Gleevec is cost effective for those in China

November 11, 2007

This has to be one of the more bizarre abstracts I've read. Apparently

in China, Gleevec isn't covered under the Chinese National

Reimbursement Drug List because the cost of Gleevec (as we all know) is

ridiculously high so they don't want to pay for it. They do however,

pay for Interferon so someone decided to compare the cost of both drugs

by looking at a host of hypothesized theories to try to justify why

China should cover Gleevec under their Drug plan.

Estimated long term survival rates, estimated costs of hospital stays,

and the estimated costs of lab tests throughout a patient's life were

all taken into consideration. They even came up with some cockamamie

amount for what they call " difference in costs divided by the

difference in quality adjusted life years " between Gleevec and

Interferon.

In doing all this, they have somehow estimated that the survival rate

for those on Gleevec will be 19 years and the survival rate for those

on Interferon is only 9 years. Now taking into account their formula

that is adjusted for quality of life, they came up with 11.83 years of

good life with Gleevec and about 5.41 for those on Interferon.

All this to say that, they believe that treatment with Gleevec is well

worth the price.

I personally don't see their argument though. They're basically

admitting that treatment with Gleevec will cost a ton more money

because patient's will be alive so much longer and obviously have to

keep paying for the drug whereas those on Interferon will be dead so

they won't have to pay for any drugs anymore.

Like I said, this was a weird one. Maybe I misunderstood their point,

I don't know, but it sure has me scratching my head.

Here's the abstract:

Tracey

Recommended Posts