U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old Yesterday, 09:24 AM
 
Location: Denver CO
21,524 posts, read 12,143,850 times
Reputation: 32811

Advertisements

Some actual facts

Quote:
Developing a new prescription medicine that gains marketing approval is estimated to cost drugmakers $2.6 billion according to a recent study by Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development and published in the Journal of Health Economics. This is up from $802 million in 2003—equal to approximately $1 billion in 2013 dollars, and thus a 145 percent increase in the ten year study gap. Furthermore, while the average time it takes to bring a drug through clinical trials has decreased, the rate of success has gone down by almost half, to just 12 percent.
https://www.policymed.com/2014/12/a-...inical-de.html

same article - close to 90% of drugs will fail in development before ever getting to the point of being sold

Quote:
“Based on an analysis of 1,442 experimental drugs that were in clinical tests in recent years through the end of 2013, DiMasi said the overall chance that a drug entering clinical development will be approved for marketing is just under 12 percent.”

“Approximately seven out of eight compounds that enter the clinical testing pipeline will fail in development,” DiMasi said. “Put another way, you need to put an average of 8.5 compounds in clinical development to get one approval.”

Seiffert notes that DiMasi arrived at the 12 percent figure using a “weighted average, since as of the study, just 7 percent of the 1,442 drugs had actually been approved. Fully 80 percent had been abandoned by the companies developing them, and the other 13 percent were still in active development. DiMasi said it’s likely that many of the drugs in later development will eventually earn approval, hence the overall 12 percent rate.”
Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 10:53 AM
 
Location: In a vehicle.
5,184 posts, read 3,327,038 times
Reputation: 8478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cida View Post
Really frightening.

Drug to Treat Rare Disease Costs Millions
Pricing Creates a Crisis

Dawn Patterson keeps a multimillion-dollar drug in the fridge, next to a bottle of root beer and a jar of salsa.
“My jaw really did drop,” Ms. Patterson said. “I was like, what? This is crazy

https://www.dangolka.com/the-6-million-drug-claim/
It was long called "Orphan Diseases" few get them and fewer can afford treatment. However, if govt had its way, this family would find they might not get it.

I'm glad the union paid and glad they spoke with the pharmaceutical company and got the cost down. But how horrible to be in that situation. Relief is a fridge away and $6 million also...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:43 PM
 
30,631 posts, read 47,841,301 times
Reputation: 16492
So headline was semi-misleading—
6/3=2 million per person...

1–does a pharmaceutical company HAVE to reduce the price once it’s made back its research costs? I don’t think so...because how does anyone really know what those research costs were? There are no itemized expenditures that insurance companies get access to showing the ROI for any particular drug...

2–if there are any Medicare or Medicaid users likely the government covers full cost PLUS what the company is losing to negotiated reductions to private insurance companies like the Boilermakers’ Union...

And yes I understand that new medications can be very expensive
But what did the wife do BEFORE this med came along?
And WHEN did she know she has a rare, incureable, expensive disease?
Before or after having children?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:47 PM
 
30,631 posts, read 47,841,301 times
Reputation: 16492
And then there is the “new” treatment for sepsis—the generalized blood poisoning that comes when the body’s immune system can’t fight infection...

Vitamin C and steroids IV in large doses—
Read article about ER doctor that tried new treatment on patient that was so close to dying it was a forlorn hope of a cure—
But it worked...
Tried it on several other critical, near death patients with positive results
Wrote a paper about it
Other ER doctors in his hospital system tried it w/positive results
The issue??
Getting it approved as “standard practice” and the fact that drug companies won’t want to deal with it because the ingredients are too cheap/no copy=write...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Denver CO
21,524 posts, read 12,143,850 times
Reputation: 32811
Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
And then there is the “new” treatment for sepsis—the generalized blood poisoning that comes when the body’s immune system can’t fight infection...

Vitamin C and steroids IV in large doses—
Read article about ER doctor that tried new treatment on patient that was so close to dying it was a forlorn hope of a cure—
But it worked...
Tried it on several other critical, near death patients with positive results
Wrote a paper about it
Other ER doctors in his hospital system tried it w/positive results
The issue??
Getting it approved as “standard practice” and the fact that drug companies won’t want to deal with it because the ingredients are too cheap/no copy=write...
There are multiple studies that have taken or are taking place on this. That's standard for a new treatment. There are multiple funding sources including foundations, the NIH, and academic medical centers which conduct all kinds of research.

Here are just a few

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/...ler+AND+sepsis

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/...3422159&rank=1

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03509350

That last one is huge, 2000 subjects being conducted at 43 sites across the US
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Middle of the ocean
32,600 posts, read 20,524,239 times
Reputation: 47044
My monthly shot of Taltz is $5,600.

They are giving it to me for $25 a month, because my insurance wanted me to try other medications first, and my doctor knew they wouldn't work.

If they stop the program I'll have to play the game with my insurance.
__________________
____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:12 PM
 
7,675 posts, read 2,327,129 times
Reputation: 9357
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74 View Post
Some actual facts



https://www.policymed.com/2014/12/a-...inical-de.html

same article - close to 90% of drugs will fail in development before ever getting to the point of being sold
Why aren't Pharma companies broke? Since it "costs" so much to develop the drugs?

They continue to post billions in profits.If it's so unprofitable, they'd go under. They don't.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:53 PM
 
Location: Denver CO
21,524 posts, read 12,143,850 times
Reputation: 32811
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
Why aren't Pharma companies broke? Since it "costs" so much to develop the drugs?

They continue to post billions in profits.If it's so unprofitable, they'd go under. They don't.
No one but you said that high costs equal unprofitability, but that doesn't mean that those costs don't exist
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 03:41 PM
 
5,698 posts, read 8,238,240 times
Reputation: 5981
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
It's a fact. If you want to research it, go ahead. I'm not your secretary. Otherwise stay ignorant.

As always, completely stunned by the lack of effort put forth by those who claim to be "knowledgable." It's almost like they don't want to know what they don't know. Eliminates accountability.
There are 0-ZERO-drugs to treat my disease. It is RARE. The disease in the article is RARE. There are no choices in treatment. Most of the time there is no treatment. So yeah cite your sources.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:03 PM
 
7,675 posts, read 2,327,129 times
Reputation: 9357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spazkat9696 View Post
There are 0-ZERO-drugs to treat my disease. It is RARE. The disease in the article is RARE. There are no choices in treatment. Most of the time there is no treatment. So yeah cite your sources.
Right.

And my statement was about the fact that the industry continues to produce me-too drugs. A slight variation on something that already exists. For the only sake of profitability.

Which means YOUR rare disease? Not profitable. They'll never make a drug. They'll never bother with it, no money in it.

You are actually AGREEING with me. Shocking, I know.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top