The High Cost of Harvoni; Luck was on My Side

When Gilead first announced that they were going to charge $84,000 for a twelve week course of treatment of Harvoni in the USA, it caused quite an uproar. It was shown to have a 90+% cure rate and relatively low side effects so, of course, huge numbers of people with Hep C were going to want to be treated. But at that price, the highest price they charged for the drug anywhere in the world, most people felt they were gouging the sick (and their insurance companies). Gilead trotted out all the usual arguments about the cost of developing the drug, the need for the drug (or any drug) to be profitable in order for them to have a reason to manufacture it and the fact that many countries capped the price they were able to charge, but people in the Hep C community in the USA mostly felt that the price was unreasonably high. After all, if you only treat 100,000 of the conservatively estimated 5,000,000 people with Hep C in the USA at $84,000 per treatment, you rack up $8,400,000,000 in gross sales. That seems be a number that, along with sales in the rest of the world, is going to be giving Gilead a fairly massive profit.

Aside from the sheer cost of the drug to health care providers, the hammer really falls on the people actually infected with Hep C. If you don't have insurance, you are basically screwed. If you have one of the bronze level plans of the Affordable Care Act with a 40% effective co-payment you would have to pay $33,600 for treatment. A silver level plan would leave you with a $25,200 cost and even a gold level plan would still run you a bit over $16,000 out of pocket to be cured of Hep C. For those of us in the fast disappearing middle class in the USA, these are fairly staggering amounts. Sure there are various subsidies and cost breaks available, but given the way they are structured, if you make an amount of money that puts you in the middle class, you are often ineligible for help. I could get into a long rant here about how the Affordable Care Act is really only an affordable insurance act and the cost of any serious health care is just as out of reach under Obama's sellout to the insurance industry as it was in the days before the law was passed, but I will spare you that diatribe. Suffice it to say that the combination of Gilead's predatory pricing and Obamacare's mostly high patient payments means that a large number of Hep C sufferer's are shut out of access to the latest and best treatments available.

Earlier this year, Gilead announced that it will be cutting the cost of Harvoni by 46% sometime this year. This is because AbbVie has introduced their own interferon-free treatment Viekira Pak (which is priced similarly to Harvoni). While this competition is a good thing, the fact that the AbbVie product requires 4-6 pills a day and has more side effects than the single pill Harvoni might mean that it does not provide an effective competitor. If the competition is effective and does induce a lower cost for Harvoni, it means that treatment under a bronze plan would cost about $18,000; a silver would be $13,000 and a gold plan would drop to just over $8,000. While much better for patients, these are still large numbers. Numbers that would have put the treatment out of reach for someone like me.

I got lucky. I have health insurance through my employer and the roll-out for Obamacare has been complex enough that many employers have been granted waivers the past few years allowing them to keep their former plans in place until the regulations for employer-paid Obamacare plans have been worked out. My employer was granted that kind of waiver. I am insured by Kaiser Permanente in San Francisco and my plan is one that has a $30 co-pay for prescription drugs. I have been closely watching the Kaiser drug formulary (the list of which drugs Kaiser provides through their plan) to see when and if Harvoni was added. As soon as it was, I contacted my gastroenterologist to try to initiate treatment. Luckily for me, Kaiser has an extremely proactive view toward Hep C treatment. They believe that everyone who wants to receive treatment should have access. They seem to understand that, regardless of the high cost of the medication, it is cheaper to treat than to deny treatment and then have to pay the higher costs of late stage Hep C and/or cirrhosis treatment. Many insurers are not as forward thinking. Kaiser did initially prioritize the Harvoni treatment to the sickest patients but as that cohort moved through treatment, they rapidly expanded care to their other Hep C patients.

When I saw my gastro guy, I explained that I currently had a health plan that made treatment affordable, but that our current plan would be most likely transitioning to the less affordable Obamacare varieties by the end of the year and thus I would like to be treated as soon as possible. He told me stories of a number of his patients on the lesser insurance plans who indeed were currently shut out of treatment. This factor meant that while my liver is not in a particularly bad state, he agreed that the issue of affordability was one that qualified me for moving up the queue for treatment. He set up the necessary tests and within a month, I began treatment.

I feel extremely lucky that the new drugs came out when they did, that Kaiser moved relatively quickly to include them in their formulary and that they have a very proactive institutional policy toward treatment.  If any of these factors had taken another 6 months to work out, most likely I would be like many other Hep C sufferers on the outside of treatment looking in.

