ICOTYDE / Icotrokinra for Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis in Adults and Adolescents Aged Twelve Years and Older Weighing at Least Forty Kilograms

As of August 2026, MARA’s assessment finds ICOTYDE / Icotrokinra’s reimbursement risk concentrated in uncertainty, sensitivity, and broader impacts, with care pathway integration a strength; the current MARA Rating and full rationale are available in the report.

The assessment also weighs safety and adverse effects: what harms arrive alongside the benefit, which payers set against the gains before funding a treatment. The strength recorded in care pathway integration carries weight because that domain asks how the drug fits into the way care is organised today; a treatment that demands new infrastructure or displaces an established pathway faces extra scrutiny.

Dermatology

This rating sits within MARA’s Dermatology coverage, alongside 13 other independently assessed treatments in the same area.

What payers will ask

Is the clinical benefit the kind payers reward? — Clinical effectiveness

Icotrokinra demonstrated significant improvement in primary outcomes versus deucravacitinib and placebo in phase 3 trials, with durable responses through one year. However, direct comparisons with IL-17/IL-23 biologics are not available.

Does the economic case hold at the expected price? — Cost effectiveness

No publicly available ICER, cost-utility analysis, or economic model was identified. NICE’s appraisal is still in development.

Is there quality-of-life evidence payers weigh? — Quality of life

The trials included validated instruments like PSSD and DLQI, showing symptom improvement and durability. However, no EQ-5D utility values were reported, limiting QALY translation.

Does the safety profile hold up for payers? — Safety and Adverse Effects

Short-term safety profile is well-characterized with low-frequency, mostly non-serious AEs. Long-term data show no new signals, but rare and very-long-term risks remain uncertain.

Was the drug compared against what payers expect? — Comparator Selection

Trials used deucravacitinib as a relevant comparator for oral systemic therapy, but no direct comparison with biologics like IL-17/IL-23 agents was available.

Is the population defined the way payers need it? — Patient Population and Subgroups

The trials included a broad adult population and adolescents, but had limited representation of Black participants and older adults. Subgroup analyses did not show response differences.

Does the drug fit how care is delivered and paid for? — Care Pathway Integration

Icotrokinra is an oral therapy with no new infrastructure or training required, fitting well into existing care pathways with minor adjustments for monitoring.

Are the wider system costs understood? — Resource Use and Cost Implications

No public data on direct medical costs, implementation costs, or cost savings from avoided events were identified.

Would the evidence survive payer scrutiny? — Evidence Quality and Robustness

The evidence is based on multiple phase 3 RCTs with consistent results. However, industry sponsorship and limited long-term data are noted.

How exposed is the case to uncertainty? — Uncertainty, Sensitivity, and Broader Impacts

High uncertainty remains due to lack of direct comparison with biologics, long-term safety data, and economic sensitivity analyses.

This rating replaces the earlier April 2026 rating of the same drug and indication — still on the record here.

Request the current rating

Be alerted when this rating changes:

Related Reimbursement Risk Assessments

Full Legal Disclaimer and Usage Terms

The MARA Rating® is an independent opinion of a drug’s market access pharma risk profile and is provided for informational purposes only—not as investment, medical, legal or any other type of advice. See our full disclaimer here.