Drug Cost Debate from the Middle Seat
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to speak at a conference hosted by AHIP (America’s Health Insurance Plans) in Chicago. While on the way back to Kansas City, I was seated next to a Sales Director for a Pharma company and a Physician who specialized in Oncology. After normal pleasantries were exchanged, we hadn’t even pushed back from the gate before the conversation about drug costs had been sparked between the two. It was an interesting discussion with great questions/responses and points made from both of their respective viewpoints.
The Pharma Sales Director truly believes that, despite making “boatloads" of money, their mission as a company is philanthropic in nature and changes peoples lives. On the other side, the physician felt strongly that it was highway robbery charging over $100k for a course of therapy during one of, if not the most emotional time in a person’s life.
As I sat quietly for the first half of the flight listening and analyzing, I began to think about their respective viewpoints and how the media coverage and political attention are affecting this discussion across the nation. Eventually I jumped in and asked, “What about the patient? How is their opinion factored in? As we enter the ‘Consumerization of Healthcare,’ shouldn’t they be involved and empowered to have conversations about the therapy choices being made with their physician?”
There are many ways to get from point A to point B to manage a specific health condition, as more and more of the cost is pushed on to consumers, empowering them to be involved in this process doesn’t seem like a “nice to have,” to me it seems essential.
Sales Leader | Senior Recruiter | Creative Problem Solver
9 年I think you're talking about two distinctly different things here: drug cost and patient education and advocacy. Are drug prices high? Yes they are. How much of this money goes back into R&D? Depends on the company, but upwards of 35% to 40%. Regarding patient education and advocacy, "what about the patient", patient-centric healthcare and quality outcomes (based largely on patient feedback) are central themes within the Affordable Care Act. So, to answer the question, of course patient opinion should be factored in. I believe that this collaboration is important within the care continuum. There is a rub however. HCPs are in the absolute best position to determine what a course of treatment should be. Example: a Rheumatologist could prescribe an inexpensive three drug cocktail that is semi-effective at symptomatic treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis, or she could prescribe a fairly expensive biologic that will work quickly, maintain efficacy, and most importantly protect the patient over the long term. Said differently, what is the cost of disability? I'll attempt to tackle this question with a blog entry. Potential Title: "Why Managed Care Organizations Don't Care About Long Term Outcomes"
Director of Talent Acquisition @ Jane Technologies, Inc.
9 年Remember the Golden Rule - those who have the gold make the rules!
P4K Executive Chairman
9 年I'll read it; is this coach or first class
The major issue that I have with the capitalistic system in the United States is that the issues always seem to devolve to money. Those who have an idea sell it and those who have money buy it and reap the benefits. Unfortunately, in areas such as medical care, as the author so astutely points out, what happens to the consumer (in this case the patient). Who does the system serve when lifesaving medical care is only available to those wealthy enough to afford the high costs? Should a long and healthy life only be available to the highest bidders?
The cost of a drugs is relative to its development. Within Oncology, many are looking at versatile Oncology drugs that can be used on more than one cancer site rather than focusing on one with the potential expense of repositioning. If you look at the pipeline across the big pharma as a whole, the oncology pipeline is far larger than any other therapy area, with 6,484 products in active development across all oncology indications. The majority of these are in the early stages of development: some 2,937 are in the preclinical stage, and 1,591 are in the discovery stage. Joining heads is more and more common because of this and deal values can vary drastically from several billion to less than $10m. A range of factors, such as deal type, drug stage of development and intent-to-treat population, are critical in determining how much a deal is worth - first-in-class status as having a significant influence on deal value