Search This Blog

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Does CAR-T Therapy Have a Payment Problem?


By many standards, and certainly by the way the media covers it and industry promotes it, immuno-oncology therapies using CAR-T are revolutionizing cancer treatments. But what if, as the saying goes, they threw a revolution and nobody came? Or more precisely, what if they threw a revolution and no one was willing to pay for it?
Because CAR-T seems to have hit a bit of a snag—payers are reluctant to pay for it.
There are currently two chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies approved by the U.S.Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They are Novartis’ Kymriah (tisagenlecleucel) and Gilead Sciences’ Yescarta (axicabtagene ciloleucel). They have been approved for slightly different, but sometimes overlapping patient populations. In the case of Kymriah, it is approved for pediatric and young adult acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) and for recurring or relapsing (r/r) aggressive lymphomas. Yescarta is approved for similar aggressive lymphomas.
Because of the potential for significant side effects, primarily cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicities, the FDA required both companies set up Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) programs, which ensure that hospitals and associated clinics that dispense the therapies are specially certified and have on-site access to treatments for those adverse effects.
David Maloney, medical director of the Bezos Family Immunotherapy Clinic and director of cellular immunotherapy at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center told BioSpace earlier this year, “These types of therapies are totally different than any other cancer therapies. They are essentially living cells that actually replicate and grow in the patient as they attack the cancer. It’s exactly the opposite of chemotherapy, which goes in and causes damage, and the damage is slowly resolved over time. CAR-T cells are infused in a relatively small number of cells that actively grow as they engage the target tumors cells and kill them. It is a type of living therapy that can expand to eradicate all of the tumor.”
But the treatments are expensive. As NPR wrote in July, “Kymriah and Yescarta cost $373,000 for a one-time infusion to treat adults with advanced lymphomas, while Kymriah costs $475,000 to treat acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and young adults. That’s’ the cost of the drug itself; in addition, many patients experience serious side effects that can land them in a hospital intensive care unit for weeks, pushing treatment costs to more than $1 million.”
Typically, commercial insurers are covering CAR-T therapies. Generally speaking, they do it on an individual basis. Smaller or regional plans don’t necessarily have experience with the therapies, and approvals are sometimes adding weeks to the process.
“A request for CAR-T may end up with somebody on the payer authorization team who doesn’t understand the technology or the urgency of the request, when somebody has only weeks or months to live,” Stephanie Farnia, director of health policy and strategic relations at the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation told NPR.
And reportedly, Medicare and Medicaid approval is an even bigger challenge. Some Medicaid programs won’t cover CAR-T. Matt Salo, executive director of the National Association of Medicaid Directors, told NPR, “Medicaid is a finite pot of money, and it’s stretched threadbare even on a good day.”
Medicare provided payment rates last spring for providers who administer Yescarta and Kymriah to outpatients, which would cover the costs of the drugs. NPR writes, “Medicare beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket costs would be capped at $1,340 plus the beneficiaries’ Part B deductible (if that hasn’t already been met), the agency says.”
The Catch-22 here is that the facilities that provide CAR-T—which are limited by FDA regulations; there are only 51 in the U.S.—typically provide treatment on an inpatient basis. That inpatient choice is based on the high risk of side effects.
Peter Bach, director of Memorial Sloan Kettering’s Center for Health Policy and Outcomes,recently wrote an editorial for The New England Journal of Medicine looking at CAR-T payment policies. He noted that United Healthcare, a provider of Medicare Advantage plans, requested that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) conduct a national coverage analysis (NCA) of CAR-T therapy. United, he writes, “argued that implementing a single coverage policy for CAR-T therapy across Medicare would level the financial playing field for competing plans and ensure equal access. NCAs do usually result in uniform coverage across Medicare; without them, coverage often varies among regions and plans.”
It’s possible CMS will find that clinical trial results show CAR-T “provides a net benefit for Medicare patients.” One tough part there is that most trials so far have not included large numbers of patients 65 years or older, which is the eligibility age for Medicare. It could also design a payment strategy for CAR-T that promotes price competition. There are also more complex plans it might consider.
Bach concludes, “CAR-T therapies have broken new ground on many fronts—they have shown efficacy in patients who previously had few options, but they cost multiple times what any previously approved cancer therapy costs. Their rapid approval based on small, uncontrolled studies reflects their promise. But they are no panacea.”

