Search This Blog

Wednesday, August 7, 2019

Sarepta’s Exondys 51 Q2 sales up 29%; shares up 3% after hours

Sarepta Therapeutics (NASDAQ:SRPTQ2 results:
Exondys 51 sales: $94.7M (+29%).
Net loss: ($276.4M); loss/share: ($3.74).
FDA action date August 19 for Vyondys 53 (golodirsen). U.S. marketing application for casimersen about to be filed with an expected FDA action date in H1 2020.
Shares up 3% after hours.

FDA advisory committee backs Gilead’s Descovy for PrEP

An FDA advisory committee voted 16-2 recommending approval of Gilead Sciences’ (GILD -0.2%) Descovy (emtricitabine and tenofovir) for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to reduce the risk of sexually acquired HIV-1 infection in men and transgender women who have sex with men.
The FDA’s action date is in October.

Patient groups push back against Gilead’s pricey HIV prevention treatment

Gilead Sciences Inc (GILD.O) hopes to soon introduce a pricey new pill to prevent HIV in people at risk of contracting the infection, but the drugmaker faces opposition from an unusual source: patient advocates.
Such groups have traditionally lobbied for insurance coverage of newer HIV drugs regardless of expense. But at least three U.S. organizations now question whether Gilead’s Descovy would be the best option for most people at risk of exposure.
A generic version of the current prevention pill, Truvada, is due in the United States in September 2020, which should bring down costs and give many more people access to the therapy, they say.
Their resistance is being echoed by some insurers, which are hinting that price will be a barrier to providing coverage for Descovy.
“Based on the science that we have seen thus far, there is no indication that everyone needs to be taking Descovy,” Tim Horn, director of medication access and pricing at the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors (NASTAD) told Reuters.
“We see no reason to push back against commercial payers or Medicaid programs that would move to prefer generic Truvada (for prevention), provided there are guard-rails that do not deny access to Descovy for those who need Descovy,” he said.
Truvada, also made by Gilead, has been used to treat people infected with HIV since 2004. It was approved as a daily pill for pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, in 2012, and remains the only preventive therapy on the U.S. market.
Descovy, shown to be less toxic than Truvada to the kidneys and bones in clinical trials, was approved in 2016 for people already infected with HIV. Advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will meet on Wednesday to decide whether to recommend Descovy for PrEP, with agency approval widely expected before the end of the year.

When asked about the patient groups’ criticism, Gilead said Descovy is safer than Truvada and offers more efficient delivery of its antiviral component, resulting in greater concentration of the drug in cells where HIV infection can occur.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 1.1 million people in the United States could benefit from PrEP. High-risk populations include people having sex with someone who is infected with HIV or who share injection needle equipment. Gilead said 213,000 people were taking Truvada for HIV prevention in the second quarter of this year.
The company has pledged to help the Trump administration achieve a goal of stopping the spread of HIV in the United States within a decade. In May, Gilead said it would donate enough Truvada annually to supply 200,000 uninsured Americans with PrEP until Descovy is approved for HIV prevention, then switch patients to the new drug.

PRICING IMMUNITY

HIV drugmakers have largely been shielded from generic competition. Each time one of their therapies came close to losing patent protection, scientific advances allowed them to introduce a new drug that improved on its predecessor, often with a higher price.
Both Truvada and Descovy are priced at $21,000 per year, before discounts provided to public and private health insurers. In the first half of 2019, Gilead’s Truvada sales totaled $1.3 billion. Descovy sales amounted to $700 million and are expected to rise to $3 billion dollars annually by 2024, according to IBES data from Refinitiv.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (TEVA.TA) is due to sell a generic version of Truvada next year. More significant price competition is expected when other competitors emerge in 2021.
Teva’s Chief Executive Kare Schultz expressed confidence that he will find a market for generic Truvada, and said the company has held preliminary talks with U.S. payers.
Health insurers “will normally say that if there was something that was the gold standard then they will prefer to use the generic for the gold standard rather than switch to a new product,” Schultz told Reuters.
Some prominent patient advocates, including community-based Treatment Action Group (TAG) and NASTAD, which advocates for public health, told Reuters that Gilead has not proven the newer treatment provides enough of a benefit to justify its use beyond people at risk of kidney or bone density problems. At a time when HIV drug prices are soaring, their views may provide support to health insurers who routinely push generic drug use to curb costs.
Jeremiah Johnson, HIV project director at TAG, told Reuters he is open to a conversation about health plans requiring individuals try a generic drug before using a significantly more expensive regimen like Descovy.
TAG and PrEP4All Collaboration, which aims to expand access to PrEP for all Americans, earlier this year called for the FDA to convene the advisory committee review of Descovy, citing concerns over Gilead’s trial data and pricing practices.
Not all experts are as vocal in questioning Gilead’s aims. Dr. Paul Volberding, director of the AIDS Research Institute at the University of California, San Francisco, told Reuters that Descovy for PrEP should be made available to people that have insurance to pay for it, while a generic could make sense for people with less access to coverage.
“The safety difference is small, but real,” he said.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told Reuters that Descovy may provide an advantage because it remains in the body for longer than Truvada. “If you miss a dose or two it is unlikely that there is going to be a gap in protection,” he said.
But some health insurers, which largely cover Truvada for PrEP, are not convinced of a significant benefit from Descovy.
“Based on the current information and data available to us at this time, we believe generic Truvada will be the most cost effective option for PrEP,” said David Lassen, chief clinical officer at Prime Therapeutics, which manages pharmacy benefits for Blue Cross Blue Shield health plans.

“We would certainly look to leverage cost savings from generic Truvada to help improve affordability for patients and payers,” the company told Reuters.

