[Debbie L.]

“The addition of pertuzumab to a standard regimen of TH for treatment of metastatic HER2-overexpressing breast cancer is unlikely to provide reasonable value for money spent in the United States compared with other interventions generally deemed cost effective,” the authors wrote. “This analysis highlights the economic challenges of extending life for patients with noncurable disease.” Here's the link to the whole article.

This is sure to be provocative and controversial. Perhaps initially specifically to pertuzumab, but eventually for all the expensive new cancer drugs.

What do those of you who are savvy about reimbursement think? Could insurance and medicare/medical use this to deny coverage for an FDA-approved drug indication?

I'm about as frugal as one can get, but even I find this shocking. If we're going to develop and approve drugs, then any needed action on their cost should happen much sooner than when they're already out there, benefiting people. Am I overreacting?

Debbie Laxague