislature that would let pharmacies partner with drugmakers to send reminder letters to patients to refill their scrips, The Sacramento Bee reports.

The senate bill is sponsored by a medical information company facing an invasion of privacy class-action suit, which alleges some of the same practices the legislation would make legal. The bill recently cleared the Senate after state Senator Ron Calderon assured colleagues it would protect confidentiality.

State and federal laws prohibit the sale of confidential medical information to pharmaceutical companies or any other entity or individuals. Patients must give their consent before their medical records are traded or sold.

Calderon, who has received more than $21,000 in campaign contributions from drugmakers and pharmacy chains, tells the Bee his bill does not allow “marketing or sales pitches.” And during the Senate debate, he said: The bill “merely seeks to clarify current law that prescription compliance program reminder letters are not marketing.”

He further argued that the bill would help patients remember to take their meds, improve their health and reduce health care costs, and that reminder programs have proved beneficial in states that have significantly higher prescription compliance rates than California for diseases ranging from diabetes to high blood pressure.

The main sponsor of the bill is Adheris, a Massachusetts company that has been named in class-action lawsuit in San Diego Superior Court. The suit was filed on behalf of patients who allege their privacy was breached when they received letters from the company encouraging them to buy more medication or switch to an alternative prescription drug made by the same drugmaker.

Privacy advocates allege the bill would open the door for pharmaceutical companies to promote their products in the guise of reminder letters. “The bill sponsor is a marketing company employed by drug manufacturers to increase the sale of prescription drugs,” Jerry Flannigan of Consumers Watchdog said in a prepared statement.

Daniel Rubin, chief executive officer of Adheris, told the paper that “the lawsuit has no merit.” He also rejected allegations Adheris advertises drugs. The purpose of the bill, Rubin told the Bee, is to improve patient adherence. “Patient non-adherence to chronic medication therapy contributes to increased hospitalization, unnecessary medical procedures and poor patient outcomes,” he wrote in an e-mail.

Under California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, drugmakers cannot send direct mailings to patients. State law allows pharmacies to do so, provided patients give consent, but does not allow pharmaceutical companies to pay for the mailings, according to the paper.

The bill would remove the consent provision and instead require patients to “opt out” of receiving prescription reminders. Drugmakers would be allowed to pay for the mailings, but pharmacies would have to disclose if they were compensated for the mailings, the paper writes.

“That’s what this is about – allowing pharmacies to increase their marketing,” Jeffrey Krinsk, an attorney who is representing plaintiffs in the San Diego lawsuit, told the Bee.