Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FDA Approves First Drug Aimed at Women With Inherited Breast Cancer (statnews.com)

Posted by msmash on from the moving-forward dept.

U.S. regulators have approved the first drug aimed at women with advanced breast cancer caused by an inherited flawed gene. From a report: The Food and Drug Administration on Friday approved AstraZeneca PLC's Lynparza for patients with inherited BRCA gene mutations who have undergone chemotherapy. The drug has been on the market since 2014 for ovarian cancer, and is the first in a new class of medicines called PARP inhibitors to be approved for breast cancer. PARP inhibitors prevent cancer cells from fixing problems in their DNA. Lynparza will cost $13,886 per month without insurance, according to AstraZeneca. The company is offering patients financial assistance.

33 comments

  1. $14K/month, yowsa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MAGA

  2. $13,886 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    The company is offering patients financial assistance.

    That's really swell.

    When are we finally going to lynch these sons-of-bitches?

    1. Re:$13,886 by moehoward · · Score: 0

      That is the price without insurance. Everyone has insurance in the US, so I'm told by Ms. Pelosi. It is required by law to have insurance. Don't you know that?

      --
      "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
    2. Re:$13,886 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      They didn't give you cancer. They aren't forcing you to buy the medicine. You could just buy medical insurance to get this all-or-mostly covered.

      Once upon a time, this medicine didn't exist, and you weren't pissed off. Now, a new medicine exists, and new options are available, and you are pissed off.

      Sad.

    3. Re:$13,886 by TFlan91 · · Score: 1

      "That is the price without insurance."

      What's your point? That insurance companies want their slice of the pie too? My mother's family pays more for insurance than for their mortgage. All of healthcare is 100% completely fucked from the financial perspective of a humane human.

      "Everyone has insurance in the US, so I'm told by Ms. Pelosi. It is required by law to have insurance."

      It was never a law to have insurance, persay. You were simply penalized if you put your health risk on the public instead of yourself. Regardless, it actually isn't mandated anymore (>=2019).

      "Don't you know that?"

    4. Re:$13,886 by moehoward · · Score: 2

      I apologize that my sarcasm was not more obvious.

      In my view, the real problem with healthcare in the US is the lack of pricing transparency. You and I can have the same condition and receive the same treatment. But, zero doctors can sit and tell you upfront how much it will cost. And I don't mean that from an "its complicated" point of view. I mean that from the point of view that nobody on your airplane ride pays the same price for the same service. No college students sitting in the same classroom paid the same amount of tuition. The market is waaaaaaaaay out of whack in all of these situations because pricing has been buried behind loads of bureaucracy, paperwork, and political favors.

      --
      "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
    5. Re:$13,886 by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I mean that from the point of view that nobody on your airplane ride pays the same price for the same service.

      Poor analogy. With an airline ticket, I at least know the price at the time of purchase. With most medical services, I don't know the cost until I receive the bill, often weeks after treatment.

      Healthcare in America is likely the world's most dysfunctional market. Fixing it will not be easy, since that would threaten the livelihood of 11% of the workforce, although more of those people work in administration and billing than in patient care.

    6. Re:$13,886 by moehoward · · Score: 1

      I see your point with regards to airline ticket. And even my college tuition issue. Not poor analogies, just shithole analogies. :)

      But, you still are basically getting random pricing. I can sometimes have a doctor give me a "treament plan" that describes the expected pricing. This is rare, and maybe once was within 10% of the final amount.

      I'm totally shocked that you can get a bill within weeks. My last two major things (I get testing done a lot because I have a BRCA edit in my DNA) took 11 and 12 months to finally get me a bill. Sheesh. Try budgeting around those types of time frames and slot machine odds.

      I'm 100% on board with you regarding the dysfunction of the healthcare market. The palms have been greased oh so well.

      --
      "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
    7. Re:$13,886 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When people need something in order to survive, they feel entitled to it (if not for free, then for a trivial cost).

      If you are in the business of saving lives, you had better be willing to work for pennies.

    8. Re:$13,886 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When people need something in order to survive, they feel entitled to it (if not for free, then for a trivial cost).

      You mean like food and clean water? Oh, right, we charge for those too and certainly not a trivial cost.

      If you are in the business of saving lives, you had better be willing to work for pennies.

      You mean farmers should be willing to work for pennies too? Gotcha.

      This will go splendidly I'm sure.

    9. Re:$13,886 by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

      What you're saying may be accurate. That you think it shouldn't change is what is truly sad.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  3. Great but... by 110010001000 · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...what about us who don't identify as a binary gender? Rather insensitive and exclusionary.

    1. Re: Great but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not their fault that you are mentally ill.

    2. Re: Great but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid bitches are getting cancer because they are not letting men to squeeze them like every other hour.

      Stupid stupid feminist bitches.

    3. Re: Great but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just curious...

      If a person is born with two X chromosomes and also a Y chromosome....and as a result of this winds up physically hermaphroditic...

      It seems like it would be objectively correct for this person to identify neither as male nor as female. The genes have spoken....such people are both. Accepting objective reality is not mental illness.

      And, though rare, this does happen.

      Do you agree that it would be perfectly sane and appropriate for such people to identify as non-binary? Or do you think they should just arbitrarily pick a gender and pretend to be that gender from then on? Maybe try to force an override of their genetics through surgery and hormone treatments?