New Drugs, New Hope; I start treatment with Harvoni

I just started treatment with the new Gilead drug Harvoni. It is the first of the new set of "wonder drugs" for Hep C that do not require either interferon or Ribavirin to be taken along with the primary treatment drug. The drug itself is a combination of Sofosbuvir, a polymerase inhibitor (much like the one I took in the drug trial described in the early posts of this blog) and Ledipasvir, which is an NS5A inhibitor. NS5A is a protein is an essential component for the replication of the Hep C virus. The two compounds act together to inhibit the Hep C virus from replicating itself and thus keep the infection from spreading and allow the immune system to gradually kill off the virus present in the body (my interpretation and if wrong the blame is on me).

The cure rates for genotype 1 Hep C (most common and vicious form) are in the 94%-99% range for treatment naive patients (those who have never undergone any sort of treatment) and in the 90% range for those of us who underwent treatment in the past and failed (thus leaving behind tougher versions of the virus). The side effects are also MUCH less difficult than those of the old standard of care of interferon and Ribavirin. The most common are headache, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea and insomnia. While these sound bad, and they are no fun, most reports have them present at levels significantly lower than the same side effects on the old standard treatment.

All of this sounds pretty good. High cure rates and moderate side effects are a strong combination. This is no doubt why you are seeing numbers of soft-sell, perhaps it's time to do something about your Hepatitis C, sorts of ads on television and in print media. Now that there is a treatment without injections, taking only one pill per day, with moderate side effects and with a treatment length of only 12 weeks (and in some instances 8 weeks) it is time for the drug companies to pile on the advertising. That and the fact that Gilead is charging $84,000 ($1000 per pill) for a 12 week course of treatment. (AbbVie has a 4 pill treatment on the market as well: Viekira Pak). The fact that the price is $1000 per pill for the Harvoni may account for the fact that the pill is in the shape of a diamond.

It's a bit too early to have much to say about the side effects, but taking a pill that cost $1,000 is definitely a new experience for me. I'll have more news about how it feels in the next few days.


  

New Drugs, New Treatments, New Hype

In mid-June of this year while at a baseball game watching my childhood hometown Minnesota Twins defeat my adopted home town team San Francisco Giants, a friend asked if I was excited about the news in the paper that morning about the new cure for Hepatitis C. He said that it cured 80% of all patients in clinical trials and that the treatment might last only 24 weeks instead of the standard 48 week therapy. The news was stunning. Which drug was it? I had been keeping up with the various new drugs in the FDA approval pipeline and had never heard of one with a viral clearance rate of more than 65%. Of course he couldn’t remember the name and none of us had a smart phone with us, so it took until after game and back at home before I could do any research.

This article appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle. It stated that about 80% of HEP C patients “with the most common strain” and relapsers from previous treatment were cured by the new drug. The drug was the protease inhibitor telaprevir, brand named Incivek by its developer Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Imagine the amount of money they must have paid a naming company to develop that brand name; rolls right off the tongue. The results from earlier studies had indicated that telaprevir increased the Sustained Viral Response (SVR) in genotype 1 HEP C, the most common genotype infecting US residents, to 65%. It seemed prudent to search out the source material to sort out all these percentages. A quick search of the web found this press release. In the fourth paragraph of the release it stated that “The sustained virologic response for patients treated with Incivek across all studies, and across all patient groups, was between 20 and 45 percent higher than current standard of care.” This seems to indicate that the low end of the SVR rate was indeed 65% and the high end might be almost 90%. The article and press release also indicated that 60% of treatment naïve patients achieved a rapid viral response (RVR) in 4 weeks and these folks not only would only be in treatment for 24 weeks, but had a 90% chance of achieving an SVR as well. It is not clear what the SVR rate for the folks who don’t achieve a RVR and continue for 48 weeks of treatment has been in the tests. It is also unclear whether there is a difference in SVR rates between genotype 1a and 1b. Folks who had relapsed after previous treatments had a 32% SVR rate when treated with the telaprevir, interferon and Ribavirin cocktail. This is very good news indeed for HEP C patients.

