Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Health Law Surprise Is Page 1,617 Demanding Which Drugs Work

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:37 PM
Original message
Health Law Surprise Is Page 1,617 Demanding Which Drugs Work
By Alex Nussbaum, Meg Tirrell and Pat Wechsler

March 25 (Bloomberg) -- Page 1,617 of the 2,400-page law signed by President Barack Obama this week -- the most sweeping change to U.S. health-care in 45 years -- sparked little of the debate surrounding the expansion of coverage to 32 million Americans or its tax on employees’ “Cadillac” insurance plans.

Yet the 43-page measure tucked inside the bill may have a far greater effect on medical care.

The overhaul creates an institute, funded with $500 million or more annually, to spur studies of which drugs, devices and medical procedures work best. The boost for comparative- effectiveness research, as the field is known among health experts, will increase scrutiny on treatments used by millions of Americans, including cholesterol drugs led by Pfizer Inc.’s Lipitor and heart stents from Medtronic Inc., said John Sullivan, an analyst at Leerink Swann & Co.

The findings may add scientific rigor to doctors’ decisions sometimes influenced more by marketing, said Jeffrey Lerner of the ECRI Institute, a nonprofit that conducts such research. In a health overhaul attacked by critics as too pricey, it’s one of the few measures with a chance to rein in U.S. medical spending that soared to $2.5 trillion last year, Sullivan said.

<SNIP>

The institute will be run by a 19-member board of governors with three representatives of drug, device and diagnostic- testing companies as well as patient advocates, doctors and the National Institutes of Health. The U.S. Comptroller General, a presidential appointee, must name the board within six months.

Its funding will start at $10 million this year and reach about $500 million in 2013 when money from Medicare and a new insurer tax kicks in, according to an estimate from the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based research center. The budget may increase if insurance rolls grow, Brookings estimates.

<SNIP>

Still, “the savings can be substantial if you’re drawing a clinical study conclusion that a generic drug works as well as a branded drug,” said Leerink Swann’s Sullivan, offering one example of research that may be done. Therapies used by large numbers of people are likely to be investigators’ first targets.

“You’re talking about saving not pennies on the dollar, but very substantial savings” if patients can replace a branded drug with a generic, he said.

Along with statins such as New York-based Pfizer’s Lipitor, Sullivan cited anti-inflammatory drugs that include Remicade, made by Johnson & Johnson of New Brunswick, New Jersey, and heart stents manufactured by Minneapolis-based Medtronic and Boston Scientific Corp. of Natick, Massachusetts.

<SNIP>

“The companies are now going to have to not just launch new products with marketing hype, but they’re going to have to demonstrate evidence of superior clinical effectiveness,” said Vivian Coates, an ECRI vice-president.

The fallout from a 2005 study of antipsychotic medications shows the most effective treatment doesn’t always win, said Robert Rosenheck, a psychiatry professor at Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut.

The U.S.-backed study found a 50-year-old drug that may cost about $2.50 a day worked as well as newer medicines priced eight times higher, Rosenheck said. Sales of the next-generation antipsychotics, led by AstraZeneca Plc’s Seroquel, Eli Lilly & Co.’s Zyprexa and Johnson & Johnson’s Risperdal, nonetheless jumped 43 percent in four years to $14.75 billion by 2009, according to IMS Health Inc., a collector of prescription-drug data based in Norwalk, Connecticut.

<SNIP>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aWaqUjSAjgAg&pos=11
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. We could save a lot of dough if drug companies didn't goose their studies....
And if there was someway to take the attractive young sales reps out of the marketing of drugs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. How un-capitalist to demand drug makers to show effectiveness...
Would we have done that with snake oil salesman?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. FDA mandates that efficacy and safety be demonstrated prior to approval.
So they are required to show "effectiveness" already. The benefit from this study will be in testing efficacy of one manufacturers drugs versus another's within the same class of drug.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kanrok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds like a pretty good idea.
I can't believe Big Pharma is too happy with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. That should tell you something
You'll note that no one is pointing to what will actually be done, only that this provides the opportunity to figure somethings out that MIGHT help. The reality is that effectiveness already has to be "proven" and the drug companies will be as involved in these studies as they are in the drug trials. It's just more area for the companies to lobby and engage the FDA. They already do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamin lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Drug companies only have to prove their product is better than
nothing, not better than existing treatments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. not *always* true
For many drugs and devices, it is impossible to test versus placebo (or untreated control) because allowing a control group to go untreated would be unethical. Believe it or not, pharma and device research *is* regulated. What you seldom see, however, are drugs tested against other manufacturers' drugs in the same class. That will be interesting to see.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Today, a drug company only has to prove that the drug is more effective than a placebo
This goes towards making them prove that a new drug or medical device is more effective than the ones that are already on the market.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. Why pay 10 times more for the latest and greatest when the old stuff
works just as well and we know what side effects to look out for?

I'm all for new medicines when they make sense; the asthma meds my son had as a baby were really tough on him. The new meds are like silver bullets in comparison. But the lisinopril for my hypertension has been around for 20 years, does the job and is cheap as dirt.


There are a lot of features in the bill designed to improve health care and cut costs. It's not merely a health insurance reform bill. Wait until the data is gathered to recommend best practices. All those doctors ordering extra tests and sending patients to the labs they happen to own will start screaming then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamin lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. It's about frackin' time!
Drug companies routinely do things that would lead to jail time in other industries. Phizer marketed an arthritis drug called Bextra. They instructed their salespeople to present the drug for applications that it had not been approved for. It killed people. Heart attacks in Bextra patients went up 65% AND THEY KNEW IT. The FDA fined Phizer $1.2 Trillion which was okay with Phizer because they made $3.8 Trillion in profits on Bextra.

Drug companies do not have to present evidence that their products are better than existing treatments, only that they are better than sugarpills.

Drug companies do not have to present ALL of their test data to the FDA, only what they want to.

Drug companies routinely buy off generic drug manufacturers to prevent them competing with brand name drugs.

Drug companies routinely fix prices.

Drug companies actually kill people for profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
8. Good, hope they go after alternative medicine...
like the angry fist of god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duer 157099 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
10. Finally! A federally-funded organization that will regulate drugs
Oh wait, isn't that what the FDA is?

Seems like a department of redundancy error, again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
12. Was this part of the evil PHaRMA "deal"?
:rofl:

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. How odd. I have been unable to find the entire text of the bill AS SIGNED anywhere online.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jan 20th 2025, 03:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC