NICE (UK) consults on draft guidance on the drug sofosbuvir (Sovaldi)
Cinnamon Girl said
Jun 16, 2014
Yes, Isiscat, I`m quite sure the cost is the main issue here, I doubt if they`d be so picky otherwise, and I think the same will apply in the rest of Europe. I notice the NICE draft guidelines include the following "Revised cost-effectiveness analyses presented separately for people with and without cirrhosis, with and without HIV-co-infection, and by treatment history." Our NHS (National Health Service) has already committed to funding for a small number (500) of the most severely affected patients but I`d be surprised if anyone outside those groups in most immediate need will received funding for treatment with Sovaldi.
Gilead must be aware of this though and at some point surely they`ll have to adjust the cost to comply with market forces especially with some tough competition in the pipeline.
Isiscat2011 said
Jun 16, 2014
One cannot help but wonder if the "lack of evidence for some subgroups" concern would be as pronounced if Sovaldi was priced lower. Gilead could actually end up pricing itself out of a good chunk of the market if this trend continues.
I can envision a scenario where Sovaldi sales are limited to a relatively small group of patients. Gilead's competitors could then pick up a huge share of the unmet need in the years to come (which means continued warehousing of patients for some time to come). This is how it appears to be playing out in the Euro market and it is possible the same will happen in the US.
Wouldn't Gilead's profits be greater if it reduced prices on a global scale? Once the market becomes competitive Gilead will need to lower its prices anyway. I'm not sure that playing hard-ball is in Gilead's best interests in the long term.
In the US will physicians rally to prevent this by prescribing S/L to all despite cost and what effect would that have? Just some random thoughts and questions. What do others think about all this?
Cinnamon Girl said
Jun 16, 2014
In draft recommendations published on 16th June 2014 healthcare guidance body NICE (the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) is asking Gilead Sciences for more information on its product sofosbuvir (Sovaldi), for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C.
Commenting on the draft guidance Professor Carole Longson,Director of the NICE Centre for Health Technology Evaluation, said:
"The available evidence shows that sofosbuvir is an effective treatment for chronic hepatitis C in certain patients. However, evidence is lacking for some subgroups of patients with chronic hepatitis C, and there are also substantial uncertainties in the evidence base presented by the manufacturer. The Committee has therefore requested further information from the manufacturer before it can decide whether sofosbuvir is a cost-effective use of NHS resources."
NICE has not yet issued final guidance to the NHS. Until then, NHS bodies should make decisions locally on the funding of specific treatments.
Yes, Isiscat, I`m quite sure the cost is the main issue here, I doubt if they`d be so picky otherwise, and I think the same will apply in the rest of Europe. I notice the NICE draft guidelines include the following "Revised cost-effectiveness analyses presented separately for people with and without cirrhosis, with and without HIV-co-infection, and by treatment history." Our NHS (National Health Service) has already committed to funding for a small number (500) of the most severely affected patients but I`d be surprised if anyone outside those groups in most immediate need will received funding for treatment with Sovaldi.
Gilead must be aware of this though and at some point surely they`ll have to adjust the cost to comply with market forces especially with some tough competition in the pipeline.
One cannot help but wonder if the "lack of evidence for some subgroups" concern would be as pronounced if Sovaldi was priced lower. Gilead could actually end up pricing itself out of a good chunk of the market if this trend continues.
I can envision a scenario where Sovaldi sales are limited to a relatively small group of patients. Gilead's competitors could then pick up a huge share of the unmet need in the years to come (which means continued warehousing of patients for some time to come). This is how it appears to be playing out in the Euro market and it is possible the same will happen in the US.
Wouldn't Gilead's profits be greater if it reduced prices on a global scale? Once the market becomes competitive Gilead will need to lower its prices anyway. I'm not sure that playing hard-ball is in Gilead's best interests in the long term.
In the US will physicians rally to prevent this by prescribing S/L to all despite cost and what effect would that have? Just some random thoughts and questions. What do others think about all this?
In draft recommendations published on 16th June 2014 healthcare guidance body NICE (the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) is asking Gilead Sciences for more information on its product sofosbuvir (Sovaldi), for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C.
Commenting on the draft guidance Professor Carole Longson, Director of the NICE Centre for Health Technology Evaluation, said:
"The available evidence shows that sofosbuvir is an effective treatment for chronic hepatitis C in certain patients. However, evidence is lacking for some subgroups of patients with chronic hepatitis C, and there are also substantial uncertainties in the evidence base presented by the manufacturer. The Committee has therefore requested further information from the manufacturer before it can decide whether sofosbuvir is a cost-effective use of NHS resources."
NICE has not yet issued final guidance to the NHS. Until then, NHS bodies should make decisions locally on the funding of specific treatments.
Full article and details of draft guidance...
http://www.nice.org.uk/newsroom/pressreleases/NICEOnDraftGuidanceForSofosbuvirSovaldiDrugHepatitisC.jsp