|
Post by mnkdnut on Jun 19, 2016 13:31:50 GMT -5
Regarding superiority, subjective? the abstracts...
This analysis of Afrezza's PK characteristics won't move the needle at all with insurance companies. You'd need to show that these characteristics actually result in measurable and clinically significant patient outcomes. Further, they want to see an analysis of how much cost savings result from those outcomes. We already have a study that shows the outcomes statistically not worse, but no better than the RAA comparator, so a new study would have to show the old study was flawed in its execution and therefore underestimated its outcomes. Any current label change resulting from this PK analysis won't be able to say anything regarding resulting clinical outcomes, so besides providing an extra talking point for the sales rep, I'm not sure what positive effect on scripts we'd see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2016 13:35:06 GMT -5
Huh? Matt said "So long as different parts of the payor market have different financial incentives, coverage for a more expensive alternative will be difficult in the absence of long-term studies proving its cost effectiveness within the time horizon the patient will remain with the insurance plan. For that there is no easy answer. "
He's calling Afrezza "a more expensive alternative." But it won't be "more expensive" after MannKind reduces its price to compete with or undercut the price of injectibles. Seeker or other knowledgeable person, what did you tell us the cost for fast acting insulin pens are a month? A vial of apidra by memory, with discount card in US $125/vial. www.tudiabetes.org/forum/t/costs-of-apidra-vial-insulin-canada-vs-usa/14341
I know what Matt on the proboards has said. I still think insurance coverage is a cost issue.
i just know everything is $ based. At some price point individual to each, i am sure all insurers will take away the ST, PA clauses.. may not be tier 2 due to exclusivity rules but tier 3 at which point Mannkind can keep running the co pay assistance programs making it equivalent to tier 2 - lower co pays
|
|
|
Post by sweedee79 on Jun 19, 2016 14:39:59 GMT -5
I know that Matt and Mike have said they are going to reduce the price of Afrezza so that we can compete.. however, how much does it cost to bring Afrezza to market? Will MNKD be able to turn a big enough profit at these reduced prices so that the company can survive and thrive? Or is the reduced price part of a plan to get the product out there and then eventually raise the price?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jun 19, 2016 14:55:24 GMT -5
Insurers view the entire pharma portfolio. Express Scripts did this when they created a stir by dropping all Novo Nordisk diabetes products in favor of Lilly. Lilly were prepared to compromise on their insulin price to gain market share for their GLP-1 at the time so Express Scripts dropped Novo and went with Lilly. Insurers look at their entire drug bill rather than any one item and negotiate around that. This puts small pharmas like Mannkind at a disadvantage as they have only a single drug to negotiate with.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2016 15:19:24 GMT -5
Insurers view the entire pharma portfolio. Express Scripts did this when they created a stir by dropping all Novo Nordisk diabetes products in favor of Lilly. Lilly were prepared to compromise on their insulin price to gain market share for their GLP-1 at the time so Express Scripts dropped Novo and went with Lilly. Insurers look at their entire drug bill rather than any one item and negotiate around that. This puts small pharmas like Mannkind at a disadvantage as they have only a single drug to negotiate with. Mike Castagna (@castagna2011) 5/31/16 STAY AWAY FROM NEGATIVE PEOPLE. THEY HAVE A PROBLEM FOR EVERY SOLUTION.
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Jun 19, 2016 15:42:11 GMT -5
Insurers view the entire pharma portfolio. Express Scripts did this when they created a stir by dropping all Novo Nordisk diabetes products in favor of Lilly. Lilly were prepared to compromise on their insulin price to gain market share for their GLP-1 at the time so Express Scripts dropped Novo and went with Lilly. Insurers look at their entire drug bill rather than any one item and negotiate around that. This puts small pharmas like Mannkind at a disadvantage as they have only a single drug to negotiate with. Mike Castagna (@castagna2011) 5/31/16 STAY AWAY FROM NEGATIVE PEOPLE. THEY HAVE A PROBLEM FOR EVERY SOLUTION. What is the sense of plastering a comment you do not like with this quote? Why do you not just ignore it? I would interpret this as a rather rude gesture to silence someone instead of responding with a genuine argument of your own.
|
|
|
Post by victoria on Jun 19, 2016 16:42:08 GMT -5
With reference to the title of the thread, fortunately sometimes good effective drugs do make it in the market... isn't this exciting?
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 19, 2016 18:15:32 GMT -5
I read that as the insurance premium rather than a price premium. The insurers are focused on providing an acceptable level of care within the insurance premium the customer pays. The problem Matt points out is that complications turn up on a far longer timescale than the average policy life (three years). Mannkind needs to show that Afrezza can reduce costs over that three year timescale or the insurer is not going to care what it does. Huh? Matt said "So long as different parts of the payor market have different financial incentives, coverage for a more expensive alternative will be difficult in the absence of long-term studies proving its cost effectiveness within the time horizon the patient will remain with the insurance plan. For that there is no easy answer. "
He's calling Afrezza "a more expensive alternative." But it won't be "more expensive" after MannKind reduces its price to compete with or undercut the price of injectibles. Let's say Afrezza DOES lower its price to undercut that of injectibiles. Do the latter have no room to drop THEIR prices in response? I've no information on this one way or the other, but my guess is that someone's injectible product will always be able to undercut the price of Afrezza.
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Jun 19, 2016 22:50:11 GMT -5
Perhaps Mike Castagna is targeting areas with high income per pop; to populations able to afford the co-pays? The roughly 70 areas the Publicis reps will be working out of, perhaps Mike picked them based upon per capita income and number of patients with type 1 ...... ?
