Experts debate affordability of myeloma drugs at ASCO

CHICAGO – Are today’s myeloma drugs affordable? Two Mayo Clinic researchers agreed that costs are high but not whether the price is offset by the value.

“I don’t think there is any debate here. It’s like debating whether the Earth is flat or not,” S. Vincent Rajkumar, MD, of Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said during a debate at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. “These drugs are expensive.”

“I would trust Dr. Rajkumar with my life if I were diagnosed with myeloma,” countered Rafael Fonseca, MD, of Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Ariz., “But I think he’s wrong on drug economics.”

Dr. Rajkumar said the total lifetime costs to treat all patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2017 were $22.4 billion, a “conservative estimate” that excluded hospital, infusion, laboratory, imaging, physician, nursing, and ancillary costs.

“Every single drug is expensive,” he said, referring to newer approved myeloma therapies that cost up to $192,000/year individually, and up to $590,000/year in triplet or quadruplet combination regimens, according to estimates he included in a related article he wrote for the 2018 ASCO Educational Book.

Of $50 billion spent in 2017 on cancer drugs, 80% of that spending was based on just 35 drugs, of which 6 were myeloma drugs – and myeloma is just 1% of all cancers. “Maybe it’s because of all the progress we’ve made in myeloma, but unless you think none of the other cancers should have the type of progress we have, this is not going to be affordable,” Dr. Rajkumar said.

Drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017 cost $100,000/year or more, with an average of $150,000/year, according to Dr. Rajkumar. He compared that with the average U.S. annual gross household income of $52,000, saying that the high price of drugs has contributed to compliance problems and medical bankruptcy.

While Dr. Fonseca agreed that drug prices are “skyrocketing,” he challenged the notion that the increases were not affordable in his presentation and an associated ASCO Educational Book article.

In his talk, Dr. Fonseca said the availability of new myeloma drugs has led to “astounding” improvements in overall survival, but today’s best drugs are still not good enough. “We cannot afford to stop innovation and the move forward as we are ever so close to curing a large fraction of myeloma patients,” he said.

The increasing cost of drugs has been offset by societal and health effects, Dr. Fonseca argued.

The war on cancer from 1988 to 2000 added 23 million additional life-years, which has equated to $1.9 trillion in social value for Americans, according to one analysis he cited. In one myeloma-specific study, investigators found myeloma drug costs increased from $36,607 in 2004 to $109,544 in 2009, but those increases were balanced out by $67,900 in health benefits.

Although the financial impact of myeloma on the individual patient can be significant, it’s not bankruptcies, but out-of-pocket costs such as copayments, that have the most direct effect on patients, Dr. Fonseca said. Research shows medical bankruptcies are not associated with drug copayments, he added, but rather other medical expenses, such as hospital and physician bills, along with loss of income and limited savings.

Dr. Rajkumar – unconvinced that myeloma drugs are currently affordable – urged action on several fronts, including value-based pricing or tying the price of a drug to how much value it produces.

The Medicare program has to be able to negotiate prices, he added, and patients should be allowed to reimport cancer drugs from other countries for personal use. He also pushed for more to be done to facilitate the entry of generics and biosimilars into the marketplace.

He also called for a relaxation of FDA regulations to lower drug development costs. “We have so many regulations so that every T is crossed and every I is dotted, to the point that it costs $30,000, $40,000 per patient to do a trial,” he said.

But Dr. Fonseca opposed market interference, saying that price controls would kill innovation.

“The patented drugs of today are the generics of the future, and absent innovation, we won’t have future generics,” he said in his presentation. “Price fixing kills innovation. ... So if we engage in that, today’s best is simply the best there is going to be.”

Dr. Rajkumar reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Fonseca reported consulting work with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Bayer, Janssen, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Sanofi, Kite Pharma, and Juno Therapeutics, and scientific advisory board work with Adaptive Biotechnologies.

CHICAGO – Are today’s myeloma drugs affordable? Two Mayo Clinic researchers agreed that costs are high but not whether the price is offset by the value.

“I don’t think there is any debate here. It’s like debating whether the Earth is flat or not,” S. Vincent Rajkumar, MD, of Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said during a debate at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. “These drugs are expensive.”

“I would trust Dr. Rajkumar with my life if I were diagnosed with myeloma,” countered Rafael Fonseca, MD, of Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Ariz., “But I think he’s wrong on drug economics.”

Dr. Rajkumar said the total lifetime costs to treat all patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2017 were $22.4 billion, a “conservative estimate” that excluded hospital, infusion, laboratory, imaging, physician, nursing, and ancillary costs.

“Every single drug is expensive,” he said, referring to newer approved myeloma therapies that cost up to $192,000/year individually, and up to $590,000/year in triplet or quadruplet combination regimens, according to estimates he included in a related article he wrote for the 2018 ASCO Educational Book.

Of $50 billion spent in 2017 on cancer drugs, 80% of that spending was based on just 35 drugs, of which 6 were myeloma drugs – and myeloma is just 1% of all cancers. “Maybe it’s because of all the progress we’ve made in myeloma, but unless you think none of the other cancers should have the type of progress we have, this is not going to be affordable,” Dr. Rajkumar said.

Drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017 cost $100,000/year or more, with an average of $150,000/year, according to Dr. Rajkumar. He compared that with the average U.S. annual gross household income of $52,000, saying that the high price of drugs has contributed to compliance problems and medical bankruptcy.

While Dr. Fonseca agreed that drug prices are “skyrocketing,” he challenged the notion that the increases were not affordable in his presentation and an associated ASCO Educational Book article.

In his talk, Dr. Fonseca said the availability of new myeloma drugs has led to “astounding” improvements in overall survival, but today’s best drugs are still not good enough. “We cannot afford to stop innovation and the move forward as we are ever so close to curing a large fraction of myeloma patients,” he said.

