3 ms·
Spinraza was specifically not covered for years because the English NHS and Biogen could not reach financial terms based on the NHS’ assessment of the value of
by twoodfin 3y ago
Spinraza was specifically not covered for years because the English NHS and Biogen could not reach financial terms based on the NHS’ assessment of the value of the drug over other treatments.
Look, if you don’t want to engage with this specific example, there are many more. Cerdelga to treat Gaucher’s disease was approved by the EU in 2015, but the English NHS didn’t agree to pay for it for another two years:
https://pharmatimes.com/news/nice_u-turn_backs_sanofis_gaucher_disease_drug_1194651/ https://pharmatimes.com/news/nice_u-turn_backs_sanofis_gauch...
Canada as well, not approved for coverage until 2017:
https://hpr-rps.hres.ca/reg-content/summary-basis-decision-detailTwo.php?linkID=SBD00359 https://hpr-rps.hres.ca/reg-content/summary-basis-decision-d...
- sofixa 3y agoAgain, not being approved for 2 years, for whatever reason, doesn't match the original claim of not being approved at all because it's too expensive.
- twoodfin 3y agoIf you’re a parent of a child suffering from a terrible genetic condition with what is effectively a miracle cure available, does it really matter to you if perhaps, hypothetically, someday—years later—a drug your government already deems safe is made available to you? Prices aren’t static. Competitors enter the market. Governments are willing to offer more or less. Eventually, generics or biosimilars become available. It’s 100% accurate that English and Canadian citizens were denied access to these new drugs until they ceased being “too expensive” (at which point they were no longer “new”).