11 ms·

Drug for discussion: Bimzelx (for psoriasis). This costs six figures or more per year, from what I can glean. Watching baseball a lot, I see this advertised mu

Drug for discussion: Bimzelx (for psoriasis). This costs six figures or more per year, from what I can glean. Watching baseball a lot, I see this advertised multiple times per game, and God only knows what else they spend on marketing. (I don't have psoriasis or know anyone with it, if that matters) Looking at UCB's financials (helpfully broken out by drug), they took in $242 million on that drug alone in fiscal 2024. So that's how they can afford all those ads. It's also probably something patients would demand, and maybe even be happy to pay for out of pocket. > they will help the Medicare program cap what individual patients spend out of pocket on their prescriptions in a year at $2,000. So if you want clear skin, you probably have to pay big bucks. But maybe these immensely profitable drugs subsidize the life-saving ones.

bryanlarsen 2y ago
> (I don't have psoriasis or know anyone with it, if that matters) Psoriasis is very common, especially the mild forms. You probably know people who have it.
__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
C6552 H10132 N1750 O2029 S42, 147229.87 g·mol, what a monster. Probably not making that one in your garage.
- exyi 2y ago
  It's apparently a monoclonal antibody (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimekizumab https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimekizumab). That's just a protein, so it might actually be easier to make in your garage than your average small molecule ;) ... not that either would be practically possible, but it might be available in countries where they don't care too much about patents and such
  - twic 2y ago
    And if you're really willing to DIY, easier to make in your body than in your garage.
zdragnar 2y ago
Clear skin is the least of the problems with psoriasis. From their website: Bimzelx, alone or in combination with methotrexate, is indicated for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis in adults who have had an inadequate response or who have been intolerant to one or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In other words, it's for people with bad cases who don't respond well to other drugs. Keep in mind, other drugs often come with serious complications- constant use of topical steroids will thin your skin, and give you glaucoma if you develop it and use them near your eyes. Many biologics have even worse potential side effects. On top of that, psoriatic arthritis is degenerative, if you're unlucky enough to get that too, so not treating it means not only constant pain, constant threat of skin infections from scabbing, but permanent joint damage. I ended up on Taltz, another very expensive biologic, but the eli lily foundation covered almost all of the cost since my insurance wouldn't. Before then, I looked like an alcoholic, because my nose was constantly red and inflamed, and I didn't have anything safe to put on it- glaucoma runs in my family, and I wasn't brave enough to risk anything strong enough. If that was the only problem, I might not have even gone the route of Taltz, but I was also developing it all over my body, and there wasn't much that was helping.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  Thanks. I finally realized I was seeing this ad constantly and decided to look into it.
  - zdragnar 2y ago
    It may not qualify as a life saving drug, but really it ought to be. The long-term quality of life with untreated and/or resistant psoriatic arthritis is awful. Also, biologic drugs are money printing machines if they survive the FDA approval process, as they can manage the symptoms but the disease itself is incurable. Since they are brand new, they need promotion to raise awareness, and they pay for themselves after a few years. Given all of that, irritating as they may be, the major ad spends make a lot of sense.
    - AlbertCory 2y ago
Neil44 2y ago
Obviously you need to subtract costs from that, not just production costs for this year but development costs, and the development costs of other drugs that didn't even make it to production.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  > Obviously Yes, it is. I didn't say it was all profit.
fgonzag 2y ago
My feet have had open wounds for the past year due to psoriasis (and I've gone to every dermatologist I can). It's not just clear skin, it gets very bad with quite painful wounds from the scratching. Especially in hot humid conditions, and I play tennis a lot. 3 people I train with have bad cases, as in having to stop playing for a while
BenFranklin100 2y ago
You seem to be implying the advertising costs are a significant driver of the price for drugs. They are not. The significant driver of the cost in drug is the development costs, including the cost of the many failures along the way. Also, in general and not specific to this case, the prices need to targeted high enough to encourage investors to invest in the first place. If prices are not set at a sufficient premium to offset the volatility and risk, in the future investors will realize biomedical research is a poor investment and put their money in less socially beneficial investments like Facebook.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  > You seem to be implying the advertising costs are a significant driver No, I'm not. That's in your mind. The advertising costs can be justified by their return. Business 101.
  - BenFranklin100 2y ago
    Ok good, thanks. I just wanted to clarify that point for other readers. As an aside, as someone who works in the life sciences field, I’m a bit conflicted about advertising new therapeutics. I see why it is an often necessary practice in order to raise awareness among potential patients. On the other hand, in an ideal world, primary care physicians would be up on the latest therapies and recommend them to their patients as appropriate. Sadly, that is not always the case.
    - AlbertCory 2y ago
      Good, I thought we were about to have a flame war there. People are so accustomed to everything having an ideological point that they infer one if you don't say it. Putting myself in the place of the doctor: if I say "hey, there's this new drug Bimzelx!" and then I have to tell the patient what it costs, I can imagine being happy to wait until THEY bring it up. Of course, if they just ask "are there any drugs for this?" I'd be duty-bound to answer.
istultus 2y ago
Like many a disease with an old name, Psoriasis refers to a localized cutaneous autoimmune disease usually treated by dermatologists, and a severe family of Rheumatic (autoimmune) diseases, part of the Spondyloarthropathy family, that happens to have a cutaneous element which is the same (and often is the first symptom). This treats the latter, debilitating and possibly life-threatening variety.
a_puppy 2y ago
But presumably the advertising department pays for itself, right? So if they cut the advertising department, wouldn't they have less total money in the end? The advertising supports the R&D, not competes with it. (The one exception is when two pharma companies have competing drugs that are basically equivalent. So they get trapped in a "Red Queen's race" where they both spend money on advertising to try to gain market share. In the end they've both spent a bunch of money on ads and ended up back where they started. For those cases, I think government regulation would be valuable.)
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  You seem to have supplied your own conclusion here. I didn't say UCB should do anything in particular: cut it, increase it, or keep it the same.
- Physkal 2y ago
  To counter a Red Queens race is to spend twice as much in advertisements?
- sudosysgen 2y ago
  If there wasn't a competing drug there would be no need for ads, the only drug would get prescribed anyways.
  - AlbertCory 2y ago
    They want the "ask your doctor about..." bits to be heard and followed, I'm guessing. People who thought they just had to live with it will now go in and ask for Bimzelx.
    - sudosysgen 2y ago
      As someone with psoriasis, I seriously doubt anyone with severe plaque psoriasis is going to go from no treatment to monoclonal antibodies. In fact, your insurance won't even pay for it no matter how good it is unless you try other courses of treatment first. The effect is going to be changing from one course of treatment to the next, asking your doctor about it is a call to action.
slashdave 2y ago
> So if you want clear skin, you probably have to pay big bucks. The price is determined by what the market will bear. So, yes.

