TheAIDS Healthcare Foundation, which run free AIDS clinics in various countries, including more than a dozen in the US, took the step over what it calls Merck's "unwarranted pricing" for Isentress. At nearly $13,000 per patient a year, the AIDS med is believed to be the most expensive first line AIDS therapy on the US market today, according to AHF.
Isentress was originally approved in 2007 as a salvage therapy for patients who are resistant to other AIDS drugs. Initially, Merck set the average wholesale price at $12,150 per patient, but since raised the AWP to $12,868, a 5 percent increase, according to AHF. In July 2009, the FDA expanded its use as a first-line treatment, which made the drug the most expensive first-line treatment in the US.
“The fact that Merck recently obtained FDA-approval for wider use of Isentress as a first line treatment, but kept it priced as if it were a salvage drug is reprehensible,” AHF president Michael Weinstein says in a statement. In a letter to Merck ceo Dick Clark, Weinstein writes that "your company’s price for Isentress is hindering AHF’s mission of providing high-quality medical care to people with HIV/AIDS. Access to clinics like AHF’s Healthcare Centers is your company’s primary marketing strategy; therefore we cannot allow it."
4 Comments
This is a difficult question, I think, from an ethical conduct of business perspective. That is -- I think Merck should be handsomely rewarded for its innovations, however. . . when is the thus far amassed profit "enough, already" -- and consequently, the cry of "price-gouging" arises, especially with human lives, hanging in the balance?
Of course, for those who can afford these extremely high prices, Isentress has become part of a very promising first-line AIDS treatment approach.
However, now that Isentress is FDA-approved as a "first line" rather than just a "salvage" therapy (thus greatly increasing volumes of sales), shouldn't New Merck <b.lower selling prices, given that people are literally dying without the drug -- and most patients without Cadillac insurance plans cannot afford the current co-pays? I tend to think so. I've more on that notion, at mine.
As ever, great stuff, Ed!
Namaste
"We're in the business of saving lives".
And killing wallets.
I'm willing to cut Merck some slack here on historical grounds. Merck was one of the pioneers in protease inhibitor therapy, with Crixivan. With respect to pricing, Crixivan was priced about 20% LOWER than other available PI's at the time. Merck was one of the few companies to work with groups such as ACT-UP in expanding access to HIV clinical trials and affordable treatment.
Just some perspective.
I'm willing to cut Merck some slack here on historical grounds. Merck was one of the pioneers in protease inhibitor therapy, with Crixivan. With respect to pricing, Crixivan was priced about 20% LOWER than other available PI's at the time. Merck was one of the few companies to work with groups such as ACT-UP in expanding access to HIV clinical trials and affordable treatment.
Just some perspective.