A month earlier, this article appeared in the NY Times announcing the debut of Victrelis the brand name of boceprevir (again where do these brand names come from) another protease inhibitor, this one developed by Merck. This drug, which is taken for either 24 or 48 weeks in combination with interferon and Ribavirin, has an SVR rate for treatment naïve genotype 1 HEP C patients of 65-70%. The SVR rate for patients who relapsed after previous treatment is about 40%. Boceprevir is a bit different in that the patient starts with 4 weeks of standard treatment and then adds the boceprevir for either an additional 24 or 48 weeks depending on the viral response. So we have two competing drugs available whose addition to the standard of care treatment increases the SVR rate by a range of 20 to 40 percent. Good news indeed but what is the rest of the story.

The rest of the story has several chapters from side effects to cost of treatment. Looking at side effects first, both boceprevir (Victrelis) and telaprevir (Incivek) have additional side effects to add to those caused by interferon and Ribavirin and both can somewhat intensify the interferon and Ribavirin side effects as well.

Boceprevir can increase the risk of anemia and neutropenia, cause strange taste sensations and cause intestinal tract issues.
Telaprevir also increases the risk of anemia, causes diarrhea, and most importantly can cause an itchy rash. The rash can be serious enough to require that the patient stop taking the telaprevir.

The new drugs are very much like the established treatment in that those with lower viral loads at the beginning of treatment have a better chance of success than those with high viral loads. Also like the established treatments, anyone who has ever tried a treatment, whether standard or experimental, and failed also has a considerably lower chance of success.

Both drugs are protease inhibitors. This means that they inhibit the action of an enzyme that the virus needs to reproduce. They are similar to the protease inhibitors developed to fight the AIDS virus. This means that they must be taken on a fairly rigid schedule: three pills per day, one every eight hours. If that means waking up to take it, wake up you must. They also need to be taken with food, so you cannot pop a pill and run off. You have to have certain types of food with the dose of the drug. This means that for 12 weeks (telaprevir) or 24-48 weeks (boceprevir) your life will be scheduled around your drug dosing.

Both drugs are vastly expensive as discussed in this article. Boceprevir/Victrelis will cost $1,100 per week making the cost of a full course of the drug either $26,400 (24 weeks) or $52,800 (48 weeks) depending on your viral response. Telaprevir/Incivek has been priced at $49,000 for the 12 week course of treatment. This cost is in addition to the $15,000-$20,000 (24 weeks) or $30,000-$40,000 (48 weeks) for the interferon and Ribavirin with which they must be taken. This also does not count the cost of the Procrit to fight anemia ($500 per week) or the Neupogen to fight neutropenia (also about $500 per week) should you need them. There are also the costs involved with antidepressants, sleep medications, thyroid medications, pain medications and whatever you will be using to deal with the rash and itching in the case of the telaprevir.

It is also not clear how quickly insurance plans will add them to their drug formularies. Kaiser Permanente, my HMO here in California, has added both to its formulary. I do not know which other insurance providers have done the same. Even if they are added, it is not clear what the requirements will be for a patient to be eligible to be prescribed and how easily insurance companies will make them available. From an economic point of view they should make them easy to get as even at these prices the cost of treatment is still much less than the cost of a liver transplant.
For those without insurance, I do not know how anyone but the wealthy could afford the additional cost. The cost of standard of care treatment is by itself so high as to exclude many HEP C sufferers from being treated. There are programs to assist those with low resources to get treatment but even with the drugs deeply discounted the ability to come up with as much as $20,000 for a course of treatment would seem impossible.

Despite all these potential problems, the advent of new drugs to combat HEP C is excellent news. Ramping up the SVR rate to a range of 60% - 80% is a vast improvement over the standard of care treatment rate that topped out at 45%. Psychologically, it is far more encouraging to go into a course of treatment thinking you have a 2-1 shot at beating the virus than to go in thinking you have just under a 50-50 shot. These drugs are also only the leading edge of a wave of new drugs and new therapy approaches that are under research and testing. There are new polymerase inhibitor drugs that have SVR rates similar to telaprevir, but with fewer and less severe side effects. Testing on the holy grail of finding a treatment regimen that does not have to include interferon is also underway with early stage results coming in soon. Within the past year, scientists have discovered a method of growing the HEP C virus in the lab. This means that future early stage testing of drugs can be done directly on the virus instead of with animal models. This should increase the pace of research dramatically. In all it is a good time to have HEP C if you are one of us infected. There are established treatments, there are promising new treatments and there are drugs and treatments in the research and development pipeline that seem to point to future in which HEP C can be attacked and treated with a high expectation that it will be successfully cleared from the human body.

Perhaps we can believe the hype surrounding these new drugs. Despite the problems of determining the actual efficacy of the drug in your own case, the potential difficulties in obtaining and paying for the treatment and persevering through the side effects, they have advanced the cause of combatting Hepatitis C.