    4. Re: Great but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of the people who don't identify as a binary gender only 0.0001% have actual genetics as a foundation for it; the remaining 99.9999% are simply mentally ill.

    5. Re: Great but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that means that the .0001% that have the genetics for it are not mentally ill, even if they identify as non-binary.

      Right?

  4. (.)(.) yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love boobs!

    1. Re:(.)(.) yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming you are a male....it should be obvious that at this stage in your life boobs have lost all practical value to you.

      Sure, they may cause some erotic stimulation, but that's about it. The time and resources you spend gaining access to them is time and resources you will never get back. Once you grow up a little bit you will realize how much more fulfilling it is to invest your time and resources in more profitable ventures (such as gaining new skills, refining existing ones, creating awesome things, etc.).

      But, if scratching an itch is your addiction, I guess you are free to keep obsessing over that.

    2. Re: (.)(.) yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read that shit you wrote and... I love boobs

    3. Re:(.)(.) yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Spotted the virgin.

  5. I'm Affected and I Welcome This by moehoward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm male, but have this genetic condition. I do have female family members who have suffered greatly. Many in my close and extended family have died because of this defect. Men are affected as well, but not as badly as women. I'm at much higher risk for prostate, colon, and pancreatic cancers.

    I have known about my situation for about 20 years. I have even donated to UPenn's cancer center (where this drug was developed) in the past many years. It is inspiring to see real progress and real medicine happening.

    I'm not outraged at the price at all. I've visited the labs and researchers who do this work. It is so freaking complicated, messy, and heartbreaking. PARP inhibitors have been our real hope for the women in the family. One family member who died a couple of years ago was part of a trial for this class of medication.

    The road to curing these diseases is very long, and this is a great step in the right direction. I'm glad to see such an uplifting story on Slashdot (for me personally).

    --
    "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
  6. As Curly says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    What's it to you?

    Shill much?

    The price is outrageous.

    1. Re:As Curly says by moehoward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If being honest about this situation is shilling, then I suppose I shill quite a bit.

      Go visit the researchers as I have. Go have 9 or 10 family members have a particular type of cancer as I have. Go tell your kids that they shouldn't have kids because of a genetic defect.

      Do those things, and then come back and preach to me. I will listen intensively and with great fervor.

      --
      "If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
    2. Re:As Curly says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the gulf between the rich and the poor continues to grow, so does the expectation that the rich should have to pay for everything.

      This is why universal basic income is doomed to fail. No matter how much you give, the recipients will insist that it is not enough.

    3. Re:As Curly says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's a scam it is. But if it works then on par, for today's big pharma stock market expectations. Like most of these great white hopes, it starts out with a bang then dies quickly, in a whimper, after making lots of bux$.

    4. Re:As Curly says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The price of most new technology begins outrageous and out of most people's reach. Especially a technology expensive to develop with a narrowly targeted set of people who can benefit from it, compared to the general population.

      Develop a new med AND get it FDA approved. Then add up your costs and report back on whether this outrageous.

      I'm not in pharma at all and I can see that from basic business experience.

    5. Re:As Curly says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, but how many people can afford $14k/month?
      I keep forgetting Americans generally don't give a fuck about the poor.

    6. Re:As Curly says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will cheapen as time goes on.

      It's really odd that people seem to think the tens of thousands of man-hours and resources that go into these things are only there to serve them specifically.

      With great investment... comes great expectations.

    7. Re:As Curly says by pots · · Score: 1

      Go tell your kids that they shouldn't have kids because of a genetic defect.

      Maybe I should tell them that anyway? Because they can't afford $14k per month?

      I'm glad that the drug exists, I'm glad that (some) people have this benefit, I'm glad that having the wrong genes isn't a death sentence for (some) people. Nothing that you've said here justifies the price.

      If I go and visit the researchers, as you say, will they open their books for me? Looking at a lab isn't going to prove to me that $14k per month is a reasonable price. I've seen medical labs before.

  7. "study of 302 patients" by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    "The median progression-free survival for patients taking Lynparza was 7 months compared to 4.2 months for patients taking chemotherapy only.

    OK, so we're looking at $40k for an extra 3 months of life? I'm not sure what to think. But it does point out the importance of discussing end-of-life decisions. Remember when Republicans were screaming about their made-up "death panels"? There weren't any death panels, of course, but there was language suggesting doctors should talk to their patients about discussing these things with their family and making the decisions before they're actually needed. Because trust me, when the time comes to make those decisions, it's the worst time to have to make those decisions.

    If you have a family, you should think about advanced directives. Don't make your family have to deal with that at the same time they're worried about losing you.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:"study of 302 patients" by Miser · · Score: 1

      I am inclined to agree with you.

      Reminds me of that advertisement for the drug Optivo. "A chance to live longer". Then you read the fine print. 2-3 months longer. Let's say 6 months to be generous. Sorry, but to me that's not worth it. I want a cure/remission. Why all the research to postpone the inevitable?

      That's also why I believe advanced directives should include a clause that if there is a clear, terminal illness at play (no cure, no hope of cure, x months to live) give me that morphine IV, leave me alone in the room, and tell me what dial not to touch ... :) No way I'm going to burden my family with this shit.

  8. More fraudulent 'research' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will be taken off the market within a few years due to a) not actually working and b) terrible side effects. Like most drugs.