Healthcare Wants To Need Real Estate Less

The healthcare industry is in a bind: Providers bear more of the cost of care than ever before, rendering them less able to keep up with the constant real estate demands of the industry.
“The incredible pressure that all of this is putting on facilities to maximize effectiveness, coupled with the environment we’re in now where construction cost is escalating again — we’re starting to see the fringes of a new era of house calls,” Array Architects principal Kent Doss said. “Home care is starting to become more prevalent, and it puts even more pressure on the facilities we construct to be hyper-efficient.”
The problem is one Temple University Health System President and CEO Dr. Larry Kaiser knows all too well, running a system in dire need of a new outpatient care tower on its central campus, but with too much debt to build it.
If Temple’s patient load were lessened by a decrease in inpatient care in favor of outpatient care — and less outpatient care in favor of more in-home care — the system would save considerable money, Kaiser said at Bisnow’s State of Philadelphia Healthcare event at the Westin Philadelphia Aug. 16.
“Mount Sinai Hospital in New York has run a program [for post-surgery patients] where a physician or a nurse comes to the home even multiple times per day, and that has been proven to reduce costs,” Kaiser said.
Christiana Care Health System Chief Population Health Officer Sharon Anderson predicted to attendees that virtual healthcare, wherein doctors meet with patients through phone calls, online or video chats to save time and money, will become increasingly ubiquitous.
“I think we need broad approaches, because some populations will want in-person care, but a growing population will want virtual care,” Anderson said. “They’re used to the Amazon experience. There are also a lot of businesses used to delivering things using virtual service like Amazon that are getting into healthcare.”
Anderson singled out millennials and Generation Z as the demographics more likely to use the emerging virtual care system, but that same population has been used to justify the fever pitch of urgent care center construction across the country.
Inspira Health Network Vice President of Facilities, Design and Construction Brandon Bardowsky expressed concern that the industry might have responded too vigorously to the urgent care trend.
“It seems there’s pretty major market saturation going on with urgent care centers right now; people are slowing down in building as a lot of centers go up,” Bardowsky said. “There’s a lot of competition, and people are still trying to figure out the market viability for how long that trend will last.”
Urgent care centers and virtual care systems largely fulfill the same purpose: they are the first point of contact for patients and a one-stop shop for many minor maladies and injuries. But for specialists and more intensive care, physical space is still very much necessary — the challenge is to shrink the amount of space they need.
Virtua Health has been consolidating physician groups across its network in South Jersey into “mini-malls” of medical offices, Virtua Assistant Vice President of Facilities Development Julie Herb said. She said bringing disparate practices together can shorten trips for patients who may need multiple consultations or referrals to justify shrinking its number of locations.
“We’ve found [consolidation] to be very beneficial for the patient,” Herb said. “Plus, if we want to move a certain practice out of the area and move something else in, we can do that, and we can have timeshares to have multiple specialists occupying the same space at different times in the week.”
No matter how efficient providers make their practices, the simple passage of time keeps development necessary. Some are building new hospitals because their current buildings are too old to renovate cost-effectively, Bardowksy said. But even as Inspira and Virtua both plan new hospitals and care centers, they find themselves unable to leave their older buildings behind; too many patients and professionals depend on them. That leaves them constantly updating and tinkering to boost efficiency and modernize along the margins.
“We continue to make renovations to our aged facility in Mount Holly,” Herb said. “When we look at our new hospital that’s still six years away, we recognize the consumer-driven environment we currently have. So we’re undergoing many renovations in our Mount Holly hospital, even though we’re pretty much [unable to expand]. We continue to reinvest in that property out of necessity.”
Some fixes can be relatively simple, like the installation of LED lights in parking lots. Herb said the cost of the switch was $250K, but she expects to make that money back within a year and a half on energy savings, and will pursue a similar switch in the hospital itself. Other fixes are more necessary, more challenging and more costly.
“What we’re running into a lot is how to integrate new patient experience technology with older infrastructure,” AKF Group Director Michael Brumberg said. “Some of the biggest problems have been with wireless infrastructure and ceilings, to the point where you can’t expand the facility any longer.”
The rising cost of such repairs and the competition inherent in the Greater Philadelphia healthcare market has been a driving factor in increased merger and acquisition activity. Larger systems see acquiring existing networks as a quicker way to enter a region than building their own facilities, HFF Senior Director Ben Appel said. He cited Penn Medicine’s purchase and subsequent renovation of a facility in Cherry Hill as an example.
“If you have the flexibility to build a hospital five years down the road, that’s great, but sometimes you need to be in a space right now,” Appel said.