The more cures, the fewer pig livers will have to be implanted in humans (sorry, I’ve been reading far too many science fiction novels during treatment).

Money Saved Is Money Earned

In one of the last posts I did before I lost the energy to continue writing, I talked about the differences in care between a centrally administered health care organization (in my case the Kaiser HMO) and a health insurance model of care. One of the biggest differences is in the way drug prescriptions are handled. While under health insurance, the copayment for commonly prescribed drugs and drugs with generic equivalents was $15 for each prescription. Uncommon drugs or drugs whose patent had not yet run out or there were no generic equivalents available had much higher copayments depending on which supply store or agency you used. In the case of HEP C, the high-copayment drugs needed for treatment were Interferon (Pegasys), Procrit and Neupogen. My copayment for each of these was $100 for a 4 week supply. These drugs had to be ordered many days in advance from an out of state specialty pharmacy that delivered them via express mail. When you added in Ribavirin, the thyroid meds, the Ambien for sleep, Celexa for depression and the Vicodin for the weekly bought of muscle pain, the copayments added up to $375 every 4 weeks. During the 7 months of Standard of Care treatment while covered by health insurance the grand total was roughly $2800 in copayments for the meds.

Under the Kaiser HMO model of care, it is very different both in cost and the ease of getting the necessary meds. Kaiser has all the drugs available through their pharmacy. The is no longer any need for ordering interferon, Ribavirin, Procrit and Neupogen through an out of state mail order pharmacy; a pharmacy that had to send the stuff in an insulated carton with freeze packs and once mistakenly sent the meds to Canada. It can now be picked up at the local Kaiser pharmacy without the necessity for ordering many days in advance to make sure all the necessary approvals are in order. Kaiser also considers a standard order to be larger for some of the drugs than do the health insurance people which means there is more bang for the buck. The copay for the Ribavirin, Celexa, thyroid meds, Ambien and vicodin are still $15 but the prescriptions are for greater numbers of pills each. The interferon, Procrit and Neupogen all have a $25 copayment. In the case of the interferon and Procrit it covers a 4 week supply, for the Neupogen it covers an 8 week supply. Thus a 4 week supply of the necessary meds adds up to about $120. The savings amount to about $1500 for the length of treatment done while at Kaiser. This is not a trivial amount for the folks in my pay grade.

There are a lot of other differences large and small, good and bad, between the two methods of supplying health care and I hope to go into them more in the near future. This difference however, is nothing but good. $1500 saved covers a full month of expenses in my world and that is the same as $1500 earned.

World Hepatitis Day – Who Knew?

Thursday July 28, seven days ago, was World Viral Hepatitis Day. The day was dedicated to raising awareness of all types of viral hepatitis and the populations they affect throughout the world. Did you know it was happening? If not for the efforts of the San Francisco Hepatitis Task Force, no one in my city would have known, myself included. Were it not for an email sent out by the task force recruiting volunteers for some boots on the ground outreach at transit stations in the city, it certainly would have passed me by. As it was about 50 hardy souls wore t-shirts, held up banners and handed out information cards during the morning and evening commute hours. Over 2500 cards were passed out during the day and thousands of other folks saw the signs and heard our pleas that they find out about HEP C and get tested. We tried out numerous catchphrases such as: “Do your liver a favor, get tested,” “Seven out of ten people don’t know they have it,” “We never thought we had it,” “If you have a tattoo, you might be infected.” “I never knew I had it,” etc. I irresponsibly came up with a few others such as “If you have a tattoo you are already dying,” “If I have it, so could you,” “Don’t die not knowing what killed you,” “What you don’t know can kill you,” and others. Anything to break through the iPod, cell phone and traffic noise clutter. It was a worthwhile though exhausting effort but it left me wondering why we don’t have better outreach about Hep C.

