Cancer drugs in the United States: Justum Pretium--the just price.

In 2011, health care spending in the United States was estimated at $2.7 trillion,1 making it the sixth largest economy in the world, larger than the national budget of France. National health care spending is approximately 18% of the US gross domestic product, more than $8,000 per person, compared with 6% to 9% in Europe and elsewhere, with apparently similar patient outcomes. Total Medicare expenditures in 2011 were $549 billion.2 A study comparing the Canadian universal health care program in older patients with the Medicare program in the United States suggested that adopting more-prudent health care strategies could have saved $2.56 trillion from 1980 to 2009, or approximately one fifth of our national debt, without compromising benefit.3 In the debate about health care and Medicare solvency, strategies that reduce health care costs without compromising treatment efficacy and patient safety should be explored. Several experts have addressed health care costs in excellent analyses and editorials,4–9 but their efforts have not translated into concrete decisions and results that benefit patients, providers, insurers, or payees. However, an interesting exception occurred recently when Bach et al,10 in a New York Times editorial, compared the efficacy and cost of two anticancer agents—ziv-aflibercept (Zaltrap; sanofi-aventis, Bridgewater, NJ) and bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA)—in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. After noting ziv-aflibercept had similar efficacy but was twice the cost of bevacizumab, they stated it would be excluded from their hospital formulary.10 Within 1 week, sanofi-aventis, the company producing ziv-aflibercept, reduced its price by 50%. Thus, expert review of anticancer therapies for their cost-benefit ratios may influence institutional usage and drug pricing while preserving a healthy profit margin for pharmaceutical companies. Aristotle is credited to be the first to discuss the relationship between price and worth in his book Justum Pretium—the just price. Sixteen centuries later, Saint Albert the Great and Saint Thomas Aquinas refined Aristotle's argument. Their conclusion: of moral necessity, price must reflect worth. In the context of cancer therapy, the prices of new anticancer agents seem to be decided by pharmaceutical companies according to what the market will bear. There is little correlation between the actual efficacy of a new drug and its price, as measured by cost-efficacy (CE) ratios, prolongation of patient life in years, or quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).7 Compared with a decade ago, the price range of new anticancer agents has more than doubled, from $4,500 to more than $10,000 per month.4,5 Of the 12 anticancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2012, only three prolonged survival, two of them by less than 2 months. Yet nine were priced at more than $10,000 per month. Many so-called targeted therapies have been priced between $6,000 to 12,000 per month, or approximately $70,000 to 115,000 per patient annually (Table 1).11 However, novel or reformulated chemotherapy drugs like pralatrexate (Folotyn; Allos Therapeutics, Westminster, CO; $120,000 per course), omacetaxine (Synribo; Teva Pharmaceuticals, North Wales, PA; $28,000 for induction, $14,000 for monthly treatments), and pegylated asparaginase (Oncaspar; Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals, Gaithersburg, MD; $22,000 per course) are also expensive. Hillner and Smith7 suggested that profiteering (ie, making profit by unethical methods, such as raising prices after natural disasters) could be applied to this recent trend, where a life-threatening disease is the natural disaster. Table 1. Cost of Targeted Therapy Pharmaceutical companies justify the high price of drugs as necessary to support investment in research and development. The often-cited cost of bringing anticancer drugs to FDA approval is $1 billion.12 This figure is roughly calculated by dividing total expenditures on research and development by the number of agents that receive FDA approval. However, this figure may be inflated, because it includes ancillary expenses, salaries, bonuses, and other indirect costs not related to research or development13 as well as an 11% compounded discount rate over 10 years based on stock market returns on capital investment.14 Other independent estimates of cost of drug development put the figure as low as 4% to 25% of this estimate.15–17 Allowing the producer-dominated market to set drug prices has spiraled the cost of cancer drugs out of control. In this analysis, we highlight examples of the cost benefit of different anticancer agents and suggest scenarios for reduced drug pricing, while preserving the profit-making incentive, by linking price to a true measure of quality: preservation and meaningful prolongation of life.

