- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Big Pharma uses old drug to treat rare disorder, w/ $89k price tag
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:14 pm to Spock's Eyebrow
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:14 pm to Spock's Eyebrow
Got to start somewhere. This is easy because they are using unfair business practices or being allowed to by our government.
An epi pen for $28 in the UK shouldn't cost $600. I'm not the fricking world bank. Either charge us $28 or raise EVERYONE else to $600.
An epi pen for $28 in the UK shouldn't cost $600. I'm not the fricking world bank. Either charge us $28 or raise EVERYONE else to $600.
0
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:15 pm to Spock's Eyebrow
quote:
Who else you wanna give a haircut to?
I don't blame the pharmaceuticals for trying to make money, but they shouldn't be surprised when their monopoly gets called out.
If it was up to them their share would be bigger than 10%.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:16 pm to NYNolaguy1
I'm all for capitalism and supply & demand, but this is ridiculous. Government should step in on this one. This is an exception.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:18 pm to NYNolaguy1
And people think it's the Doctor that drives up the cost of healthcare
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:21 pm to TigerMyth36
quote:
This crap has to stop. It isn't capitalism that every other country on the planet can tell big pharma to kiss their arse so we end up subsidizing the whole planet.
If Trump does only 1 more thing for his whole term, I hope it is to badger Republicans to attack big pharma and end US subsidization of the rest of the planet.
Charge us the same price or you can't sell in the US.
Different healthcare systems, different regulatory environments, approvals, etc in different countries necessitates a different approach, often including how the drug is priced and/or reimbursed.
As for the cost, probably needs a little context. You don't know how much it costs the company to develop it. They've sunk untold millions into the trials, and it's for a disease state with an incredibly small patient population.
Average drug development time from concept to market is generally in the range of 12-15 years, can cost as much as $2.5 billion, and 70% of compounds fail phase 1 trials (only 2% ever make it to market). So when a company gains approval on a new drug, that income is covering all the losses on other compounds that fail at any point in the process.
I feel like pharma companies are kind of like banks. They provide critical products to society, yet are viewed as villians. It's odd.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:23 pm to SamuelClemens
quote:
And people think it's the Doctor that drives up the cost of healthcare
Agreed. It's a lot of things and is a really complex issue, but the cost of doctors is definitely not toward the top.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:27 pm to lsupride87
quote:
to ell_13
I am all for capitalism and a free market.
But my libertarianism gets tested with Pharma
This isn't free market capitalism. It's protectionism and crony capitalism.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:28 pm to poops_at_parties
quote:
Government should step in on this one. This is an exception.
They did, that's the problem.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:29 pm to Chucktown_Badger
A decent overview of what is driving the cost in the US vs overseas.
LINK
Definitely things to be learned from other countries. But those are mostly countries where the healthcare is entirely government run.
LINK
Definitely things to be learned from other countries. But those are mostly countries where the healthcare is entirely government run.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:30 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
for the cost, probably needs a little context. You don't know how much it costs the company to develop it. They've sunk untold millions into the trials, and it's for a disease state with an incredibly small patient population.
Average drug development time from concept to market is generally in the range of 12-15 years, can cost as much as $2.5 billion, and 70% of compounds fail phase 1 trials (only 2% ever make it to market). So when a company gains approval on a new drug, that income is covering all the losses on other compounds that fail at any point in the process.
So how does that justify overseas manufacturers not being allowed to sell their goods here? It's an old drug, all they did was test it for a new application.
No doubt they did this because of the resulting monopoly.
ETA- they appear like villians when they get a monopoly on a drug and then gouge the consumer. It's not a good look.
This post was edited on 2/10/17 at 3:32 pm
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:33 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
Definitely things to be learned from other countries. But those are mostly countries where the healthcare is entirely government run.
Interesting how we pay more for less care when others do it cheaper on govt run systems.
Not suggesting we follow suit, but the data are interesting.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:35 pm to ell_13
quote:
Not when you're forced to have insurance. This is how ins prices
Except this sort of thing happened long before insurance was mandatory
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:38 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Northbrook, Illinois-based Marathon said the drug will carry a list price of $89,000 a year but that the company will provide a "robust" assistance program for patients who are not covered by insurance.
How much is it per dose? $89k is a big number, but is that once a week? 3 times a day? Is this part of a REMS program?
A lot goes into the manufacture of a drug. I work in a generic manufacturing plant, we specialize in cancer drugs. shite is crazy expensive. The API is what drives the cost. Generics can cost a lot less in other countries because they get their API from India and China where they give no fricks about the conditions its made. FDA regulation (and the EMA) drives costs really high.
Obamacare really hurt the generic industry, if a company has a chance to make bank on a product to offset other boat anchors they damn sure will.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:38 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
You don't know how much it costs the company to develop it. They've sunk untold millions into the trials, and it's for a disease state with an incredibly small patient population.
Except of course:
quote:
Marathon did not invent deflazacort and patients have been able to import it inexpensively for personal use for years because there was not an approved U.S. treatment.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:40 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
So how does that justify overseas manufacturers not being allowed to sell their goods here? It's an old drug, all they did was test it for a new application.
No doubt they did this because of the resulting monopoly.
ETA- they appear like villians when they get a monopoly on a drug and then gouge the consumer. It's not a good look.
I don't disagree. But there are a ton of oversees pharma companies that sell products here. Lundbeck, Takeda, Daiichi Sankyo to name a few better known ones. It's the system and the fact that the US is the biggest market that are contributing.
I would need to do a little bit more digging to find out whose company can no longer sell here. If it's generic, and is a cheaper standard of care, this new drug would generally need to "step through" the previous/existing one.
This post was edited on 2/10/17 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:41 pm to TigerGman
quote:
Marathon did not invent deflazacort and patients have been able to import it inexpensively for personal use for years because there was not an approved U.S. treatment.
You still spend millions upon millions to launch a new drug. You don't have to do the heavy lifting with as many phases of clinical trials, but the development costs are still insane.
For every drug that makes it to market there are probably 10 that hit the wall in some phase of development.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:43 pm to SprintFun
quote:
For every drug that makes it to market there are probably 10 that hit the wall in some phase of development.
The average from concept to market is 2%. So almost all go nowhere.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:46 pm to TigerGman
quote:
Marathon did not invent deflazacort and patients have been able to import it inexpensively for personal use for years because there was not an approved U.S. treatment.
This doesn't make any sense. A company can't take a compound that's already a generic from another company, submit it to the FDA as is, and then sell it as a licensed product under patent protection. They would have needed to change the compound in some way and go through trials. If you could do that, every pharma company in the world we just resubmit their compounds the moment they go generic and continue charging more
This post was edited on 2/10/17 at 3:47 pm
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:47 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
The average from concept to market is 2%. So almost all go nowhere.
For generics it is likely much higher.
The thing that hurts people now is patents on drugs are much more than just what it does. The FDA is pushing generics to imitate the innovator to a T, so the innovators are throwing smoke screens on their products that have nothing to do with efficacy but make it harder for generics to come to market. And those costs go to the consumer.
Posted on 2/10/17 at 3:47 pm to SprintFun
quote:
You still spend millions upon millions to launch a new drug. You don't have to do the heavy lifting with as many phases of clinical trials, but the development costs are still insane.
Which begs the question, why go through the trouble of spending millions on a trial you know will succeed, especially given that the drug was available for 1/70th the price of what you want to charge?
They knew that the drug was effective before they tested it.
The answer of course is that they knew they'd be able to gouge their consumers with a new monopoly. It's a super shitty look as I said earlier for Marathon.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News