The New York Times has been doing a series on the breast cancer medicine Avastin over the last few months. This is because the FDA was considering, and then deciding, to remove their approval for Avastin as a breast cancer treatment.
Avastin is a bio-tech drug. They way it's supposed to work is that it cuts off nourishment to a tumor by suspending the growth of blood vessels and other delivery systems which normally grow as the tumor does. The end result should be that the tumor starves and subsequently shrinks. Which sounds like a victory! But, weirdly, it's not. Even though the tumors might be smaller, Avastin was shown statistically to not prolong survival of breast cancer patients. Which means that cancer makes tumors, but just because you shrink the tumor, doesn't mean you shrink the cancer. Which again puts the spotlight on exactly how little we understand about cancer.
Still, some patients feel that they have really benefited from Avastin and are steamed that the FDA isn't going to approve use for it any longer, which means it is unlikely to be covered by Medicare or insurance. Which is important. Because Avastin costs about $57,000 a year.
It's hard to know who to side with here. The cost of the drug is prohibitive - truly. And cancer treatment is already expensive enough. But if it really doesn't do anything amazing, should it still available to be prescribed? Carol Fleming, a cancer patient who is taking Avastin, is not confused.
"Avastin may not work for everyone, but until there is a test to identify who will respond, it is not right to withhold Avastin from every breast cancer patient except the rich, who don’t need the reimbursement."
No comments:
Post a Comment