Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Why comparative effectiveness won’t matter to Avastin and Lucentis

Merrill Goozner
Meds
July 30, 2010
Share
Tweet
Share

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services could save a half billion dollars a year by switching its beneficiaries with macular degeneration to  Genetench’s Avastin instead of Genentech’s Lucentis, the Wall Street Journal reported recently. The two drugs are variations of the same molecule.

Many eye doctors across the country have been switching to the less expensive Avastin ($42 a dose compared to $1593 for Lucentis) to save their elderly patients with the sight-robbing condition from expensive co-pays. Medicare at first said it wouldn’t pay for the off-label use of Avastin for macular degeneration, but reversed itself last year after pressure from Capitol Hill.

Four years ago, the National Institutes of Health funded a $16 million trial comparing the two to provide definitive clinical evidence that the two drugs have the same effect. The trial results are due next year. Numerous smaller studies have already shown the two drugs are comparable.

According to the Journal story, CMS sought to suppress this latest cost savings analysis, whose authors included three CMS employees. When Journal reporter Alicia Mundy called, CMS chief medical officer Barry Straube claimed there was no effort to suppress the data and saw no reason why it couldn’t be published quickly.

What’s the difference? Everyone already knows you can save a bundle for Medicare and for patients by using Avastin off-label instead of Lucentis. I suspect the main reason many eye doctors still use Lucentis is that they make a small mark-up for drugs administered in their own offices (the treatment is given with a shot in the eye). Six percent on $1593 beats the hell out of six percent on $42.

The NIH comparative effectiveness trial will not change that core incentive. CMS will still cover Lucentis after the “definitive” trial results are published because it is prohibited by law from using comparative effectiveness research or cost-benefit analysis to make coverage decisions.

Until Congress gives CMS the power to make coverage determinations based on the relative cost of treatments that have been proven to be equally effective, many doctors with well-off Medicare beneficiaries who can afford the co-pays (and the Genentech detailers who cater to them) will feel free to ignore the results of comparative effectiveness studies like the forthcoming Avastin-Lucentis trial.

Merrill Goozner is a freelance writer, independent researcher and consultant who blogs at Gooznews on Health.

Submit a guest post and be heard.

Prev

Decision support can help doctors order scans

July 30, 2010 Kevin 1
…
Next

When a biopsy cannot completely rule out cancer

July 30, 2010 Kevin 19
…

Tagged as: Medications, Public Health & Policy

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Decision support can help doctors order scans
Next Post >
When a biopsy cannot completely rule out cancer

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Merrill Goozner

  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    Curbing Medicare costs: Are seniors or the government responsible?

    Merrill Goozner
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    Will health reform survive the Supreme Court?

    Merrill Goozner
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    A look behind the growing cost of cancer drugs

    Merrill Goozner

More in Meds

  • How CAR-NK cancer therapy could be safer than CAR-T

    Cliff Dominy, PhD
  • Psychedelic-assisted therapy: science, safety, and regulation

    Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD
  • The anticoagulant evidence controversy: a whistleblower’s perspective

    David K. Cundiff, MD
  • Is tramadol really ineffective and risky?

    John A. Bumpus, PhD
  • Unregulated botanical products: the hidden risks of convenience store supplements

    Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD
  • “The meds made me do it”: Unpacking the Nick Reiner tragedy

    Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Examining the rural divide in pediatric health care

      James Bianchi | Policy
    • Will AI replace primary care physicians?

      P. Dileep Kumar, MD, MBA | Tech
    • How CAR-NK cancer therapy could be safer than CAR-T

      Cliff Dominy, PhD | Meds
    • Sustainable legislative reform outweighs temporary discount programs [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why patient trust in physicians is declining

      Mansi Kotwal, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is primary care becoming a triage station?

      J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD | Physician
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • The blind men and the elephant: a parable for modern pain management

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Conditions
    • Is tramadol really ineffective and risky?

      John A. Bumpus, PhD | Meds
    • Psychiatrists are physicians: a key distinction

      Farid Sabet-Sharghi, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Prostate cancer genomic testing: a physician-patient’s perspective

      Francisco M. Torres, MD | Conditions
    • Why every physician needs a sabbatical (and how to take one)

      Christie Mulholland, MD | Physician
    • Retail health care vs. employer DPC: Preparing for 2026 policy shifts

      Dana Y. Lujan, MBA | Policy
    • Taiwan’s “Yi-Dong-Yang”: a preventive aging model for super-aged societies

      Gerald Kuo | Conditions
    • The moral injury of “not medically necessary” denials

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Physician
    • What is palliative medicine and why is it so misunderstood?

      Patricia M. Fogelman, DNP | Conditions

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 6 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Examining the rural divide in pediatric health care

      James Bianchi | Policy
    • Will AI replace primary care physicians?

      P. Dileep Kumar, MD, MBA | Tech
    • How CAR-NK cancer therapy could be safer than CAR-T

      Cliff Dominy, PhD | Meds
    • Sustainable legislative reform outweighs temporary discount programs [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why patient trust in physicians is declining

      Mansi Kotwal, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is primary care becoming a triage station?

      J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD | Physician
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • The blind men and the elephant: a parable for modern pain management

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Conditions
    • Is tramadol really ineffective and risky?

      John A. Bumpus, PhD | Meds
    • Psychiatrists are physicians: a key distinction

      Farid Sabet-Sharghi, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Prostate cancer genomic testing: a physician-patient’s perspective

      Francisco M. Torres, MD | Conditions
    • Why every physician needs a sabbatical (and how to take one)

      Christie Mulholland, MD | Physician
    • Retail health care vs. employer DPC: Preparing for 2026 policy shifts

      Dana Y. Lujan, MBA | Policy
    • Taiwan’s “Yi-Dong-Yang”: a preventive aging model for super-aged societies

      Gerald Kuo | Conditions
    • The moral injury of “not medically necessary” denials

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Physician
    • What is palliative medicine and why is it so misunderstood?

      Patricia M. Fogelman, DNP | Conditions

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Why comparative effectiveness won’t matter to Avastin and Lucentis
6 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...