For many years, the psoriasis treatment landscape was dominated by tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. But with the FDA’s approval of three interleukin-17 (IL-17) inhibitors — as well as other drugs with different mechanisms of action — for the condition, those therapies are becoming more common among treatment regimens, AIS Health reported.

For many years, the psoriasis treatment landscape was dominated by tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. But with the FDA’s approval of three interleukin-17 (IL-17) inhibitors — as well as other drugs with different mechanisms of action — for the condition, those therapies are becoming more common among treatment regimens, AIS Health reported.

The first IL-17 inhibitor on the U.S. market was Cosentyx (secukinumab) from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., which launched in 2015. The next therapy was Taltz (ixekizumab) from Eli Lilly and Co., and then on Feb. 15, 2017, the agency approved Siliq (brodalumab) from Ortho Dermatologics.

An AllianceRx Walgreens Prime study sampled 5,215 members who started on an IL-17 from January 2016 through December 2017. The study showed that 2,218, or 42.5%, switched from a prior biologic, while 2,997, or 57.5%, started on an IL-17 as their first psoriasis biologic. Among those who started their biologic regimens on an IL-17 inhibitor, 2,266 started on Cosentyx, followed by 725 who initiated on Taltz and six who started on Siliq.

According to Renee Baiano, Pharm.D., clinical program manager at AllianceRx Walgreens Prime and the lead author of the poster, the main takeaway for payers is that “by [the] last quarter of 2017, IL-17 inhibitors may have gained clinical acceptance in the treatment of psoriasis, given the increase in patients prescribed as their first biologic.” She adds that “it is important for payers to be aware they may see more of their members being prescribed IL-17 inhibitors and will need to determine the appropriate placement of these newer agents within their formulary.”

The graphics below show the current market access to IL-17 inhibitors for all payers under the pharmacy benefit.

Although three new drugs for Parkinson’s disease have been approved over the last year, plans generally are sticking with the drugs they’ve included on formularies for several years, most of which are generic, experts tell AIS Health.

Although three new drugs for Parkinson’s disease have been approved over the last year, plans generally are sticking with the drugs they’ve included on formularies for several years, most of which are generic, experts tell AIS Health.

That may change in the long term as new gene therapies that currently are in development are approved and come online. But none of those potential new treatments are close to market right now, says Mesfin Tegenu, R.Ph., president of PerformRx.

“Many commonly used therapies for Parkinson’s disease — carbidopa-levodopa, MAO-Bs, dopamine agonists — have available generics, which on most plans would be considered formulary options, or one generic product within each class would be selected as formulary,” Tegenu tells AIS Health.

The FDA in August approved Kyowa Kirin, Inc.’s Nourianz (istradefylline) tablets as an add-on treatment to levodopa/carbidopa in adult patients with Parkinson’s disease experiencing motor fluctuations. In February, the FDA approved Osmotica Pharmaceutical US LLC’s Osmolex ER (amantadine) for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. And in late December, the FDA approved Accorda Therapeutics’ Inbrija (levodopa inhalation powder) for intermittent treatment of off episodes in people with Parkinson’s disease taking carbidopa/levodopa.

Still, plans are stocking their formularies with less expensive generic medications. The graphics below show the current market access to Parkinson’s disease drugs for all payers under the pharmacy benefit and their utilization management restrictions.

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.

The graphic below show the current market access to AML drugs across commercial, Health Exchange, Medicare and Medicaid formularies for all payers under the pharmacy benefit:

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.