The increasing cost of drugs has been offset by societal and health effects, Dr. Fonseca argued.

The war on cancer from 1988 to 2000 added 23 million additional life-years, which has equated to $1.9 trillion in social value for Americans, according to one analysis he cited. In one myeloma-specific study, investigators found myeloma drug costs increased from $36,607 in 2004 to $109,544 in 2009, but those increases were balanced out by $67,900 in health benefits.

Although the financial impact of myeloma on the individual patient can be significant, it’s not bankruptcies, but out-of-pocket costs such as copayments, that have the most direct effect on patients, Dr. Fonseca said. Research shows medical bankruptcies are not associated with drug copayments, he added, but rather other medical expenses, such as hospital and physician bills, along with loss of income and limited savings.

Dr. Rajkumar – unconvinced that myeloma drugs are currently affordable – urged action on several fronts, including value-based pricing or tying the price of a drug to how much value it produces.

The Medicare program has to be able to negotiate prices, he added, and patients should be allowed to reimport cancer drugs from other countries for personal use. He also pushed for more to be done to facilitate the entry of generics and biosimilars into the marketplace.

He also called for a relaxation of FDA regulations to lower drug development costs. “We have so many regulations so that every T is crossed and every I is dotted, to the point that it costs $30,000, $40,000 per patient to do a trial,” he said.

But Dr. Fonseca opposed market interference, saying that price controls would kill innovation.

“The patented drugs of today are the generics of the future, and absent innovation, we won’t have future generics,” he said in his presentation. “Price fixing kills innovation. ... So if we engage in that, today’s best is simply the best there is going to be.”

Dr. Rajkumar reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Fonseca reported consulting work with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Bayer, Janssen, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Sanofi, Kite Pharma, and Juno Therapeutics, and scientific advisory board work with Adaptive Biotechnologies.

CHICAGO – Are today’s myeloma drugs affordable? Two Mayo Clinic researchers agreed that costs are high but not whether the price is offset by the value.

“I don’t think there is any debate here. It’s like debating whether the Earth is flat or not,” S. Vincent Rajkumar, MD, of Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said during a debate at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. “These drugs are expensive.”

“I would trust Dr. Rajkumar with my life if I were diagnosed with myeloma,” countered Rafael Fonseca, MD, of Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Ariz., “But I think he’s wrong on drug economics.”

Dr. Rajkumar said the total lifetime costs to treat all patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2017 were $22.4 billion, a “conservative estimate” that excluded hospital, infusion, laboratory, imaging, physician, nursing, and ancillary costs.

“Every single drug is expensive,” he said, referring to newer approved myeloma therapies that cost up to $192,000/year individually, and up to $590,000/year in triplet or quadruplet combination regimens, according to estimates he included in a related article he wrote for the 2018 ASCO Educational Book.

Of $50 billion spent in 2017 on cancer drugs, 80% of that spending was based on just 35 drugs, of which 6 were myeloma drugs – and myeloma is just 1% of all cancers. “Maybe it’s because of all the progress we’ve made in myeloma, but unless you think none of the other cancers should have the type of progress we have, this is not going to be affordable,” Dr. Rajkumar said.

Drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017 cost $100,000/year or more, with an average of $150,000/year, according to Dr. Rajkumar. He compared that with the average U.S. annual gross household income of $52,000, saying that the high price of drugs has contributed to compliance problems and medical bankruptcy.

While Dr. Fonseca agreed that drug prices are “skyrocketing,” he challenged the notion that the increases were not affordable in his presentation and an associated ASCO Educational Book article.

In his talk, Dr. Fonseca said the availability of new myeloma drugs has led to “astounding” improvements in overall survival, but today’s best drugs are still not good enough. “We cannot afford to stop innovation and the move forward as we are ever so close to curing a large fraction of myeloma patients,” he said.

The increasing cost of drugs has been offset by societal and health effects, Dr. Fonseca argued.

The war on cancer from 1988 to 2000 added 23 million additional life-years, which has equated to $1.9 trillion in social value for Americans, according to one analysis he cited. In one myeloma-specific study, investigators found myeloma drug costs increased from $36,607 in 2004 to $109,544 in 2009, but those increases were balanced out by $67,900 in health benefits.

Although the financial impact of myeloma on the individual patient can be significant, it’s not bankruptcies, but out-of-pocket costs such as copayments, that have the most direct effect on patients, Dr. Fonseca said. Research shows medical bankruptcies are not associated with drug copayments, he added, but rather other medical expenses, such as hospital and physician bills, along with loss of income and limited savings.

Dr. Rajkumar – unconvinced that myeloma drugs are currently affordable – urged action on several fronts, including value-based pricing or tying the price of a drug to how much value it produces.

The Medicare program has to be able to negotiate prices, he added, and patients should be allowed to reimport cancer drugs from other countries for personal use. He also pushed for more to be done to facilitate the entry of generics and biosimilars into the marketplace.

He also called for a relaxation of FDA regulations to lower drug development costs. “We have so many regulations so that every T is crossed and every I is dotted, to the point that it costs $30,000, $40,000 per patient to do a trial,” he said.

But Dr. Fonseca opposed market interference, saying that price controls would kill innovation.

“The patented drugs of today are the generics of the future, and absent innovation, we won’t have future generics,” he said in his presentation. “Price fixing kills innovation. ... So if we engage in that, today’s best is simply the best there is going to be.”

Dr. Rajkumar reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Fonseca reported consulting work with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Bayer, Janssen, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Sanofi, Kite Pharma, and Juno Therapeutics, and scientific advisory board work with Adaptive Biotechnologies.