If you remember the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, the gay community did a fantastic job of organizing to demand research about the disease, research about a cure, better treatment by medical professionals, and fairer treatment for infected individuals. They had the same problem as the HEP C community in that AIDS was seen as a disease that affected mainly people who the mainstream of society saw as deviants. With AIDS the victims were defined as promiscuous, drug using men who engaged in “perverted” behavior. With HEP C victims are seen as drug using losers. (There is a rumor in San Francisco that the local Hepatitis B community decided not to ally with the HEP C community in a previous outreach program because they did not want their cause associated with drug use.) The AIDS community worked hard and eventually triumphed over that stigma (though suburban white folks starting to get the disease via contaminated blood certainly moved America toward the realization that the disease was not the wrath of god, but rather and dangerous virus). They now get vastly more attention than the HEP C community even though there are 4 times as many HEP C sufferers as people infected with HIV/AIDS. Our community of infected people needs to start becoming a lot more aggressive in publicizing HEP C and the fact that is one of a family of viruses that can infect people who have never used drugs or indeed engaged in any behaviors mainstream Americans look down upon.

We can certainly learn some lessons from the AIDS community and lose our apathy, shyness or indifference. It is the only way we are going to get the treatments for HEP C widely distributed at an affordable price so we can save the lives of people who don’t need to die from HEP C.

More Dread – Heath Insurance Woes

Insurance Plan Change Forces Change Of Doctors

The new year continues its run of good news as I found out that none of the health care options (the ones I can remotely afford anyway) that are available to me under our organization’s new health insurance plans, allow me to continue with the team that has been currently treating my Hepatitis C.

As several of the recent posts have detailed, our organization changed its health insurance broker and plans for the upcoming year. In order to save money (and I can’t really argue with this as the insurance costs for the organization have risen 40% for this year), they subscribed to Blue Cross “Select” and Heathnet “Silver” insurance plans in addition to the standard Kaiser Permanente plans that have been offered for years. While initial and even follow-up research indicated that my doctors were contracted with both Blue Cross and Healthnet the final determination that came through the brokers was that, while they are contracted to both Blue Cross and Healthnet, they are not contracted with the two stripped-down plans that our organization subscribes to. I could subscribe to a PPO that includes my doctors, but the monthly cost would total more that $4,000 per year, plus the $4,800 in yearly drug co-payments, plus very high deductibles on any medical procedures and hospitalizations that might occur and I just can’t afford to pay those kinds of fees on my income here in one of the most expensive cities in America.

On the positive side, I still have health insurance. It will be through Kaiser Permanente and will be funded by my employer. Kaiser does good work and has good doctors. Even the treatment nurse who has been handling my care at California Pacific Medical Center, was hired away by Kaiser and he is top-notch. The only problem is whether I can manage the transfer of my treatment to Kaiser during the relatively small window of time until my prescriptions run out. I have to get a primary care doctor, have him refer me to a hepatologist, have my records transferred and have my meds continued during a time period of about 20 days. I get to find out how much stress and complication I can handle with a Swiss cheese brain and a 30-day supply of anti-depressants. But that’s the modern world we all have to cope with, so the best thing to do is buckle down and dive in, to mix up some metaphors.

There are lots of people in much worse shape than I am. There are folks with the disease and no health insurance who depend on the largesse of drug companies or aid programs. There are people on waiting lists for liver transplants that are watching their window of opportunity close on them. There are people even with health insurance who are paying huge chunks of their income or going into debt to get access to treatment. I am in none of those positions and I appreciate that more than I can say. I would just like to get some good news at the start of the year. Maybe the Giants will trade for a right-handed bat, the Niners will sign a quarterback, or the Warriors will make the play-offs. I can feel my immune system recharging already.

Heprat’s Coverage Is In The Health Insurance Twilight Zone

The following story is sadly not unique to my situation.

The phone call came from the HR director of our organization. He told me that our health insurance broker had called him with the information that my primary care physician (PCP) only had a contract with Anthem Blue Cross (world’s scariest health insurance company) as a specialist, not as a primary care physician. Therefore I would have to find a new PCP. I had been going to my PCP for 12 years through 4 insurance carrier changes. For the entire time he had been affiliated with a physician group that has contracts with every major health insurance company. Something did not smell right about this ruling.

My PCP had written all my referrals to specialists for my Hep C treatment. He had written several of the prescriptions for the drugs to manage my Hep C side effects. If I had to find a new one, the new doctor would have to get up to speed on my condition, reinstitute all my referrals and prescriptions and do it all by the 10th of January when my supply of Ribavirin would start to run out.

