Two news reports of the last week, though no longer shocking, made me think exactly the same way as the headline of this article epitomizes.
These reports are not just two isolated instances, but an integral part of a similar chain of events that I partly addressed in one of my earlier blog posts titled, “Is The Core Purpose of Pharma Business Much Beyond Profit Making?” of November 10, 2014.
With the fist clenching media reports of just the last week, I shall try to dwell upon that in absence of good governance how two of the greatest healers and the medical care givers in the arena of healthcare – the doctors and the hospitals, are being increasingly perceived by the common citizens as nothing less than looters.
The doctors:
A November 21, 2014 report highlights that the Medical Council of India (MCI) has summoned over three hundred doctors from various parts of India, based on an anonymous complaint, for taking lakhs of rupees as bribes from an Ahmedabad based pharmaceutical company. All those 300 doctors have been told to bring copies of their Income Tax returns and bank statements.
Just a year ago, in September 2013, the Chief Vigilance Commissioner reportedly received a letter alleging that doctors were taking bribes from Pharma companies. The complaint was forwarded to the Health ministry. The MCI took over the case in December 2013 and formed a subcommittee to investigate the doctors.
The complaint details that the Ahmedabad-based pharma company has been paying to the doctors not just huge cash, but also gifting them cars and flats, besides sponsoring foreign trips for the family.
In return, the involved doctors are allegedly prescribing that Ahmedabad based pharma company’s products that are priced 15 to 30 percent higher than those of well-established other pharma players.
In addition, according to reports, the doctors would also air on the Television sets placed at their respective clinics, advertisements of the pharma company products against hefty cash or equivalent in kind.
Although, the allegations of unholy nexus between pharma players and the doctors are continuity of a good old saga, the risk taking incentives that it provides to the wrong doers are very significant. The anonymous letter alleged that the concerned pharma company’s profit zoomed from zero to Rs. 400 Crore in a period of just 5 years.
According to available reports, the MCI has already questioned 166 doctors, out of which 7 are senior doctors from Maharashtra, including 3 physicians from Mumbai.
The hospital:
Another report on the subject that appeared yesterday is related to overcharging for an oncology medicine of Novartis – Sandostatin LAR, over the last nine months by the well-known Tata Memorial Hospital of Mumbai.
According to the report, even when Novartis revised the price of Sandostatin LAR from Rs. 65,499 for a 20mg vial to Rs 32,000 during Oct-Dec 2013 and the chemists in the hospital’s vicinity were selling the same vial for Rs 32,000, Tata Memorial continued to sell it at Rs 48,296.
The report also states that patients could have saved much more, if the hospital had prescribed an Octreotide generic of the same strength, Octride Depot 20mg by Sun Pharma with an MRP of Rs 17,800 is sold at Tata Memorial for Rs 12,157, instead of Sandostatin LAR 20mg.
However, the newspaper claims, “DNA was the first to report about the price disparity at the hospital on Nov 5. Tata Memorial Hospital has decided to reimburse cancer patients who were overcharged for a Novartis-branded oncology medicine over the last nine months.”
Interestingly, we get to know only about a few of such instances, only when these are reported either anonymously or by some employees or through rare impartial investigative journalism of international standard.
Treatment of dreaded diseases like Cancer also not spared:
The above hospital case assumes immense importance, as it is related to a dreaded disease and an expensive cancer drug. In real every day life, many such cases of various hues and colors are taking place in India incognito, at the cost of patients.
A scary scenario:
According to the ‘Fact-Sheet 2014′ of the World Health Organization (WHO), cancer cases would rise from 14 million in 2012 to 22 million within the next two decades. It is, therefore, no wonder that cancers figured among the leading causes of over 8.2 million deaths in 2012, worldwide.
A reflection of this scary scenario can also be visualized while analyzing the growth trend of various therapy segments of the global pharmaceutical market.
A recent report of ‘Evaluate Pharma (EP)’ has estimated that the worldwide sales of prescription drugs would reach US$ 1,017 Bn. by 2020 with a Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 5.1 percent between 2013 and 2020.
Interestingly, oncology is set to record the highest sales growth among the major therapy categories with a CAGR of 11.2 percent during this period, accounting for US$ 153.4 Bn. of the global pharmaceutical sales.
High incidence of cancer in India:
A major report published in ‘The Lancet Oncology’ states that in India, around 1 million new cancer cases are diagnosed each year, which is estimated to reach 1.7 million in 2035.
The report also highlights, though deaths from cancer are currently 600,000 -700,000 annually, it is expected to increase to around 1.2 million during this period.
The Lancet Oncology study showed, while incidence of cancer in the Indian population is only about a quarter of that in the United States or Europe, mortality rates among those diagnosed with the disease are much higher.
Experts do indicate that one of the main barriers of cancer care is its high treatment cost that is out of reach for millions of Indians.
Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer, accounting for over 1 in 5 of all deaths from cancer in women, while 40 percent of cancer cases in the country are attributable to tobacco.