After Trial Failure, Tonix Sees Glimmer of Hope for Future of PTSD Drug


Shares of Tonix Pharmaceuticals shot up 25 percent in premarket trading this morning after the company announced there may be a future for its late-stage posttraumatic stress disorder treatment Tonmya after a Phase III trial was halted early in July following a data review showed an inadequate response.
After the trial was halted, the company examined some data and noted that a “retrospective analysis” showed a treatment effect in participants who experienced trauma less than or equal to nine years prior to screening, which was approximately 50 percent of the modified intent-to-treat population. Tonix noted that the impact of “time since trauma” on Tonmya treatment response was not evident in the P201 Phase II trial. The company said that might relate to the fact that the trial had “relatively fewer participants who experienced trauma greater than nine years before screening.”
Tonix Chief Executive Officer Seth Lederman said future studies of Tonmya will focus on patients with more recent trauma of fewer than nine years.
“The finding that treatment response to Tonmya in P301 decreases as the time since trauma gets longer, suggests that military service members and veterans with PTSD are transitioning from a Tonmya-treatment responsive state to a non-responsive state after approximately nine years.  These results emphasize the urgency for early diagnosis and treatment for PTSD, especially for military-related PTSD,” Lederman said in a statement.
PTSD affects approximately 11 million U.S. adults and is characterized by chronic disability, inadequate treatment options, especially for military-related PTSD, and an overall high utilization of health care services that contributes to significant economic burdens. TNX-102 SL (cyclobenzaprine HCl sublingual tablets), which would be marketed under the name Tonmya, is derived from the muscle relaxant Cyclobenzaprine.
In July Tonix halted its P301 HONOR trial early following an analysis of 12-week data from an Independent Data Monitoring Committee. The IDMC reported that at the 12-week mark, there was “inadequate separation” between patients with PTSD symptoms who were treated with Tonmya and placebo. However, the company said in July that at week four of the study, “meaningful improvement in overall PTSD symptoms was observed.”
Tonix said will present a poster on the Tonmya at the 2018 Military Health System Research Symposium (MHSRS) in Kissimmee, Fla. that includes the new findings.
Gregory Sullivan, Tonix chief medical officer, said PTSD is a complex condition. Although it is caused by trauma, there is clear evidence of a “dynamic pathophysiology which changes over time.”
“Treatment responsiveness over the course of the disease may vary with different pharmacological classes, and may also differ between PTSD from combat versus other types of trauma. Yet it is unclear what specific features of PTSD change over time and make it less treatment responsive.  These findings of P301 and P201 show that in PTSD, time since trauma is important in the treatment response to Tonmya,” Sullivan said in a statement.
Tonix said there were no serious or unexpected adverse events in either the Phase II or Phase III trials. The adverse events in both studies were comparable and consistent with the company’s experience in prior fibromyalgia studies, Tonix said.

