Filed Under:

When A Famous Hospital Didn't Want An Expensive New Drug

Play associated audio

Last year, a new drug called Zaltrap was approved as a kind of last-chance therapy for patients with colorectal cancer. Studies suggested Zaltrap worked almost exactly as well as an existing drug called Avastin. In fact, the main difference between the two drugs seemed to be the price.

"I was rather stunned," Dr. Leonard Saltz, who specializes in colorectal cancer, told me.

Zaltrap costs about $11,000 per month — about twice as much as Avastin, Saltz said.

Saltz and his colleagues at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York made what seemed like a very reasonable decision: The hospital would not stock the more expensive drug. But taking cost into account for a new cancer drug was a very unusual decision for the hospital

"There was a lot of angst over it, simply because it had never been done before" at Sloan-Kettering, Saltz says.

It was such a big deal that he and a few of his colleagues decided to write an op-ed about their decision in the New York Times. The op-ed ran under the headline "In Cancer Care, Cost Matters." Peter Bach, one of the doctors who co-authored the op-ed, braced for the reaction.

"I admit to clutching my chair as it went up," he says. "But, you know, [the response] was really uniformly positive."

After the op-ed ran, Sanofi, the company that co-markets the drug, started offering hospitals a discount of 50 percent on Zaltrap. (The company wouldn't comment for this story. Bach has taken speaking fees from the company that makes Avastin. Saltz has been paid consulting fees from both drug companies.)

So why doesn't this sort of thing happen more often? Why is a high-profile hospital choosing not to buy an expensive new drug so rare that it merits an op-ed in the New York Times?

It's partly because we don't know how a lot of drugs compare to other drugs. The head-to-head studies just haven't been done. That is starting to change, though, as federal funding for comparative studies increases.

More head-to-head studies will raise a new question: What do you do with comparative information when you have it?

The Zaltrap case was a bit of a fluke. Two drugs seemed to worked equally well. Both extended life by 1.4 months. But what if Zaltrap had worked slightly better than Avastin? What if it had extended life by, say, an extra week? Would Sloan-Kettering have stocked the drug then, in spite of the price?

"Absolutely," Bach says. "We are a premier cancer center in the country — maybe the world — and drugs that provide additional benefit are ones we want to understand and want to be able to use."

Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.

NPR

Jhumpa Lahiri Finds Freedom In Italian Memoir: 'No One Expected Me To Do It'

The Interpreter of Maladies author is a successful, Pulitzer Prize-winning English-language writer. But she found writing in Italian gave her true freedom; "Language is a very messy thing," she says.
NPR

Gulf Of Mexico Open For Fish-Farming Business

For the first time, companies can apply to set up fish farms in U.S. federal waters. The government says the move will help reduce American dependence on foreign seafood and improve security.
NPR

WATCH: Republicans — Then And Now — Talking About Drug Addiction

In New Hampshire, Republican presidential candidates are using compassionate language when it comes to drug abuse. It's a marked change for a party that has advocated tough stances on the issue.
NPR

A Skeptical Review Of CBS' Super Bowl Online Streaming Success

For the first time, CBS put the full Super Bowl, with ads, online and claimed record viewership. But StreamingMedia.com's Dan Rayburn says the decision to stream is getting too much hype.

Leave a Comment

Help keep the conversation civil. Please refer to our Terms of Use and Code of Conduct before posting your comments.