Here we address questions regarding the affordability of RIT
...
Emphasizing that our efforts on behalf of
RIT are done for one purpose: to ensure that patients
have access to this effective class of drugs, and that research is
not crippled by short-sighted policy decisions, no matter how
well-intentioned.
We underscore that Patients Against Lymphoma is
a patient-centered non-profit group, which is independent
of health industry funding. That is, we have no financial
conflict of interest in this matter.
Q: Are the sponsors charging too much for
Bexxar and Zevalin?
It's worth noting
that for RIT there are two approved agents (Bexxar and Zevalin) and
therefore, atypically, price competition is already in effect
for these new agents - and
for Bexxar when it was first approved
Furthermore, the price of Zevalin (as best we can
tell) did not edge downward when Bexxar also won marketing
approval.
We think these facts are very good
indications that manufacturing and development costs are the primary
reasons these biological agents cost so much to provide ... and that
it is not a result of greed.
Finally, CMS policy of cutting reimbursements so
far is exclusive to radioimmunotherapy - a treatment for lymphoma.
Other similarly expensive targeted biological therapies have not
been treated the same.
CMS
discriminates against this "organ," but not others,
based on misinformation. The supply is cut despite warnings of
ASCO, ASH, the sponsor, and many nonprofit groups that CMS has
made an error: has grossly underestimated the costs. http://lymphomation.org/wordpress/?p=14
.
Q: Can society afford to pay for expensive
therapies for cancers?
We think you have to
compare the one-time cost of an effective agent against the costs of
repeated use less effective therapies - financial and to the
patient.
Regarding the costs of
RIT, it should be noted that it is probably less expensive than
Rituxan-based chemotherapy, which is given repeatedly in six or
eight infusions; and certainly it is less expensive (and less
dangerous) than stem cell transplantation:
Notably, the alternative to RIT will many times be death, or rescue via more toxic, less effective or higher-risk therapy and more expensive in-patient treatments, such as stem cell transplantation, which is contraindicated in older patients the population most dependent on Medicare.
http://www.lymphomation.org/CMS-RIT.pdf
From our perspective the
price of a car (approximately 32K) is not too much to pay for
getting your life back. And with your life back you can earn and pay
taxes (give back to society, instead being a burden to society and
your dependents).
To make good decisions we must consider all the information, not just a few parts of it. CMS (Centers for Medicaid and Medicare) has failed miserably on this account with its decision to cut reimbursements to hospitals in half for radioimmunotherapies (bexxar and zevalin).
They have not tallied the significant benefits of RIT in their equations: Allowing patients with disease resistant to chemotherapy a good chance to be productive members of society; allowing parents to live longer and better so they can nurture and provide for their families. These are among the many invaluable and incalculable returns on investments the reason our society rewards development of innovative health
products.
http://lymphomation.org/wordpress/?p=14
Radioimmunotherapy,
combines the potency of radiotherapy with immunotherapy in a
targeted way, thus offering an effective platform to build on:
*
as first primary therapy (already producing durable remission that suggests
cure)
* as therapy to achieve responses in patients refractory to chemotherapy (already demonstrated)
* as therapy to achieve complete remissions in patients with transformed indolent lymphoma (already demonstrated)
* as consolidation to first primary chemotherapy - already showing improvements in CR rates and durations of remission in controlled trials (current randomized clinical trial recruiting patients)
* as therapy to be followed by patient-specific vaccines, or other immunotherapies.
* as conditioning prior to autologous stem cell transplants (already showing promise and improved safety of Total Body Irradiation (TBI)
* as therapy to be combined with adoptive immunotherapy (infusions of NK cells or immune modulating agents to build on the vaccine-like effect?
* as an effective option for patients who relapse following stem cell transplant (a significant need)
Q: Why are
biological therapies more expensive?
We are developing this section.
For now, see Monoclonal antibodies for a concise overview of
how they are made - http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Monoclonals.html
Q: Why is it
important to everyone that companies make a profit on the therapies
they invent and bring to market?
It is estimated that it
costs approximately one billion dollars to develop and test a new
cancer therapies, and that the failure rate is exceedingly
high.
Because of the benefits
we receive from effectively treating disease (touched on above) our
society has wisely chosen to provide an incentive system to ensure
that
Thus policy that
undermines the ability of companies to profit from developing new
cancer therapies must be challenged and overturned ...
... particularly now, that
we are beginning to see genuine returns on our investments: patients
living longer, more productively, and better with lymphomas and
other cancers.
Further
Reading:
s
Lymphoma