Sector News

U.S. poised to spend $50B on just 10 ‘breakthrough’ meds in 10 years

June 9, 2015
Life sciences
U.S. payers are striking out at drug spending again. This time, they’re not lamenting their own spending on pricey meds. They’re highlighting the cost to taxpayers–and according to a commissioned report, 10 hot new “breakthrough” meds are expected to cost publicly funded healthcare plans more than $50 billion over the next decade.
 
Among that group of 10 FDA-designated breakthrough drugs are Merck & Co.’s cancer treatment Keytruda, Regeneron and Bayer’s eye drug Eylea, and Bristol-Myers Squibb’s forthcoming hepatitis C drug daclatasvir. Other hep C drugs and cancer meds, plus the Vertex Pharmaceuticals cystic fibrosis treatment Kalydeco, round out the list.
 
Commissioned by the trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the report from Avalere estimates the 10 drugs will cost Medicare $31.3 billion, Medicaid $15.8 billion and health-exchange plans $2.1 billion over the coming 10 years.
 
The report outlines its methods–estimating utilization and calculating government programs’ share, for instance. It also admits one key thing: The quoted drug costs are for the meds alone, and don’t take into account any potential savings that drug therapy might deliver to the healthcare system.
 
Hep C, for instance. Gilead Sciences has maintained that its pricey treatments Sovaldi and Harvoni are worth the cost because they cure a disease with costly complications such as hospitalizations, liver transplants and liver cancer; the same might be said of the hep C treatments from BMS, Merck and AbbVie mentioned in this report.
 
Then again, these numbers also don’t include many, many drugs coming to market. These are just 10 of the drugs that earned the FDA’s “breakthrough” designation. There are more–and even more forthcoming meds that aren’t in the breakthrough category. The numbers also leave out indications that didn’t win the breakthrough tag. And they don’t include spending by the Veterans Administration or Department of Defense.
 
“This is an enormous price tag for only 10 drugs, and it’s just the tip of the pharmaceutical iceberg and a fraction of the costs that patients in the country will bear for prescription drugs,” AHIP interim CEO Dan Durham said during a phone conference on the report (as quoted by MedPage Today).
 
AHIP says this level of spending on new meds won’t just hit Medicare and Medicaid, but will also lead to higher insurance premiums–particularly new drugs that treat common diseases. That’s not just hep C; Keytruda, for instance, is poised to win approval in lung cancer, the most common type of cancer in the U.S.–and its list price is around $150,000. “Looking ahead, therapies that come with a high cost and serve a large patient population are most likely to have an impact on government costs and consumer premiums,” the report noted.
 
By Tracy Staton
 

comments closed

Related News

November 28, 2021

Founder-led biotech is making space for ideas—and diverse leaders—where it didn’t exist before

Life sciences

Decades ago, the founder-led biotech was rare and considered the tougher path to follow. Now there is a trend of founder-led biotechs that have risen in prominence in recent years, going from startup to well known with lightning speed. Scientists-turned C-suite occupants know their technology inside out. They’ve got credibility both at the bench working with their research teams and in the boardrooms selling their future products.

November 28, 2021

Pfizer to become $100B behemoth next year thanks to COVID-19 drug and vaccine: analyst

Life sciences

Pfizer’s revenue could reach $101.3 billion in 2022, with major contributions coming from the company’s BioNTech-partnered COVID vaccine and an antiviral therapeutic that has shown stellar clinical data, SVB Leerink analyst Geoffrey Porges projected in a Monday note to clients.

November 28, 2021

GlaxoSmithKline takes aim at sick pay access inequities with microgrant program and new campaign

Life sciences

In a survey commissioned by GlaxoSmithKline’s consumer health division of 2,000 working people in the U.S., almost 70% admitted to clocking in while sick, often because they couldn’t afford to lose a day’s pay. Black and Latina women were 10% more likely than white women to shun taking sick time for fear of fallout from their boss, according to the company’s 2021 Temperature Check Report.

Send this to a friend