Industry Trends

Radar On Market Access: AML Therapy Class Has Seen Boom Over Past Couple of Years

September 19, 2019

The FDA has approved nearly 10 therapies for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) over the past couple of years. Because most of them target a specific biomarker, it’s critical that people diagnosed with the condition undergo genetic testing to determine whether they fall into a particular patient subgroup, AIS Health reported.

The FDA has approved nearly 10 therapies for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) over the past couple of years. Because most of them target a specific biomarker, it’s critical that people diagnosed with the condition undergo genetic testing to determine whether they fall into a particular patient subgroup, AIS Health reported.

“Prior to two years ago, we had no new drugs for over a decade, and now we have eight new drugs approved in just the last two years, so the whole field has changed,” said Daniel J. DeAngelo, M.D., Ph.D., chief, division of leukemia, institute physician, professor of medicine, Harvard Medical School, in an interview published on the website obroncology.com.

Many of the newer drugs are oral formulations, which, “in general, are easier to administer,” points out Mesfin Tegenu, R.Ph., president of PerformRx, LLC. “Rather than having to go into a hospital or clinic for treatment, a patient can simply take a medication orally for their condition.”

Payers utilize a variety of management tactics with AML therapies. “Payers often require prior authorization of these therapies due to safety, concern for off-label usage and cost,” says Tegenu. A variety of drugs are used off-label for certain patient populations, he notes.

Asked if AML is a condition suited for value-based contracting, Tegenu asserts that “all therapies associated with high cost should have some kind of value-based payment models to make drug manufacturers an integral part of the health care delivery system. We plan to initiate this discussion with all leading pharmaceutical companies.”

According to Winston Wong, Pharm.D., president of W-Squared Group., the newer drugs would be better candidates for such deals due to AML’s heterogenicity and the fact that “the treatment foundation is still conventional chemotherapy, which for the most part is available as a generic.”

Trends That Matter for RM/AT Products

September 12, 2019

This past quarter saw two new gene therapies: Novartis AG subsidiary AveXis, Inc.’s Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec-xioi) received FDA approval May 24 for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy, and bluebird bio’s Zynteglo (autologous CD34+ cells encoding βA-T87Q- globin gene) received conditional marketing authorization from the European Commission for transfusion-dependent beta thalassemia.

This past quarter saw two new gene therapies: Novartis AG subsidiary AveXis, Inc.’s Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec-xioi) received FDA approval May 24 for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy, and bluebird bio’s Zynteglo (autologous CD34+ cells encoding βA-T87Q- globin gene) received conditional marketing authorization from the European Commission for transfusion-dependent beta thalassemia.

While only a handful of therapies in the broader regenerative medicine/advanced therapy (RM/AT) space are available globally, a new report shows that is likely to change, as there are more than 1,000 products in the pipeline, AIS Health reported.

The Alliance for Regenerative Medicine published the report, titled Quarterly Global Regenerative Medicine Sector Report: Q2 2019, on Aug. 1. It shows there are 1,069 clinical trials using specific RM/AT technologies, which include gene therapy, gene-modified cell therapy, cell therapy and tissue engineering. Ninety-four of those products are in Phase III trials.

Radar On Market Access: Novartis’ Zolgensma Crisis May Not Impact Pickup

September 12, 2019

The FDA in August put out a statement addressing “data accuracy issues” with Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec-xioi), a new gene therapy to treat spinal muscular atrophy in people less than two years old who have bi-allelic mutations in the survival motor neuron 1 gene, AIS Health reported.

The FDA in August put out a statement addressing “data accuracy issues” with Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec-xioi), a new gene therapy to treat spinal muscular atrophy in people less than two years old who have bi-allelic mutations in the survival motor neuron 1 gene, AIS Health reported.

The FDA approved the drug from AveXis, Inc., which was acquired by Novartis AG last year, on May 24. On June 28, AveXis notified the FDA that there was “a data manipulation issue that impacts the accuracy of certain data from product testing performed in animals submitted in the biologics license application (BLA) and reviewed by the FDA.”

The FDA said Novartis learned about the issue March 14, but rather than informing the agency, which was assessing Zolgensma’s BLA at the time, the company conducted its own internal investigation, reporting its findings to the FDA after the investigation was completed. Still, the agency said that it “remains confident that Zolgensma should remain on the market.”

The one-time therapy is the most expensive drug in the world, with a price tag of $2.1 million.

In response, Novartis issued a press release Aug. 6 that read, in part, “we maintain that the totality of the evidence demonstrating the product’s effectiveness and its safety profile continue to provide compelling evidence supporting an overall favorable benefit-risk profile.”

Novartis recently said that Zolgensma has coverage plans from payers representing 40% of commercial lives, and high-profile news reports name Aetna Inc. and Anthem, Inc. among insurers expanding their policies to cover more patients. So will the current situation have any impact on pickup among payers and providers?

Based on the FDA’s statement, “I expect there will be no more than a minor and temporary blip in pickup of Zolgensma among providers and payers,” says Elan Rubinstein, Pharm.D., principal at EB Rubinstein Associates.

