Date post: | 18-Jan-2017 |
Category: |
Healthcare |
Upload: | rarecancersaustralia |
View: | 185 times |
Download: | 0 times |
The University of Sydney Page 1
Negotiating limits to accessing medicines for rare cancers:An ethical perspectivePresented byDr Wendy LipworthCentre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Sydney Medical School
The University of Sydney Page 2
Overview
1. What is a rare cancer?2. Who wants access to medicines for rare cancers?3. Who provides access to medicines for rare
cancers?4. Why can decisions about access be difficult?5. Implications for rare cancer advocacy
The University of Sydney Page 3
What is a rare cancer?
– Various definitions of rare cancers– 2-15 per 100,000 people– Australia 6 per 100,000
– Can be rare because– Arises in unusual site– Is a biologically unusual variant of a common cancer– Needs special treatment
– In a typical year over 44,000 Australians will be diagnosed with a rare or less common cancer and nearly 24,000 will die
– Little change in incidence to mortality rations over past 20 years
The University of Sydney Page 4
Overview
1. What is a rare cancer?2. Who wants access to medicines for rare
cancers?3. Who provides access to medicines for rare
cancers?4. Why can decisions about access be difficult?5. Implications for rare cancer advocacy
The University of Sydney Page 5
Who wants access to medicines for rare cancers?
– Review of Life Saving Drugs Program (2014)– Cancer Drugs Alliance submission:
• LSDP “absolutely essential” for patients with rare cancers
• Should be revised to accommodate cancer
– Senate Inquiry on the availability of new, innovative and specialised cancer drugs in Australia (2015)– Rare Cancers Australia submission:
• “some cancer patients have suffered from systematic neglect”
• Need for an “interim access fund” prior to PBS listing• Need to consider licensed usages of medicines
The University of Sydney Page 6
Overview
1. What is a rare cancer?2. Who wants access to medicines for rare cancers?3. Who provides access to medicines for rare
cancers?4. Why can decisions about access be difficult?5. Implications for rare cancer advocacy
The University of Sydney Page 7
Who provides access to medicines for rare cancers?– The Federal Government via the PBS– “Special” government programs
– Life saving drugs program– Herceptin program
– Hospital therapeutics committees– Pharmaceutical companies (compassionate
access)– Researchers by enrolling people in clinical trials– Individuals who can afford to pay themselves
The University of Sydney Page 8
Overview
1. What is a rare cancer?2. Who wants access to medicines for rare cancers?3. Who provides access to medicines for rare
cancers?4. Why can decisions about access be
difficult?5. Implications for rare cancer advocacy
The University of Sydney Page 9
Why can decisions about access be difficult?1. There is a need to consider a number of
different values2. These values can be difficult to fulfill when it
comes to rare cancers3. These values also compete and conflict with
each other
The University of Sydney Page 10
Doing good/avoiding harm
– The desire to provide benefit to patients, without harming them
– The desire to fulfill the related the “rule of rescue”– the moral and psychological imperative to help those in
desperate need, irrespective of cost or uncertainty
The University of Sydney Page 11
Why it is difficult to consistently do good/avoid harm– Treatments for rare cancers are not always as
safe and/or effective as we hope they will be – Like any other treatment
JAMA Internal Medicine October 2015• 2/3 of new cancer drugs in the past five
years approved by FDA on surrogate outcomes e.g. tumour shrinkage, progression free survival
• They have not been shown to extend or improve life
• They may be toxic• Includes treatments for rare cancers
The University of Sydney Page 12
Equity
– The desire to promote equity—ensuring that patients are not disadvantaged simply because they have rare cancers or rare subsets of cancers
– Currently receive a disproportionately small % of PBS funds (15%)
The University of Sydney Page 13
Why it is difficult to ensure equity of access– Government payers, hospitals and
pharmaceutical companies can’t fund everything for everyone– Some people will always be disadvantaged relative to
others– Groups of cancer patients are being divided up
more and more according to molecular profiles• E.g. 1% of NSCLC have ROS1 mutation and respond
to crizotinib• E.g. 10 % of stomach cancer have HER-2 mutation
and respond to trastuzumab (Herceptin)– This is good for some people who can receive “targeted
therapies”– But also means there are more people to be “left
behind” relative to others
The University of Sydney Page 14
Why it is difficult to ensure equity of access– Modes of access other than through the Federal
Government will always be uneven, based on:– Who has access to/is eligible for clinical trials– Who has access to/is eligible industry compassionate
access programs– Who has doctors advocating for supply through hospitals– Who has money in the absence of the above
The University of Sydney Page 15
Efficiency, affordability, fairness of price– The desire to allocate resources efficiently
– producing the ‘greatest good for the greatest number’ – in an affordable and cost-effective manner
– And paying a ‘fair’ price for medicines, based on their clinical value
The University of Sydney Page 16
Why it is difficult to ensure efficiency and affordability– Many treatments for rare cancers are very
expensive– Development is expensive (e.g. time to recruit to trials)– Markets are small
– The number of rare cancers is collectively large (and increasing as cancers are divided up according to particular molecular profiles)
– The costs add up when all rare cancers are considered together
– Even medicines that are “cost-effective” may not be affordable
The University of Sydney Page 17
Why it is difficult to negotiate a “fair” price– Main justification for high prices is need to recoup
investment in innovation and promote further innovation
BUT– No agreement as to how much it costs to develop
a new drug– Tufts estimate >$2 billion
• incl. considerations of risk and need to attract investors
– But critics say the figure is overblown by• Ignoring public investment in basic science• Including marketing costs• Overstating risk and what it takes to attract
investment– Some believe that prices are whatever the “market will
bear”– Small markets have less bargaining power
The University of Sydney Page 18
Scientific evidence
– The desire to make decisions based on sound scientific evidence of – Effectiveness– Safety– Cost effectiveness
The University of Sydney Page 19
Why it is difficult to make “evidence-based” decisions– Can’t always do large RCTs and meta-analyses
– Numbers of patients are (by definition) small difficult to recruit to trials and achieve adequate power
– Patients are often desperately ill and need to “crossover” upon progression difficult to maintain a control group
– For targeted therapies have to factor in • “Companion diagnostics”• Appropriate comparator
– Difficult to demonstrate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness
The University of Sydney Page 20
How values compete and conflict
In order to achieve… There is often a need to compromise on…
Clinical benefit Safety
Equity of access EfficiencyAffordabilityPower to negotiate a “fair” price
Quick access Quality of evidence used to make decisions
The University of Sydney Page 21
Lessons for advocacy
– Not enough to just advocate for “more access” – Need to recognise the complexity of decisions
and advocate for “procedural justice”:– Stakeholder engagement
• So that we can identify all the relevant values– Transparency
• So that we can see that all values are being considered and balanced in a “reasonable” way
– Accountability• So that decisions can be overseen e.g. re conflicts of
interest • So that decisions can be appealed