Is an $84,000 Hepatitis Drug Too Expensive?

The debate over drug prices is heating up as insurers clash with pharmaceutical companies over a wave of expensive new products.

A pharmacist pours Truvada pills back into the bottle at Jack's Pharmacy on November 23, 2010 in San Anselmo, California.
National Journal
Sam Baker
May 29, 2014, 1 a.m.

An $84,000 hep­at­it­is drug called Sovaldi is at the cen­ter of a new battle between phar­ma­ceut­ic­al com­pan­ies and in­surers — but the fight is about much more than one drug.

Sovaldi costs $1,000 per day, or $84,000 for a full treat­ment, and cures 90 per­cent of hep­at­it­is C pa­tients who take it. In­surers say the drug is ri­dicu­lously over­priced; the phar­ma­ceut­ic­al in­dustry says it’s a steal.

But the de­bate here isn’t simply about one hep­at­it­is drug. Sovaldi is more like a single skir­mish that has reawakened a broad­er, deep­er, and high­er-stakes cold war over the cost of pre­scrip­tion drugs. Of­fi­cials in both in­dus­tries say that even if Sovaldi’s man­u­fac­turer, Gilead, slashed its prices, the newly in­tens­i­fied battle between in­surers and pharma com­pan­ies wouldn’t re­cede: Sovaldi is just the be­gin­ning.

Sovaldi is a light­ning rod be­cause in­surers and con­sumer ad­voc­ates are afraid it’s a sign of what’s to come. The drug pipeline is full of drugs like Sovaldi, and in­surers say that flood of new, ex­pens­ive products will cause health care spend­ing to skyrock­et.

“I think that this one drug is the ca­nary in the coal mine. It’s one that is out front and one of the first ones we’re see­ing, but there are a lot more down the pipeline,” said Brendan Buck, a spokes­man for Amer­ica’s Health In­sur­ance Plans.

Un­til Sovaldi, the class of products known as “spe­cialty drugs” was mainly tailored to re­l­at­ively rare con­di­tions. The drugs are com­plex, which makes them more ex­pens­ive to pro­duce, driv­ing up the price for con­sumers. And be­cause they treat rarer con­di­tions, there were few­er po­ten­tial cus­tom­ers — an­oth­er factor driv­ing up prices.

Spe­cialty drugs have al­ways been ex­pens­ive. They ac­count for roughly 25 per­cent of U.S. spend­ing on pre­scrip­tion drugs, but just 1 per­cent of all pre­scrip­tions, ac­cord­ing to a newly formed co­ali­tion lob­by­ing for lower prices.

But Sovaldi set off a par­tic­u­lar shock wave largely be­cause it treats a more com­mon ail­ment — some 3 mil­lion people have hep­at­it­is C. They can’t all af­ford an $84,000 course of treat­ment, but still, crit­ics ar­gue, the drug’s large po­ten­tial cus­tom­er base means that a once-nar­row slice of drug spend­ing could ex­plode.

“If this sets a pat­tern for oth­er drugs then we’re really in deep trouble “¦ it’s the com­bin­a­tion of the price and the volume,” said John Roth­er, who helped start the Co­ali­tion for Sus­tain­able Rx Pri­cing. The new or­gan­iz­a­tion, which also in­cludes AARP and oth­er health care ad­voc­ates, launched Wed­nes­day.

The phar­ma­ceut­ic­al in­dustry says crit­ics are miss­ing the point. Yes, Sovaldi is ex­pens­ive, it ar­gues, but that’s be­cause it works. Sovaldi cures about 90 per­cent of pa­tients with a com­mon form of hep­at­it­is C with­in its 12-week course.

Spend­ing $84,000 on a cure might seem ex­pens­ive up front, but it’s a lot more ef­fi­cient in the long run than pay­ing for a string of less ef­fect­ive treat­ments, in­clud­ing hos­pit­al­iz­a­tions that run the risk of com­plic­a­tions, the drug in­dustry says.

A re­port from Optum, a con­sult­ing sub­si­di­ary of United Health­care, agrees. Even very ex­pens­ive drugs can be cost-ef­fect­ive if they work well enough, Optum said in a re­port is­sued be­fore Sovaldi’s price was re­leased.

“It is cer­tainly pos­sible that the com­bin­a­tion of high­er cure rates and re­duced side ef­fects, com­bined with re­duced treat­ment times, may mean even great­er cost-ef­fect­ive­ness in the fu­ture,” Optum’s ana­lysts wrote.

A phar­ma­ceut­ic­al in­dustry of­fi­cial said in­surers’ ef­fort to crack down on Sovaldi and oth­er spe­cialty drugs is short-sighted. The in­sur­ance in­dustry is un­der tre­mend­ous pres­sure to keep premi­ums low, es­pe­cially in the first few years of Obama­care en­roll­ment, and it’s re­act­ing to that pres­sure by steer­ing health pro­viders and con­sumers away from products that are more ex­pens­ive in the short term, the of­fi­cial said — but is run­ning the risk of fore­go­ing longer-term sav­ings.

The ba­sic dy­nam­ics un­der­neath this ten­sion are noth­ing new: Phar­ma­ceut­ic­al com­pan­ies want in­surers to cov­er their drugs, which helps them make money; in­surers want to avoid shelling out tens of thou­sands of dol­lars for ex­pens­ive treat­ments, which helps them make money.

But the Sovaldi dust-up has turned up the in­tens­ity, as in­surers make an ag­gress­ive case that they’re not the ones to blame if rising health care costs drive up premi­ums.

“The real­ity is that the com­pany in this case is ask­ing for a blank check, and we can’t give any­one a blank check in the health care sys­tem “¦ be­cause it will blow up fam­ily budgets, it will blow up state Medi­caid budgets, it will blow up em­ploy­er be­ne­fit costs, and it will wreak hav­oc on the fed­er­al debt,” AHIP Pres­id­ent and CEO Kar­en Ig­nagni said at a re­cent event sponsored by The At­lantic.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×