Researchers Take a Bite out of Bioengineering


People can lose their teeth for several reasons. Many of those, though, are not related to poor dental hygiene, but rather, are byproducts of other diseases, such as cancer, osteoporosis and diabetes.
For people who have lost their teeth due to any number of reasons, the solution has been either the use of dentures or a bridge, or artificial dental implants, which are the current standard. Now, another solution could be on the horizon – bioengineered teeth. An article published earlier this summer in the Journal of Dental Research suggests that “bioengineered tooth buds” are a “superior alternative tooth replacement therapy.” In the article “Bioengineered Tooth Buds Exhibit Features of Natural Tooth Buds,” the authors report that artificial implants do not exhibit the same properties as natural teeth and are therefore subject to certain complications.
Because of those complications, the authors take a keen look at the use of bioengineered tooth buds that are made from postnatal dental cells. The bioengineered tooth buds were implanted subcutaneously into immunocompromised rats for the purpose of the study. In the study, the bioengineered tooth buds formed “hallmark features that resemble natural tooth buds.” Those features include the “dental epithelial stem cell niche, enamel knot signaling centers, transient amplifying cells, and mineralized dental tissue formation,” according to the article abstract.
The authors of this abstract said that to their knowledge, their report is first of its kind to describe the use of postnatal dental cells to “create bioengineered tooth buds that exhibit evidence of these features of natural tooth development.” The authors said they believe continued research in the area is important as bioengineered tooth buds are “promising” and “clinically relevant” as a tooth replacement option.
While the bioengineered tooth buds article may have been the first report of its kind, it was not the only article in the June issue of the Journal of Dental Health to address bioengineered teeth. Another article, “Bone Marrow Stromal Cells Promote Innervation of Bioengineered Teeth” points to the use of bone marrow to stimulate the nerve cells of bioengineered teeth. The scientists used autologous mesenchymal cells that were derived from bone marrow to stimulate the nerves of the bioengineered teeth. According to the article abstract, the researchers confirmed the “stemness” of isolated BMDCs (bone marrow-derived dendritic cells) and the role it can play in the innervation of bioengineered teeth. Additionally, the researchers analyzed the mechanisms by with the innervation can occur. The authors noted that BMDCs promoted innervation through two mechanisms. The first was through immunomodulation in the implants and the second was by expressing neurotrophic factors for axonal growth, according to the abstract.
William V. Giannobile, the editor in chief of the Journal of Dental Health, said the research into bioengineered teeth shows a promising future for the field.
“This cutting-edge research has the potential to advance tooth replacement therapy and the science base to bring such regenerative medicine treatments to improve clinical care,” Giannobile said, as cited by Nanowerk.
While bioengineered teeth may seem odd, the development of artificial body parts through stem cells, such as the above studies, has been around for years. New capabilities in 3D printing point to a fascinating future for the field. Earlier this year BioSpace took a look at some of the companies behind the surge of 3D bioprinting, including France-based Pessac and Belgium-based Prometheus. Those two companies teamed up this year to create tissue for skeletal regeneration through 3D bioprinting. San Diego-based Organovo has developed liver and kidney tissue through the process as well.

Wells Fargo says has ‘no political position’ on medical marijuana


Wells Fargo said that, in recent days, there have been assertions that the bank elected to close an account in Florida because of its presumed political viewpoint regarding medical marijuana. The bank called that assertion “completely false,” adding that it has “no political position on the matter.” “As a national bank that is federally regulated, Wells Fargo must comply with federal law on the topic of marijuana, even in instances where state laws may differ,” the company said. “Since federal law prohibits the sale and use of marijuana, national banks like Wells Fargo may not knowingly bank or provide services to marijuana businesses or for related activities. While we recognize that resolving the differences between federal and state laws on this matter has become an industry problem, we make these decisions based on the requirements of federal law and not because of any political view on the topic.”

