Perspectives: In Our Quest To Lower Drug Costs, We Have To Keep The Patients In Mind
Editorial pages focus on these health care topics and others.
Boston Globe:
A Dangerous Plan For Rationing Essential Prescription Drugs
This past summer, Rhode Island-based CVS Caremark, the biggest pharmacy benefit manager (the intermediary between drug manufacturers and insurers), announced that it would allow its insurer clients to exclude from their plans any drugs priced greater than $100,000 per QALY. The CVS decision allows insurers to forbid access to prescription drugs that cost more than $100,000 per extra year lived in perfect health or per extra few years lived in mediocre health. (Terry Wilcox, 12/17)
Washington Examiner:
Elizabeth Warren's Silly Drugmaking Scheme
Should the U.S. government create its own chain of grocery stores — “Uncle Sam’s Club”? Should it begin a new government-run restaurant? A new government chain of gas stations — “7-Eleven Trillion,” perhaps? Should Uncle Sam build his own line of patriotic American cars (“Government Motors”)? How about government oil-drilling and coal-mining companies, or government makers of solar panels? (12/19)
The Wall Street Journal:
More Lawsuits = Higher Drug Prices
What spreads holiday cheer like a defeat for the trial lawyers? So seasons greetings from the Food and Drug Administration, which last week withdrew a destructive rule that would have enriched the tort bar at the expense of patients who rely on prescription medicines. The rule proposed by the Obama Administration in 2013 allowed generic drug makers to tailor their own safety labels, which historically must be identical to the branded product. The rule’s biggest supporter was the plaintiffs bar, which figured this would open up more opportunities for lawsuits for failing to warn consumers about all and sundry risks. The practical effect would be to make drug labels even more incomprehensible than they are now, varying among products that are chemically identical. Side effects may include confusion. (12/18)
Stat:
Cure 'Futures' Offer A Way To Pay For Million-Dollar Medicines
You could buy a futures contract as a call option for the right to purchase a therapy that has not yet been invented but is close. Individuals would pay something, say $250 a year for illustration purposes, for the right to buy a disease-specific cure at a fixed affordable amount, one that their health plan would likely cover. Contract owners who end up not needing this cure could sell their contracts to people who need or want access to it. For multiple diseases, one would need to buy multiple contracts. That annual option purchase, paid by tens of millions of people to the institutions working on cures for specific diseases, would help fund research into new drugs and make the resulting cures more affordable. Think of it as a giant Kickstarter campaign. (Maria Ferrante-Schepis, 12/14)
New England Journal of Medicine:
Disclosing Prescription-Drug Prices In Advertisements — Legal And Public Health Issues
Under a new proposed rule, television advertisements for prescription drugs and biologic products would be required to disclose the product’s list price. Although there is broad support for improving price transparency, the rule raises public health and legal concerns. (Stacie B. Dusetzina and Michelle M. Mello, 12/13)
Stat:
How Traditional Pharmacies Can Survive The Amazon Threat
Are traditional pharmacies doomed to the same fate as Borders, Blockbuster, and Sears? The threat is real.Companies like Capsule and PillPack are redesigning the pharmacy for the digital age. In addition to making it effortless to get prescription medications, these disruptors are bent on cutting out the physical store. This summer, Amazon bought PillPack, bringing heft, customer-service expertise, and gargantuan corporate ambition to the fight. (Vik Panda, 12/13)
The Hill:
Medicare Drug Proposal Will Prevent New Medicines From Coming To Market
A new threat has emerged to our country’s position as the global leader in pharma innovation and it comes from within our borders. The administration's new proposal to tie Medicare reimbursement to the price control rates paid by European single-payer states will undoubtedly harm competition and reduce the number of new medicines coming to market. As a former secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), I want to suggest another way to get to the same result rather than foreign price controls as a reference price for Medicare drugs. (Former Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson, 12/18)
The Virginia Gazette:
Seeking Clarity On Drug Pricing
Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar wants to make prescription drug pricing more transparent. We agree, but his well-intentioned plan will only confuse and mislead consumers. What's the good of listing drug prices in advertising if almost no one pays that "list price?" When patients say, "My drugs are too expensive," they're not talking about the list price — they're talking about their co-pays at the pharmacy. (Peter J. Pitts and Merrill Matthews, 12/11)