Cancer drug price – a global issue to address:
As the targeted therapies have significantly increased their share of global oncology sales, from 11 percent a decade ago to 46 percent last year, increasingly, both the Governments and the payers, almost all over the world, have started feeling quite uncomfortable with the rapidly ascending drug price trend.
In the top cancer markets of the world, such as, the United States and Europe, both the respective governments and also the private insurers have now started playing hardball with the cancer drugs manufacturers.
There are several instances in the developed markets, where the stakeholders, such as, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) of the United Kingdom and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) are expressing their concerns about manufacturers’ charging astronomical prices, even for small improvements in the survival time.
Following examples would give an idea of global sensitivity in this area:
After rejecting Roche’s breast cancer drug Kadcyla as too expensive, NICE reportedly articulated in its statement: “A breast cancer treatment that can cost more than US$151,000 per patient is not effective enough to justify the price the NHS is being asked to pay.”
In October 2012, three doctors at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center announced in the New York Times that their hospital wouldn’t be using Zaltrap. These oncologists did not consider the drug worth its price. They questioned, why prescribe the far more expensive Zaltrap? Almost immediately thereafter, coming under intense stakeholder pressure Sanofi reportedly announced 50 percent off on Zaltrap price.
Similarly, ASCO in the United States has reportedly launched an initiative to rate cancer drugs not just on their efficacy and side effects, but prices as well.
Developments in India:
India has already demonstrated its initial concern on this critical issue by granting Compulsory License (CL) to the local player Natco to formulate the generic version of Bayer’s kidney cancer drug Nexavar and make it available to the patients at a fraction of the originator’s price. As rumors are doing the rounds, probably some more patented cancer drugs would come under Government scrutiny to achieve the same end goal.
I indicated in my earlier blog post that the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) of India by its notification dated July 10, 2014 has decided to bring, among others, some anticancer drugs too, not featuring in the National List of Essential Medicines 2011 (NLEM 2011), under price control. These prices have already in force.
Not too long ago, the Indian government reportedly contemplated to allow production of cheaper generic versions of breast cancer drug Herceptin in India. Roche – the originator of the drug ultimately surrendered its patent rights in 2013, apprehending that it would lose a legal contest in Indian courts, according to media reports.
Biocon and Mylan thereafter came out with biosimilar version of Herceptin in the country with around 40 percent lesser price.Herceptin,
Hence, affordable pricing of cancer drugs would continue to remain a key pressure point, as it just happened yet again.
The government to intervene again:
According to a media report of the last week, the new government in India is planning to control prices of anti-cancer drugs to address this critical issue.
As the current National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM) does not include many important anti-cancer medication, Tata Memorial Centre of Mumbai has recommended to the government that oncology drugs, such as Trastuzumab, Erlotinib, Irinotecan, Lenalidomide, Capecitabine, All Trans Retinoic Acid (ATRA), Bendamustine, Rituximab, Temozolomide (TMZ), Zoledronic acid, Megestrol acetate and Letrozole, should be added to the NLEM.
As a first step towards this direction the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) has invited comments on the same from the pharmaceutical industry and other stakeholders to bring these drugs under price control.
Quoting NPPA the report states, “the recommendations are based on factors such as the ability of the drug to improve the overall survival chances of the patient. The other factors include higher priority to drugs that have the potential to cure a fraction of patients versus those that have been proven to only prolong lives; the number of patients potentially impacted in India based on data from population based cancer registries of the National Cancer Registry Program; the non-availability of alternative medications of the same or other pharmacological class that can act as a reasonable ‘substitute’; and price of the drug to patients and the differential in price between various brands.”
Although this is a welcome move to most of the patients, the pharma industry would certainly not be happy with this development, because of very obvious reasons and is expected to strongly oppose this initiative of the government. Let us wait and watch how this scenario unfolds further.
Conclusion:
In pursuit of the Eldorado to generate more and more wealth, shorn of least concerns for majority of patients, quite a few companies are not sparing even the dreaded diseases, such as cancer, pushing many patients to abject poverty, if not untimely death.
Increasingly, many healthcare players across the world are reportedly being forced to pay heavily for ‘unethical behavior and business practices’ by the respective governments. Unfortunately, no such steps are being taken in India, not just yet.
At least on paper, for errant doctors and hospitals there is MCI to take prompt remedial measures. For implementation of Drug Price Control Order (DPCO) there is NPPA, though effectiveness of these two seemingly powerful bodies are far from the expectations of the stakeholders, occasional reported jingoism notwithstanding.
Currently in India, there are no legally binding ‘codes of pharma marketing practices’ in place. Even the Department of Pharmaceutical does not seem to have any legal jurisdiction for taking penal action against the errant pharma players for marketing malpractices or misdemeanor.
In this chaotic scenario, is it not quite challenging to fathom how would the government possibly discourage any healthcare or pharma player from turning looter instead of playing the expected role of a healer, ensuring beyond doubt that there is no wolf in sheep’s clothing?
By: Tapan J. Ray
Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.