bryanlarsen 2y ago

> (I don't have psoriasis or know anyone with it, if that matters) Psoriasis is very common, especially the mild forms. You probably know people who have it.

__MatrixMan__ 2y ago

C6552 H10132 N1750 O2029 S42, 147229.87 g·mol, what a monster. Probably not making that one in your garage.

exyi 2y ago
It's apparently a monoclonal antibody (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimekizumab https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimekizumab). That's just a protein, so it might actually be easier to make in your garage than your average small molecule ;) ... not that either would be practically possible, but it might be available in countries where they don't care too much about patents and such
- twic 2y ago
  And if you're really willing to DIY, easier to make in your body than in your garage.

zdragnar 2y ago

Clear skin is the least of the problems with psoriasis. From their website: Bimzelx, alone or in combination with methotrexate, is indicated for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis in adults who have had an inadequate response or who have been intolerant to one or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In other words, it's for people with bad cases who don't respond well to other drugs. Keep in mind, other drugs often come with serious complications- constant use of topical steroids will thin your skin, and give you glaucoma if you develop it and use them near your eyes. Many biologics have even worse potential side effects. On top of that, psoriatic arthritis is degenerative, if you're unlucky enough to get that too, so not treating it means not only constant pain, constant threat of skin infections from scabbing, but permanent joint damage. I ended up on Taltz, another very expensive biologic, but the eli lily foundation covered almost all of the cost since my insurance wouldn't. Before then, I looked like an alcoholic, because my nose was constantly red and inflamed, and I didn't have anything safe to put on it- glaucoma runs in my family, and I wasn't brave enough to risk anything strong enough. If that was the only problem, I might not have even gone the route of Taltz, but I was also developing it all over my body, and there wasn't much that was helping.