Glaxo seeks mid-Sept bids for $4 billion Indian Horlicks unit


 GlaxoSmithKline is seeking initial bids by mid-September for its India-focused Horlicks health nutrition business, which is expected to fetch more than $4 billion (£3.1 billion), two people familiar with the situation said on Tuesday.

LONDON (Reuters) – GlaxoSmithKline is seeking initial bids by mid-September for its India-focused Horlicks health nutrition business, which is expected to fetch more than $4 billion (£3.1 billion), two people familiar with the situation said on Tuesday.
The British drugmaker started a strategic review of Horlicks – a malt-based drink brand popular in India – and some smaller products, after buying Novartis out of their consumer healthcare venture for $13 billion (£10.2 billion) in March.
Potential acquirers are likely to include major food and consumer products groups, such as Nestle, Pepsico and Reckitt Benckiser, the sources said.
The large Indian consumer business could also be of interest to other food and drink companies.
GSK, Nestle and Reckitt declined to comment, while officials at Pepsico were not immediately available. The timing of the bidding process was first reported by Bloomberg.
The main asset on the block in the sale is GSK’s 72.5 percent stake in its Indian subsidiary GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare, which is famous for Horlicks but also makes other products, including the chocolate-flavoured malt-based drink Boost.
Horlicks is more than 140 years old with origins dating back to 1873, when two British-born men, James and William Horlick, founded a company in Chicago to manufacture the drink. It was introduced to India by Indian soldiers who had fought with the British Army in the First World War.
Nestle, the world’s biggest packaged food company, has previously told GSK privately of its interest in Horlicks on several occasions, people familiar with the matter told Reuters earlier this year. Nestle already owns the malt drink Milo, but it is not a big seller in India.

Missouri judge affirms $4.69 billion talc verdict, J&J vows to appeal


A Missouri trial court judge has affirmed the massive $4.69 billion verdict against Johnson & Johnson in a case involving 22 women and their families who alleged the company’s talc-based products, including its baby powder, contain asbestos and caused them to develop ovarian cancer.

J&J in a statement on Wednesday said it would continue to pursue all available appellate remedies. The company, which denies the allegations and says its talc is safe, previously said it was confident the verdict would be overturned on appeal.
In a series of orders on Tuesday evening, Judge Rex Burlison of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis affirmed the jury’s July 12 decision in favor of the women, six of whom have died.
“The Court finds there is no just reason for delay and hereby certifies this judgment as final for purposes of appeal,” Burlison wrote in the judgments.
Defendants in civil cases can generally file so-called post-trial motions, asking the trial court judge to reduce a verdict or set it aside entirely, but J&J did not file such motions. It can now take up the cases with a Missouri appeals court.
The jury found the company’s talc-based products had caused the women’s cancer, awarding $550 million in compensatory damages and $4.14 billion in punitive damages to all plaintiffs.
Mark Lanier, a lawyer for the women, in a statement on Wednesday said he was confident the judgment would be upheld on appeal.
“We hope this judgment will compel Johnson & Johnson to take responsible, effective action in acknowledging the inherent dangers of the use of talc, and specifically the use of Johnson’s Baby Powder and similar products,” Lanier said.
The verdict was the largest to date arising from lawsuits alleging products like J&J’s Baby Powder cause cancer. The company faces some 10,600 cases nationwide over talc, according to an August regulatory filing.
J&J has called the five-week St. Louis trial “fundamentally unfair” and its Chief Executive Alex Gorsky has expressed confidence the jury decision will be overturned on appeal.
J&J has been successful at having other talc verdicts in Missouri thrown out on appeal. A lawyer for the company told Reuters J&J would focus on jurisdictional arguments and put forth its case that scientific studies overwhelmingly show talc itself is safe and the company’s talc-based products never contained asbestos.