Radar On Market Access: Insurers Welcome Changes to Addiction Treatment Privacy Rules

September 10, 2019

A recent federal proposal — which would loosen privacy rules surrounding substance use disorder (SUD) treatment — is being applauded by health insurer trade groups. But some advocates are worried about potential harms to patients, AIS Health reported.

A recent federal proposal — which would loosen privacy rules surrounding substance use disorder (SUD) treatment — is being applauded by health insurer trade groups. But some advocates are worried about potential harms to patients, AIS Health reported.

At the center of the debate is legislation enacted in the 1970s and the subsequent regulations implementing that law, known as 42 CFR Part 2, which was designed to protect the confidentiality of SUD patient records created by federally funded treatment programs. Under the proposed changes to 42 CFR Part 2, opioid treatment programs would be able to enroll in state prescription drug monitoring programs and submit the dispensing data for controlled substances consistent with applicable state laws. SUD patients also would be able to consent to disclosure of their Part 2 treatment records to an entity, without having to name a specific person.

“At the highest level, ACHP does see the proposed rule as a positive development,” says Connie Hwang, M.D., chief medical officer of the Alliance of Community Health Plans. When an individual is undergoing treatment for SUD, “you want to make sure that all the other groups engaged in the ongoing care are aware and don’t inadvertently interfere with that or put the patient at greater danger,” she adds.

However, not everyone shares that view.

“While the Legal Action Center strongly supports the need for coordinated flow of health information between providers, it must be done so with patient consent in disclosure and re-disclosure,” Paul Samuels, president and director of the advocacy group, said in a news release.

The current privacy rules are “a necessary protection for individuals who would otherwise be susceptible to a multitude of detrimental consequences if their SUD information was disclosed without their permission to potential employers, housing providers, law enforcement and more,” Samuels added.

Perspectives on Trump’s Drug Importation Plan

September 5, 2019

Amid an ongoing outcry against rising drug costs, the Trump administration recently introduced two importation pathways to reduce what U.S. residents pay for drugs, AIS Health reported.

Amid an ongoing outcry against rising drug costs, the Trump administration recently introduced two importation pathways to reduce what U.S. residents pay for drugs, AIS Health reported.

Under the Safe Importation Action Plan, the first pathway would allow states, wholesalers and pharmacists to propose to HHS demonstration projects for importing certain drugs from Canada. Under the second pathway, drug manufacturers could import non-U.S. countries’ versions of their drugs into the United States.

What do health plan executives need to worry about with these two pathways? Not much, at least not in the next couple of years, according to Jigar Thakkar, Pharm.D., a managing director at FTI Consulting.

“There are so many hurdles that this isn’t something that’s going to happen tomorrow or in the next year or two,” Thakkar says. The hurdles include passage of legislation to allow biologics such as insulin to be imported and the ability of drugs imported from other countries to be tracked via FDA-TRACK, the FDA’s agency-wide performance system that monitors drugs during their journey from manufacturer to distributors to pharmacies.

Another significant hurdle is pushback from interest groups in Canada. Bloomberg News reported that the Canadian Medical Association and 14 other groups sent a letter to Canada Health Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor protesting the Trump administration’s moves.

Deb Devereaux, senior vice president of pharmacy at Gorman Health Group, isn’t optimistic about the success of the first pathway where drugs would be imported to the United States from Canada. “The bottom line is the Canadian drug supply would be exhausted in 16 months with all the U.S. states trying to avail themselves of Canadian drugs,” she says.

Trends That Matter for Hepatitis C Drugs

August 29, 2019

Beginning last month, Louisiana has been able to treat hundreds of patients who were waiting to receive a pricey cure for hepatitis C thanks to after hammering out an innovative payment model with a drug manufacturer, AIS Health reported.

Beginning last month, Louisiana has been able to treat hundreds of patients who were waiting to receive a pricey cure for hepatitis C thanks to after hammering out an innovative payment model with a drug manufacturer, AIS Health reported.

But the road to get there was long and difficult, according to Rebekah Gee, M.D., secretary of the Louisiana Dept. of Health, who, during a July 22 event hosted by the Brookings Institution, detailed the challenges she faced in trying to get a costly curative therapy to more people while facing down a $2 billion budget deficit. “We were told ‘No’ at least 50 times from a variety of people, whether it was the industry, or policymakers or individuals at the CDC…because it had never been done before,” she said.

Here’s how the “modified subscription model” works: The state pays a fixed amount to Asegua Therapeutics LLC, a subsidiary of Gilead Sciences, Inc., for the authorized generic of Epclusa (sofosbuvir/velpatasvir tablets), up to a set spending cap, and in return gets unlimited access to the therapy for Medicaid beneficiaries.

For states that want to successfully replicate what Louisiana has done, not only do they need a solid partnership with CMS, but they must understand that price is not the only barrier to expanding treatment, said Neeraj Sood, a professor at the University of Southern California, who helped develop the model.

The graphic below show the current market access to hepatitis C drugs across the Medicaid formularies.