Heprat, man of panic and desperation, sprang into action. I called my PCP’s office. They told me in no uncertain terms that they had a PCP contract with Blue Cross as many of their patients had Blue Cross insurance. I went to the Anthem Blue Cross website, searched for PCP physicians within 2 miles of my home and my doctor appeared on their list of Primary Care Physicians. Not only that, but the doctor code for his PCP status was listed and it said that he had an open practice and was currently accepting patients. Armed with this information, I called the insurance broker for our organization. I explained my situation and they repeated that according to the website of the insurance broker they used, my doctor was only contracted as a specialist; they even went online and checked it while we talked. I told them that I was looking at the Blue Cross website and on that site it clearly stated he was a contracted PCP. I reminded them that the broker website they used for their information had been wrong about the Blue Cross drug formulary and wrongly stated that my hepatologist was not a Blue Cross doctor. They grudgingly admitted that the Blue Cross website might be more accurate than their broker website and agreed to resubmit the paperwork with the codes I provided them from Blue Cross. Now we wait on Blue Cross to process the paperwork.

The Ribavirin runs out on the 10th of January. The interferon runs out on the 14th of January. My thyroid medication runs out on the 9th of January. The Celexa runs out on the 17th of January.

I suspect my neighbors think I am either insane or being brutally beaten as I have spent several minutes the past few afternoons walking around the house and screaming. It sounds terrible but it really does help relieve the stress. For all of you out there in this same situation, I recommend screaming. It lets out your feelings and leaves you so damned tired that you don’t have enough energy for an anxiety attack.

The Magic Bullet Theory

Waiting for the “Next Best Thing”


Last Tuesday was the annual Holiday Pot Luck for the twice-monthly Hepatitis C support group that meets in the California Pacific Medical Center Pathology Conference room. There were about two dozen people there and, in the tradition of potluck dinners everywhere, enough food for twice that number. Best of all, there were plenty of desserts.

Of the two dozen people or so people attending, about half were either currently in treatment or had successfully completed treatment; another quarter had undergone treatment and either failed to respond or the virus had reappeared after the completion of treatment and the last quarter had yet to make a decision about treatment. About half the folks who had successfully completed treatment and never had a recurrence of the virus were people with Hepatitis C genotype 2. This genotype has about an 80% chance of clearance, and excellent prospects of a sustained viral response, with 24 weeks of standard interferon and ribavirin treatment.

After people had settled down with their plates of food and glasses of non-alcoholic libations (ginger potions of all sorts were quite popular), everyone reported on their general state of health, how they felt and any significant issues they had that might be caused or intensified by the disease or their treatment status. Several common themes emerged as people told their stories.

The people who had successfully completed treatment reported that by and large they felt they were back to normal functioning (one individual reported that she felt that after 2 years she still did not feel she was back to her previous cognitive function level). They felt their energy had returned, they no longer had shortness of breath, their strength was back and generally they were physically in good condition. Most felt that their mental faculties and their memory had returned to pre-treatment levels as well. To a person, they reported that it took considerably longer to return to full function than the time that is considered standard by the medical establishment. The usually quoted time to recover from the effects of interferon, ribavirin and the other associated drugs used in treatment is 3 to 6 months. Everyone reported that the time it took them to recover from treatment was in the range of 6 months to 1 year with a few reporting longer times than that.

The people currently in treatment (and for that matter, the folks who had completed treatment) reported two side effects as most debilitating: fatigue and brain fog. The fatigue ranged from merely difficult to extreme with no one reporting only mild fatigue. That said, person after person stated that the most irritating and frustrating side effect was the cognitive deficit associated with interferon brain fog. It was not just the increased memory difficulties, it was the inability to concentrate, the ease of distraction, the loss of train of thought that drove everyone crazy. Most folks also reported nausea of varying degrees, insomnia, sweats etc.; but those paled in comparison to the frustration of brain fog and the annoyance of being tired all the time.

The rest of the people at the meeting, the non-responders to treatment and the people yet to attempt treatment, all had the same outlook: they were waiting for the new and better drugs to become available. They had very different reasons for this viewpoint, but it was surprising to see the uniformity of their point of view.

The non-responders and fail-to-sustainers had all failed at the standard interferon and ribavirin treatment. They and their doctors had come to the conclusion that the two drug standard treatment was not going to successfully defeat the virus in their bodies. They need the additional punch of one of the new drugs in order to have a real chance at success. You can’t argue with that conclusion, when what is available has failed, you have to await further developments to move forward.