AlbertCory 2y ago
Thanks. I finally realized I was seeing this ad constantly and decided to look into it.
- zdragnar 2y ago
  It may not qualify as a life saving drug, but really it ought to be. The long-term quality of life with untreated and/or resistant psoriatic arthritis is awful. Also, biologic drugs are money printing machines if they survive the FDA approval process, as they can manage the symptoms but the disease itself is incurable. Since they are brand new, they need promotion to raise awareness, and they pay for themselves after a few years. Given all of that, irritating as they may be, the major ad spends make a lot of sense.
  - AlbertCory 2y ago

Neil44 2y ago

Obviously you need to subtract costs from that, not just production costs for this year but development costs, and the development costs of other drugs that didn't even make it to production.

AlbertCory 2y ago
> Obviously Yes, it is. I didn't say it was all profit.

fgonzag 2y ago

My feet have had open wounds for the past year due to psoriasis (and I've gone to every dermatologist I can). It's not just clear skin, it gets very bad with quite painful wounds from the scratching. Especially in hot humid conditions, and I play tennis a lot. 3 people I train with have bad cases, as in having to stop playing for a while

BenFranklin100 2y ago

You seem to be implying the advertising costs are a significant driver of the price for drugs. They are not. The significant driver of the cost in drug is the development costs, including the cost of the many failures along the way. Also, in general and not specific to this case, the prices need to targeted high enough to encourage investors to invest in the first place. If prices are not set at a sufficient premium to offset the volatility and risk, in the future investors will realize biomedical research is a poor investment and put their money in less socially beneficial investments like Facebook.

AlbertCory 2y ago
> You seem to be implying the advertising costs are a significant driver No, I'm not. That's in your mind. The advertising costs can be justified by their return. Business 101.
- BenFranklin100 2y ago
  Ok good, thanks. I just wanted to clarify that point for other readers. As an aside, as someone who works in the life sciences field, I’m a bit conflicted about advertising new therapeutics. I see why it is an often necessary practice in order to raise awareness among potential patients. On the other hand, in an ideal world, primary care physicians would be up on the latest therapies and recommend them to their patients as appropriate. Sadly, that is not always the case.
  - AlbertCory 2y ago
    Good, I thought we were about to have a flame war there. People are so accustomed to everything having an ideological point that they infer one if you don't say it. Putting myself in the place of the doctor: if I say "hey, there's this new drug Bimzelx!" and then I have to tell the patient what it costs, I can imagine being happy to wait until THEY bring it up. Of course, if they just ask "are there any drugs for this?" I'd be duty-bound to answer.

istultus 2y ago

Like many a disease with an old name, Psoriasis refers to a localized cutaneous autoimmune disease usually treated by dermatologists, and a severe family of Rheumatic (autoimmune) diseases, part of the Spondyloarthropathy family, that happens to have a cutaneous element which is the same (and often is the first symptom). This treats the latter, debilitating and possibly life-threatening variety.

a_puppy 2y ago

But presumably the advertising department pays for itself, right? So if they cut the advertising department, wouldn't they have less total money in the end? The advertising supports the R&D, not competes with it. (The one exception is when two pharma companies have competing drugs that are basically equivalent. So they get trapped in a "Red Queen's race" where they both spend money on advertising to try to gain market share. In the end they've both spent a bunch of money on ads and ended up back where they started. For those cases, I think government regulation would be valuable.)

AlbertCory 2y ago
You seem to have supplied your own conclusion here. I didn't say UCB should do anything in particular: cut it, increase it, or keep it the same.
Physkal 2y ago
To counter a Red Queens race is to spend twice as much in advertisements?
sudosysgen 2y ago
If there wasn't a competing drug there would be no need for ads, the only drug would get prescribed anyways.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  They want the "ask your doctor about..." bits to be heard and followed, I'm guessing. People who thought they just had to live with it will now go in and ask for Bimzelx.
  - sudosysgen 2y ago
    As someone with psoriasis, I seriously doubt anyone with severe plaque psoriasis is going to go from no treatment to monoclonal antibodies. In fact, your insurance won't even pay for it no matter how good it is unless you try other courses of treatment first. The effect is going to be changing from one course of treatment to the next, asking your doctor about it is a call to action.

slashdave 2y ago

> So if you want clear skin, you probably have to pay big bucks. The price is determined by what the market will bear. So, yes.