New research by scholars at the University of Pittsburgh
shows how much better access American patients have to new cancer medicines
than their peers in other developed countries:
Of 45 anticancer drug indications
approved in the United States between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013,
64% (29) were approved by the European Medicines Agency; 76% (34) were approved
in Canada; and 71% (32) were approved in Australia between January 1, 2009, and
June 30, 2014. The U.S. Medicare program covered all 45 drug indications; the
United Kingdom covered 72% (21) of those approved in Europe— only 47% (21) of
the drug indications covered by Medicare. Canada and France covered 33% (15)
and 42% (19) of the drug indications covered by Medicare, respectively, and
Australia was the most restrictive country, covering only 31% (14).
(Y. Zhang, et al., “Comparing the Approval and Coverage Decisions of New
Oncology Drugs in the United States and Other Selected Countries,” Journal of Managed Care and Specialty
Pharmacy, 2017 Feb;23(2):247-254.
I am no fan of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, but it
is a less restrictive bureaucracy than its counterparts in other developed
countries. Allowing patients to use new medicines without the interference of a
government bureaucracy should be pretty straightforward, as long as they are
aware of the risks.
Coverage is more ambiguous. Both Medicare and other
countries’ single-payers systems are socialized. So, we should not always jump
to the conclusion that every approved drug should be covered 100 percent. As
long as patients are free to pay out-of-pocket, we might not want taxpayers to
pay the entire cost of each drug. However, cancer is the textbook diagnosis of
a catastrophically expensive diagnosis, when we expect insurance to kick in. If
insurance does not cover a wide portfolio of therapeutic options, it is not
good coverage.
When we look at approval and coverage combined, the results
are appalling. Of 45 drugs covered by Medicare, the British National Health
System was the best of the other
countries measured, and it covered only 21 – less than half. We are not talking
about North Korea, here. Nevertheless, it is shocking how much citizens of otherwise
free countries give up when they allow their governments to control their
access to health care.
No comments:
Post a Comment