I.e. the justification for not covering SMA2 or 3 is that there is no "evaluable published data" - and personally, after the FDA abdicated their role in the case of Etep, that seems a completely reasonable response even when the FDA approves for an indication (as they did for SMA2 and 3). That said the Anthem letter is a little strange in several ways:
a) They ID the CHERISH trial as being for SMA3. It isn't - it is for SMA2.
b) The note that CHERISH isn't scheduled to complete until June of this year, but in fact it was halted in November for overwhelming efficacy (on a motor function endpoint).
All told - I'd bet they start reimbursing for SMA2 shortly after CHERISH is either published in a journal, or is somehow added to the FDA documents (I don't think I've ever seen the latter happen). The big question IMO is whether SMA3 will ever be reimbursed?
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.