The people who had not done any treatment had different reasons for waiting for the next new and better drugs. Many were afraid of the side effects but most were looking for a therapy with a better chance of success that the standard therapy. The standard treatment has about an 80% chance of clearing genotype 2 Hepatitis C. It has a 40-45% chance to clear genotype 1 Hepatitis C. The drug most likely to be approved next is Telaprevir, a protease inhibitor (Boceprevir, a similar protease inhibitor is supposedly not far behind). Telaprevir has demonstrated in research testing that, in combination with interferon and ribavirin, it has a genotype 1 clearance rate of about 60-65% (Boceprevir has similar test results). On the surface the reasons for waiting for the new drugs are clear-cut, 60% is a much better chance than 40%. There are a lot of other factors to consider before pinning one’s hopes on the next best thing, however.

First is the discovery of variations in the IL28B gene and how these variations affect response to treatment. If you have the CC variant of the gene, the evidence indicates that your chances of responding well to standard treatment rise to the 60% level, or about the same as the telaprevir response rates. The test to determine which variant you have is available, not extremely expensive and clearly gives information you can use to make a decision about treatment. For a more info the link is here.

Secondly, the new drugs are not assured of either approval or timeliness. The latest Telaprevir application was submitted to the FDA in November, 2010 which means a decision is 6 to 10 months away. Boceprevir has not even reached the “it’s coming in the next x months stage of rumor yet.” There is also the, admittedly small, chance that Telaprevir is never approved. I have many friends who are in the gene-splicing and drug development fields who report a number of instances when companies were extremely confident of FDA approval only to be turned down during the final application. The FDA might come back with concerns that require further testing or additional data submissions, all of which could move the timeline much further out. The promising new polymerase inhibitors (RG7128 and RO5024048 for example) are only just beginning phase II trials which means they are at least 3-5 years away from any sort of approval and only if they succeed in further trials. There are other drugs even further away, etc.

Thirdly, these new drugs are expensive. They project to be about twice as expensive as the current interferon and ribavirin. The plan is that you only need 24 weeks of treatment, but it will be a very expensive 24 weeks. Therefore the question of once the drugs are approved how long it will take for them to be added to insurance company drug formularies so they will be covered by your insurance becomes extremely important. As we all know, insurance companies can be quite recalcitrant about approving new therapies.

Finally, there are all the considerations about your personal situation. What stage is your liver disease? What is your viral load? What is your general health? How old are you? These questions only start to list your issues. What is your financial situation? What is your insurance coverage? What is your work situation? Do you have solid family support? If you have to go on disability, how would that affect your job future? Can you even tell your employer, family, friends and coworkers that you have the disease? All of these and more are considerations that may be more important than the rates of viral response of the various drugs.

Remember two things as think about all the ramifications of when and how to deal with your Hepatitis C: first, there is always a newer, shinier, more promising therapy in the future and second, the best is the enemy of the good.

Another Day Another Insurance Functionary

It is amazing how exhausting phone conversations with health insurance bureaucrats can be. After composing and sending several emails, I hit the phones to try for more direct answers concerning the details of the potential coverages available to me. I talked to a number of folks who ran the gamut from clueless, bewildered, helpful but clueless, helpful but wrong and helpful and possibly correct. The problem is that determining the difference between the final two types, helpful but wrong and helpful but possible correct is neither easy nor readily apparent.

After sending a set of detailed questions to my HR department, they punted me further on to the insurance broker who handles our account. They were nice folks and quite helpful, but the insurance plan drug formulary comparison tool on their website indicated that Neupogen and Ribavirin were not in either the Blue Cross or the Healthnet formularies. I found that a bit hard to believe as both are large health care providers and must have more than a few Hep C patients. I managed to track down the pdf file of the actual Blue Cross formulary updated as of November, 2010 and all the drugs I am taking are in their formulary. Naturally, this does not raise one’s confidence level about the quality of the answers to the other questions I asked.

The two other questions I asked were about the drug copays for specialty drugs and any special tasks I needed to complete to insure continuity of care. The drug co-payment information they provided was straight out of the handbook and concerned the difference in co-payments between generic and brand name drugs, it did not address the specialty drug question. It may not even be an issue, but, again, it’s all up in the air until the actual paperwork goes through.

As far as continuity of care: heck, not a problem. Just let everyone know as soon as possible that the change in plans is occurring, get them to write new prescriptions for everything you take, get authorizations from the insurance company for all of them and have it all happen before any of the current scrips run out. Oh, and have it all happen during the highly productive holiday season.

If only they could switch the open enrollment period to some other time of the year...Ho! Ho! Ho!

