(Tue-08-12-2015, 13:42 PM)Bill Wrote: Gosh. Me being such a big DMF fan and all, like Jim, Caroline, Bassman et al, I wonder why the biologics dont get used for a couple of months to do the heavy clearing, then try a switch to DMF for maintenance? This may be possible as some of the biologics seem to modify the disease at a fundamental level. If it were just keeping my skin clear I could do this with DMF at a cost of 13 cents a week. Health insurance companies are incredibly inefficient.

Cheers,

Bill

Bill,

Economically and with normal straightforward common sense you are more than right. Even an insurance may be willing to promote it.

BUT there are enormous financial gains to be made by big pharma with DMF. The dollar signs are already visible in the eyes of Biogen. One of the things they already decided is that DMF belongs in there long term visions. Translated that means that they want to earn a lot of money with it.
Cannot tell more now, cause this is an open part of the forum, and bots can crawl around here. But one thing is sure. Despite the low costs of DMF and the big potential for auto immune diseases, the big companies want to make an awful lot of money on us.

Cheers,
Caroline

(Tue-08-12-2015, 13:42 PM)Bill Wrote: Gosh. Me being such a big DMF fan and all, like Jim, Caroline, Bassman et al, I wonder why the biologics dont get used for a couple of months to do the heavy clearing, then try a switch to DMF for maintenance? This may be possible as some of the biologics seem to modify the disease at a fundamental level. If it were just keeping my skin clear I could do this with DMF at a cost of 13 cents a week. Health insurance companies are incredibly inefficient.

Cheers,

Bill

There are a few reasons. Some people have multiple diseases where a particular biologic may manage all of them. DMF may not. There are plenty more reasons...

(Tue-08-12-2015, 22:21 PM)mataribot Wrote:

(Tue-08-12-2015, 13:42 PM)Bill Wrote: Gosh. Me being such a big DMF fan and all, like Jim, Caroline, Bassman et al, I wonder why the biologics dont get used for a couple of months to do the heavy clearing, then try a switch to DMF for maintenance? This may be possible as some of the biologics seem to modify the disease at a fundamental level. If it were just keeping my skin clear I could do this with DMF at a cost of 13 cents a week. Health insurance companies are incredibly inefficient.

Cheers,

Bill

There are a few reasons. Some people have multiple diseases where a particular biologic may manage all of them. DMF may not. There are plenty more reasons...

Matari... It is more likely the other way around. DMF works for psoriasis, PsA, Crohns, lichen sclerosis, MS, etc. I have not seen that with biologicals yet.

Let's not take Angel's thread  

(Tue-08-12-2015, 22:27 PM)Fred Wrote: Let's not take Angel's thread  

Oops... We are going.

Sorry Fred one last thing... Caroline - the number one reason is drug adherence. Switching people feom a drug that they KNOW works to drug they do not know that works and may have different AEs is enough for people to stop taking treatment. Changing a medication that working well with little side effects should be the patients decision, not the governments.

You dont pick your drug like you pick the flavours of gelati or milkshakes, nor do you necessarily get your drug of choice. In this instance the insurance company is rescinding access to a very effective drug because of its cost. Cost is a major factor, which is why drugs like methotrexate are still used. The reason you dont see regimes like the one I suggested is because the treatment protocol involves treating patients with the cheapest drugs available. By the time you go on Enbrel and its ilk you dont have other options. Sadly you dont have access to DMF in the US for treating p. Why? Because it doesn't work? It leaves mtx for dead in terms of efficacy and safety and could be saving the health system a substantial amount.

Cheers,

Bill

(Wed-09-12-2015, 11:51 AM)Bill Wrote: You dont pick your drug like you pick the flavours of gelati or milkshakes, nor do you necessarily get your drug of choice. In this instance the insurance company is rescinding access to a very effective drug because of its cost. Cost is a major factor, which is why drugs like methotrexate are still used. The reason you dont see regimes like the one I suggested is because the treatment protocol involves treating patients with the cheapest drugs available. By the time you go on Enbrel and its ilk you dont have other options. Sadly you dont have access to DMF in the US for treating p. Why? Because it doesn't work? It leaves mtx for dead in terms of efficacy and safety and could be saving the health system a substantial amount.

Cheers,

Bill

Bill, and the others, we are going over to this thread RE: [split] Dimethylfumarates and Psoriasis, as we are really stealing Angels thread.
So over there we will be  again...    

Hi Everyone! I am still on Cosentyx! I think since July of 2015! It is starting to lose it's effectiveness a bit and really never did clear my one very bad area on the bottom left leg. A few spots have reappeared. But I am still hopeful to be on it awhile. I am too afraid to try anything else! I have health insurance but am still getting Cosentyx completely free which is wonderful!!!

(Thu-01-12-2016, 05:18 AM)angel-1963 Wrote: Hi Everyone!   I am still on Cosentyx!   I think since July of 2015!   It is starting to lose it's effectiveness a bit and really never did clear my one very bad area on the bottom left leg.  A few spots have reappeared.  But I am still hopeful to be on it awhile.  I am too afraid to try anything else!   I have health insurance but am still getting Cosentyx completely free which is wonderful!!!

Yes it was July 2015. That's a shame it's losing it's effectiveness, could it be down to the winter possibly making it a little worse?

Taltz (ixekizumab) is showing good results and could end up beating Cosentyx, so it may be worth asking. But if you're getting it free and you're happy I would wait and see what it's like next July then you will have had 2 years on it and that would be a good judge of it's efficacy for you.