Four reasons Praluent is not Sovaldi
Watch out budget busters!
Watch out budget busters!
From the New York Times (New Drug Sharply Lowers Cholesterol, But it’s Costly)
Praluent, which analysts project will become a huge seller, is expected to become the next flashpoint in the growing controversy of escalating pharmaceutical prices, and health plans are expected to put in place strict measures to control which patients can use the drug and prevent it from becoming a budget buster.
This story and similar ones say Praluent may be like Sovaldi, an expensive Hepatitis C drug that has driven up healthcare costs over the past year or so. According to this narrative, health plans and pharmacy benefits managers are gearing up to do battle with the manufacturer and have learned their lesson from the Sovaldi experience. Maybe the payers will do a better job of managing Praluent expenses –I assume they can devise something better than whining about the expense to the general public while simultaneously rallying against price controls. But when the Praluent crisis is “averted” don’t let the payers pat themselves on the back too much.
I see four main reasons why Praluent will not be as much of a “budget buster” as Sovaldi:
- Praluent doesn’t cure anything
- There are good alternatives for most patients
- Praluent is an injection
- Praluent will have competition from the start
1. Praluent doesn’t cure anything
Sovaldi cures Hepatitis-C in something like 90 percent of patients. You can quibble with the numbers if you like, but the fact is this is a cure for many people who have waited for one –in many cases for decades. Take it for three months and you’re done with the drug and the illness.
What does Praluent do? It lowers cholesterol dramatically. Does it prevent heart attacks or strokes? No one knows, and we won’t have evidence about that for a couple years at least. In any case I’m sure it won’t cure heart attacks or strokes and I doubt it will reduce their likelihood by anything approaching 90 percent. And patients will have to keep using the drug indefinitely.
2. There are good alternatives for most patients
Statins work well and are available as inexpensive generics. Starting on a statin or increasing statin dosage is an option for most patients, including those who have already had a stroke or heart attack. A smaller group has a genetic condition that can’t be addressed by statins. Praluent sounds like a good choice for them.
3. Praluent is an injection
Sovaldi comes in a pill. It’s easy to swallow. Same with statins.
Praluent is an injection. Ouch. Sure it only has to be done twice a month and you can do it yourself, but who really likes a needle? I expect patients to want to try statins first.
4. Praluent will have competition from the start
Sovaldi was on the market for about a year before an (arguably inferior) competitive offering was introduced. That gave Gilead a big first-mover advantage, especially important for a drug people had been awaiting for a long time and then only needed to take for three months.
It appears that Repatha, a similar drug to Praluent, will come to market about the same time, with others to follow. Competitive pressures should keep prices in check.
5. The name evokes something nasty
I know I promised only four reasons, but I have fifth. The name reminds me too much of Soylent, the disgusting meal replacement product.
Image courtesy of digitalart at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
—
By healthcare business consultant David E. Williams, president of Health Business Group.