[1]  D. Cella,et al.  Randomized phase II trial of first-line treatment with sorafenib versus interferon Alfa-2a in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[2]  P. Murawa,et al.  Erlotinib Plus Gemcitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase III Trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group , 2023, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  D. Schadendorf,et al.  Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  Jeffrey Aronson,et al.  The $800 Million Pill: The Truth Behind the Cost of New Drugs , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  H. Kantarjian,et al.  The Chronic Leukemias , 2011 .

[6]  P. Bach Limits on Medicare's ability to control rising spending on cancer drugs. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  H. Kantarjian,et al.  Estimations of the increasing prevalence and plateau prevalence of chronic myeloid leukemia in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy , 2012, Cancer.

[8]  Elizabeth Warren,et al.  Medical bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: results of a national study. , 2009, The American journal of medicine.

[9]  C. Grady,et al.  How much is life worth: cetuximab, non-small cell lung cancer, and the $440 billion question. , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  St. Thomas Aquinas: Economics of the Just Society , 2012 .

[11]  Axel Hoos,et al.  Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  E. Small,et al.  Bevacizumab plus interferon alfa compared with interferon alfa monotherapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: CALGB 90206. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  Merrill Goozner,et al.  The $800 Million Pill: The Truth behind the Cost of New Drugs , 2004 .

[14]  E. Elkin,et al.  Cancer's next frontier: addressing high and increasing costs. , 2010, JAMA.

[15]  M. Angell The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It , 2004 .

[16]  David M. Dilts,et al.  Steps and time to process clinical trials at the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  Robert Gray,et al.  Development of Clinical Trials in a Cooperative Group Setting: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group , 2008, Clinical Cancer Research.

[18]  D. Himmelstein,et al.  Cost control in a parallel universe: Medicare spending in the United States and Canada. , 2012, Archives of internal medicine.

[19]  K. Rascati The $64,000 question--what is a quality-adjusted life-year worth? , 2006, Clinical therapeutics.

[20]  R. Kurzrock,et al.  Cancer: the road to Amiens. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[21]  Bohuslav Melichar,et al.  Bevacizumab plus interferon alfa-2a for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, double-blind phase III trial , 2007, The Lancet.

[22]  Xin Huang,et al.  Overall Survival and Updated Results for Sunitinib Compared With Interferon Alfa in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  R. W. Hansen,et al.  The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. , 2003, Journal of health economics.

[24]  R. Kurzrock,et al.  Equipoise lost: ethics, costs, and the regulation of cancer clinical research. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  Thomas J. Smith,et al.  Efficacy does not necessarily translate to cost effectiveness: a case study in the challenges associated with 21st-century cancer drug pricing. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[26]  V. Zárate DALYs and QALYs in developing countries. , 2007, Health affairs.

[27]  Eric J Feuer,et al.  Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. , 2011, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[28]  T. Eberlein,et al.  Improved Survival with Vemurafenib in Melanoma with BRAF V600E Mutation , 2012 .

[29]  David M Dilts,et al.  Invisible barriers to clinical trials: the impact of structural, infrastructural, and procedural barriers to opening oncology clinical trials. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[30]  D. Steensma The ordinary miracle of cancer clinical trials. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  M. Baccarani,et al.  Dasatinib or imatinib in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia: 2-year follow-up from a randomized phase 3 trial (DASISION). , 2012, Blood.

[32]  I. Flinn,et al.  Nilotinib versus imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase, Philadelphia chromosome-positive, chronic myeloid leukaemia: 24-month minimum follow-up of the phase 3 randomised ENESTnd trial. , 2011, The Lancet. Oncology.

[33]  C. Sternberg,et al.  Pazopanib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[34]  P. Gibbs,et al.  Bending the cost curve in cancer care. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[35]  R. Kurzrock,et al.  Electrocardiograms (ECGs) in phase I anticancer drug development: the MD Anderson Cancer Center experience with 8518 ECGs. , 2012, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[36]  David McDermott,et al.  Temsirolimus, interferon alfa, or both for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[37]  D. Light,et al.  Demythologizing the high costs of pharmaceutical research , 2011 .

[38]  S. Zenios,et al.  An empiric estimate of the value of life: updating the renal dialysis cost-effectiveness standard. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[39]  S. Nass,et al.  A National Cancer Clinical Trials Network: Recommendations From the Institute of Medicine , 2011, American journal of therapeutics.