Bayer up 7% on rumored Elanco deal

Bayer AG (OTCPK:BAYRY +6.9%) is up on below-average volume as investors anticipate a deal between its animal health unit and Elanco Animal Health (ELAN -2.8%). A month ago, Bloomberg reported that Bayer approached Elanco about a possible merger.

As ‘Medicare for All’ debate gains steam, many Americans are on the fence

Though support or opposition for “Medicare for All” is dominating the 2020 primary headlines, a large group of Americans is more ambivalent about the proposal, a new survey shows.
Urban Institute, a left-leaning think tank, surveyed close to 9,600 people about their thoughts on single-payer healthcare. It found about 41% neither support or oppose such a transition.
By comparison, about 30% said they support “Medicare for All” outright and about 28% said they oppose it, according to the survey.
The roughly half of respondents who were on the fence didn’t change when they were asked about other plans for attaining universal coverage. For example, 45% of respondents said they do not support or oppose offering a public option plan, while about 33% said they would support it and 21% oppose it.
“This largely reflects that it’s all very complicated stuff,” John Holahan, a fellow at the institute and one of the report’s authors, told FierceHealthcare. “People kind of think they understand it, but then they’re not so sure.”
The survey also dives into demographic characteristics of people more likely to support or oppose single-payer and examines attitudes and perceptions of the policy from both sides of the debate.
Urban Institute found that young people, people of color and those who receive public health benefits were more likely to support. Older whites with higher incomes were more likely to oppose “Medicare for All,” according to the study.
The racial divide was most stark, the survey found. About 35% of white respondents said they oppose single-payer, compared to about 12% of black respondents, 16% of Hispanic respondents and about 22% of multiracial respondents.
Demographically, people who landed on the fence about “Medicare for All” were more similar to the policy’s supporters than its opponents, according to the report.
“I think it’s not necessarily surprising those people who fall in the middle are people who look a lot like supporters,” Holahan said. “They’re maybe just not as confident in what they think about this.”
The survey also found a pretty clear divide in how “Medicare for All” proponents and opponents view the potential impacts of the policy. For example, about 69% of supporters believe that wait times for care would be “about the same” under a single-payer system as they are today, while about 78% of opponents believe wait times would worsen.
About 63% of supporters believe they would have similar access to their choice of providers under “Medicare for All,” while about 70% of opponents believe single-payer would make it harder to see the doctor of their choosing.
“Medicare for All” supporters also largely believe that quality of care would remain the same, while opponents believe it would get worse, according to the survey.
Respondents falling into the middle were generally in line with supporters on these beliefs, the survey found.
“I think the biggest thing that surprised me is when you give the option of neither support or oppose how many took that option,” Holahan said. “People are persuadable probably in either direction.”

Kansas warns Aetna: Improve networks, billing, or lose $1B Medicaid deal

Kansas’ insurance regulator called on Aetna to make improvements to the administration of Medicaid managed care in the state or risk losing its hefty $1 billion contract.
The notice to Aetna sent on July 24 and released Wednesday comes after months of complaints from the Department of Health and Environment about a litany of problems that include incorrect processing of claims and delays in credentialing providers for the insurer’s network.
Other problems detailed by the state include offering service plans that lack clear timeframes and language. Credentialing for doctors also took more than the required 90 days to complete, according to state documents. The state required Aetna to put together a plan to correct the problems that was due Wednesday.
Kansas has its own privatized Medicaid managed care program called KanCare. Aetna became an insurer on KanCare this January, and covers about 100,000 members in the state.

However, it has been a bumpy ride for the insurer since the beginning of this year. The Kansas City Star reported that providers such as the state’s hospital association have struggled with major payment and reimbursement issues for months.
Aetna, a subsidiary of CVS Health, did not return a request for comment as of press time.
KCUR, Kansas’ public radio station, reported that provider frustrations peaked at a quarterly meeting Monday for KenCare’s oversight committee, in which some said they struggle to receive payment for common procedures, such as frenotomies on newborns, which are performed to ease breastfeeding.
A representative for Aetna at the meeting said the insurer has addressed some of the state’s concerns and is working on others. It’s “fair” for providers to have expected the company to have these policies in place by now, he said.
KCUR notes that the insurers who previously administered KanCare, Sunflower and UnitedHealthcare, experienced similar blowback.

Rhythm Rips Higher After Obesity Drug Aces Late-Stage Trials

Shares of the thinly traded small-cap biotech Rhythm Pharmaceuticals Inc RYTM 18.26%were rallying by more than 15% Wednesday.

What Happened

Boston-based Rhythm, which focuses on therapies for rare genetic disorders of obesity,announced positive topline results from two pivotal Phase 3 trials that evaluated its setmelanotide for the treatment of pro-opiomelanocortin, or POMC, and leptin receptor, or LEPR, deficiency obesities.
Setmelanotide is Rhythm’s melanocortin-4 receptor agonist.
The company said both studies met their primary endpoints and all key secondary endpoints, showing a statistically significant and clinically meaningfully effect on weight loss and reductions in insatiable hunger in patients with POMC and LEPR deficiency obesities.
“We believe these pivotal data are the first step towards making a positive impact for people affected by rare genetic disorders of obesity who have grown up with insatiable hunger and early onset, rapid weight gain that often leads to debilitating comorbidities,” Rhythm CEO Keith Gottesdiener said in a statement.

What’s Next

Rhythm said it believes the milestone takes it closer to delivering a treatment for many MC4R pathway-driven disorders of obesity.
The company said it is working to advance setmelanotide to its first regulatory submission in POMC and LEPR deficiency obesities, with a likely timeline of the fourth quarter of 2019 or the first quarter of 2020 for the submission of a rolling NDA. It is also seeking priority status that would result in a six-month review process.
Rhythm also said it plans to submit a Marketing Authorization Application with the European Medicines Agency for the same indication.