BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

For Hepatitis C Drugs, U.S. Prices Are Cheaper Than In Europe

Following
This article is more than 8 years old.

Drug prices in the U.S., while always a source of controversy, have come under intense attack of late. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal highlighted the differences in the costs of drugs in the U.S. versus other countries, particularly Norway, again raising concerns that the U.S. is paying more than its fair share when it comes to this sector of healthcare. At the same time, Senators Wyden and Grassley issued a report attacking Gilead, the company that developed the first hepatitis C cure, for its pricing of Sovaldi, saying that “Gilead pursued a calculated scheme for pricing and marketing its Hepatitis C drug based on one primary goal, maximizing revenue, regardless of the human consequences.”

Prices for the hepatitis C drugs have caused particular outrage. Gilead’s initial price of $1,000/pill meant that the 12-week regimen of Sovaldi necessary to cure this disease would cost $84,000. Despite the fact that wiping out hepatitis C would result in enormous costs savings by eliminating the downstream consequences of liver cirrhosis, cancer and liver transplants, and SAVE LIVES, the thought of $1,000/pill was appalling to Americans, especially as the prices being paid in the U.K and Germany for a course of Sovaldi therapy were far cheaper at $55,000 and $67,000, respectively.  Insurance companies were particularly outraged by Gilead’s pricing strategy, as expressed by Ms. Karen Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans: “The company is asking for a blank check which, if granted, will blow up employer benefit costs…and wreak havoc on the Federal debt.”

Amid all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth on drug prices, it was stunning to hear recent comments by Dr. Steve Miller, Chief Medical Officer of Express Scripts , which governs the pharmacy benefits of 85 million Americans. Miller announced yesterday at the Forbes Healthcare Summit 2015 that the cost of hepatitis C drugs in the U.S. is now less than that in Europe. Furthermore, Miller boasted that Express Scripts pays far less for the new cholesterol-lowering PCSK-9 drugs like Regeneron’s Praluent, than the sticker price of $14,600/patient/year.

Are U.S. drug prices really going through the roof?

What most stories about drug pricing omit is that the large payers like Express Scripts and CVS Health don’t pay the “sticker price” advertised in the drug pricing Armageddon stories. Instead, given the vast number of patients in their plans, they negotiate with drug manufacturers to get significantly lower prices. Plus, when more than one drug in a given class is available, as Dr. Miller stressed, their negotiating power is significantly enhanced. He was overjoyed when AbbVie came out with Viekira Pak, a competitor to Sovaldi, because he could now decide, based largely on price, which drug will be provided to the 85 million patients in the Express Scripts network. (He chose Viekira Pak over Sovaldi.) The same scenario played out for the PCSK-9 pricing discussions that Dr. Miller had with Regeneron. Given the choice between Praluent and Amgen ’s Repatha, Express Scripts opted for the former. While he didn’t say what Express Scripts was actually paying for Praluent, Dr. Len Schleifer, CEO of Regeneron, glumly told the Forbes Healthcare Summit audience, “Dr. Miller drives a hard bargain.” It is undoubtedly far less than the $14,600 initially advertised. Furthermore, the bargaining position of payers will be even more enhanced should Pfizer’s PCSK-9 inhibitor, which is in late-stage development, make it to market. Pfizer will likely need to make discounts for its drug given the entrenched positions of Praluent and Repatha.

So where is the disconnect here? Why are politicians howling about the price of drugs? The problem is that the government is prevented by Congress, the same Congress that houses Senators Wyden and Grassley, to negotiate the pricing of drugs covered by Medicare. It is this segment of the drug pricing debate that gets highlighted in the drug pricing discussions, and the area highlighted when the biopharmaceutical industry is attacked on this topic.

From the standpoint of the American people, the fix is easy – change the law and allow Medicare to negotiate. This position is being advocated by Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. However, this will have consequences. As Dr. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont and Democratic National Chairman, warned in a letter to the New York Times:

The American drug industry is the most successful and innovative in the world in addition to being the most expensive because we are the only country that pays the true research and development costs not only for Americans but for the rest of the world…. But schemes to launch a federal attack on one of the last, growing, innovative industries in America are in the long run counterproductive for both job creation and, more important, for the health of human beings around the world. By all means, let us try to reduce the costs of drugs. But over the years, advances in drug efficacy and scope have saved us far more in hospital costs than we have spent on drugs.

Biopharmaceutical companies invest roughly 15% of top line revenues back into R&D. Limiting top-line growth has the consequence of limiting new investments in research. At a time when new insights into the causes of diseases are being made on a daily basis, cutting back research efforts would certainly not be in our best interests.

The issue of drug prices in the U.S. cannot be simply summarized in the headlines that are now demonizing the biopharmaceutical industry. As Dr. Miller said, there are millions of Americans for whom certain drug costs are similar, if not lower, than those for Europeans, a fact that few Americans appreciate. Before any national debate occurs on price controls for drugs, it behooves us to understand fully all facets of this issue.