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jun 20, 2016 7:53:41 GMT -5
Huh? Matt said "So long as different parts of the payor market have different financial incentives, coverage for a more expensive alternative will be difficult in the absence of long-term studies proving its cost effectiveness within the time horizon the patient will remain with the insurance plan. For that there is no easy answer. "
He's calling Afrezza "a more expensive alternative." But it won't be "more expensive" after MannKind reduces its price to compete with or undercut the price of injectibles. Let's say Afrezza DOES lower its price to undercut that of injectibiles. Do the latter have no room to drop THEIR prices in response? I've no information on this one way or the other, but my guess is that someone's injectible product will always be able to undercut the price of Afrezza. I hope that we can cut the price. I am not sure the other pharmas would do it as a view MannKind as a fly on the wall. But it could start in overall price war in the insulin market. That probably would be a great thing for the diabetic patient. It also would be a good thing for mankind because They possibly push themselves as a better alternative for diabetics and creating this pricing war. I am sure there is a marketing angle they can use on why insulin pricing went down
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 20, 2016 8:31:32 GMT -5
Let's say Afrezza DOES lower its price to undercut that of injectibiles. Do the latter have no room to drop THEIR prices in response? I've no information on this one way or the other, but my guess is that someone's injectible product will always be able to undercut the price of Afrezza. I hope that we can cut the price. I am not sure the other pharmas would do it as a view MannKind as a fly on the wall. But it could start in overall price war in the insulin market. That probably would be a great thing for the diabetic patient. It also would be a good thing for mankind because They possibly push themselves as a better alternative for diabetics and creating this pricing war. I am sure there is a marketing angle they can use on why insulin pricing went down Reminds me of the Saudis flooding the oil market and slashing the price of oil. Great for consumers. Not so great for those in the oil business, especially the smaller and more innovative (eg shale) drillers. I agree cost of Afrezza to the consumer has to fall somewhat. Beyond that, I have no idea.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2016 8:45:30 GMT -5
I hope that we can cut the price. I am not sure the other pharmas would do it as a view MannKind as a fly on the wall. But it could start in overall price war in the insulin market. That probably would be a great thing for the diabetic patient. It also would be a good thing for mankind because They possibly push themselves as a better alternative for diabetics and creating this pricing war. I am sure there is a marketing angle they can use on why insulin pricing went down Reminds me of the Saudis flooding the oil market and slashing the price of oil. Great for consumers. Not so great for those in the oil business, especially the smaller and more innovative (eg shale) drillers. I agree cost of Afrezza to the consumer has to fall somewhat. Beyond that, I have no idea.
reply: alrighty then what is your take on global warming?
Rx For week ending 6/10/16 NRx 106 TRx 292 TRx $ 170,000
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Jun 20, 2016 9:35:45 GMT -5
Iam2sekc4u2002, you said "i just know everything is $ based. At some price point individual to each, i am sure all insurers will take away the ST, PA clauses.. may not be tier 2 due to exclusivity rules but tier 3 at which point Mannkind can keep running the co pay assistance programs making it equivalent to tier 2 - lower co pays" It sounds like you know what you're talking about and I'd like to reseach and learn more about insurance coverage. For us new folks not familiar with insurance, would you mind elaborating on what an ST and PA clause is? When I google them I do not get answers applicable to the subject. Also, "exclusivity rules". What are they that would keep Afrezza off tier two? Your post appears to me to be the most insightful regarding how Afrezza will be better covered with insurance. I just need help understanding it better. TIA Read more: mnkd.proboards.com/thread/5737/good-effective-drugs-make-market#ixzz4C86DzC3n
|
|
|
Post by brotherm1 on Jun 21, 2016 15:42:17 GMT -5
Iam2sekc4u2002, you said "i just know everything is $ based. At some price point individual to each, i am sure all insurers will take away the ST, PA clauses.. may not be tier 2 due to exclusivity rules but tier 3 at which point Mannkind can keep running the co pay assistance programs making it equivalent to tier 2 - lower co pays" The above was posted by iam2sekc4u2002 two days ago. For those who are familiar with health insurance plans, does this appear to be accurate and if so what are the ST and PA clauses refered to and what is the exclusivity clause referd to? Also, if it is accurate, what are the monetary implications for: "...on tier 3 Mannkind can keep running the co-pay assistance programs making it equivalent to tier 2 lower copays?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jun 21, 2016 16:11:11 GMT -5
Iam2sekc4u2002, you said "i just know everything is $ based. At some price point individual to each, i am sure all insurers will take away the ST, PA clauses.. may not be tier 2 due to exclusivity rules but tier 3 at which point Mannkind can keep running the co pay assistance programs making it equivalent to tier 2 - lower co pays" The above was posted by iam2sekc4u2002 two days ago. For those who are familiar with health insurance plans, does this appear to be accurate and if so what are the ST and PA clauses refered to and what is the exclusivity clause referd to? Also, if it is accurate, what are the monetary implications for: "...on tier 3 Mannkind can keep running the co-pay assistance programs making it equivalent to tier 2 lower copays? ST - Step Therapy. Before you use this drug the preferred drug has to be tried and fail. PA - Prior Authorization. The prescribing doctor has to justify why this is a medical necessity and the regular drug cannot be used. PA is easier to deal with than ST. I suspect that writing PA justifications is what Mike was taking about when he was saying they would help with insurers.
|
|