Replies to post #123696 on Biotech Values

[stockbettor]

Copaxone is far more expensive, according to the NYT story on this study. But let's hope generic competition doesn't reduce the expense too much.

The measurement of cost-effectiveness used was the quality-adjusted life year, or QALY. Living one year in perfect health is one QALY. Living a year in less than perfect health is some fraction of a QALY.

The study found that the M.S. drugs cost about $1 million per QALY, with Copaxone costing $2 million per QALY. While there is no firm standard, experts say that to be considered cost-effective, a treatment should be no more than about $100,000 per QALY.

The costs of the drugs themselves accounted for total costs associated with the disease over 10 years, more than the loss of wages.

And the gains in health from the drugs were small. A person taking Avonex for 10 years would gain the equivalent of two extra months of perfect health and those taking Copaxone would gain one month. Those taking Beteaseron would have six years free of relapses, compared to five years free of relapses for those not taking any of the drugs.

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/study-examines-high-drug-costs-vs-benefits-for-m-s-patients/