The Joy of American Health Insurance

Two days ago the employees in my organization entered our annual health insurance open-enrollment season. While this has always been a pain in the butt process, it assumes greater importance given my current situation. Considering that I have 22 weeks left to complete my course of Hepatits C treatment, continuity of care becomes an issue of primary importance.

I currently have Blue Shield insurance. I enrolled in Blue Shield when my organization’s health care broker dropped my previous insurance company. This year, they have dropped Blue Shield from their list of available plans. They have substituted Anthem Blue Cross, one of the more notorious insurance companies in the country and Healthnet, one of the most expensive. Just the sort of additional stress one looks forward to at this most wonderful time of the year.

I am currently enrolled in an HMO under the Blue Shield umbrella. This is not an HMO in the traditional sense of Kaiser Permanente or Group Health; that is a company that owns it’s own medical facilities. Instead Blue Shield contracts with physician groups and hospitals that provide the same services as a HMO. My physician group is associated with both Blue Shield, Healthnet and Blue Cross, so I should – emphasis should – be able to transfer my care over to one of the other umbrella payment plans without a great deal of difficulty. Even if that is the case, however, there is no guarantee of consistency in the drugs each organization has in their drug formularies and particularly in the amount of co-payment they charge for the more exotic drugs necessary for treatment: Pegasys (interferon), Neupogen, Procrit and Ribavirin. Currently my co-payments for these bad boys run about $315.00 per month. Will the number go up, down, sideways? Inquiring minds want to know.

I have begun my research, of course. I have a series of questions in to my HR department, such as it is; I have called my specialty pharmacy to initiate inquiries as to their knowledge of co-payment differences; I have talked to my doctors about the necessary paperwork I will have to produce to ensure that I will have uninterrupted care. Oh yes, I have ten days to make my decision.

Would that our country was a sane one and health care was viewed as both a necessity and something citizens could expect from the taxes they pay. Thank heaven I at least have an employer that provides health insurance plans or I might be living in a box right now – the actual retail cost billed to the insurance company for the drugs I take on a monthly basis is just over $7,000, quite a bit more that I make in pay.

Soon enough information will come pouring in and decisions will be made, I can hardly wait for the conversations with insurance functionaries, Joy To The World, eh?

Co-Pay & Prescription Assistance Programs

As I am beginning to see the co-payments for my medications mount up, I know that many other people undergoing treatment are facing the same issue. Many of the folks I have met who have Hepatitis C, are putting off the decision to undergo treatment because of the cost of the medications. Others are waiting for the chance to screen for research trials of new drugs because the drug companies running the trials cover the cost of the medications and the monitoring care.

There are resources available to help with the cost of medications. I mentioned a few that are run by the drug companies themselves in this post. There are also a wide range of other programs run by both pharmaceutical companies and private foundations. A list of some of these programs follows. I hope it is useful.


Patient Access Nework Foundation
https://www.panfoundation.org/
1-866-316-7263
Assists patients who cannot access the treatments they need due to out-of-pocket health care costs including deductibles, copayments and coinsurance. Up to 4K yearly in drug/co-pay assistance. Patients can apply on line or call the phone number listed above.

Healthwell Foundation
www.healthwellfoundation.org
1-800-675-8416
Addresses the needs of individuals who cannot afford their insurance copayments, premiums, coinsurance or other out-of-pocket health care costs.

National Organization For Rare Disorders (NORD)
www.rarediseases.org
1-800-634-7207
Assists uninsured or under-insured individuals in securing life-saving or life-sustaining medications.

Partnership For Prescription Assistance (PPA)
www.pparx.org
1-888-477-2669
Offers a single point of access to more than 475 public and private patient assistance programs, including more than 150 programs offered by pharmaceutical companies. Includes assistance for the uninsured.

Patient Advocate Foundation’s Co-Pay Relief Program
www.copays.org
1-866-512-3861
Provides direct co-payment assistance for pharmaceutical products to insuraed patients (including Medicare Part D beneficiaries) who financially and medically qualify.

Chronic Disease Fund
www.cdfund.org
1-877-968-7233
Patient will have to call monthly to see if they have funds. Funds are based off individual donations.


Families USA
www.familiesusa.org
1-202-628-3030
Families USA is a national nonprofit, non-partisan organization dedicated to the achievement of high-quality, affordable health care for all Americans.

Modest Needs Foundation
www.modestneeds.org
(415) 956-9395
Modest Needs is an award-winning public charity with a simple but critical mission: we work to stop the cycle of poverty BEFORE it starts for the low-income workers whom conventional philanthropy has forgotten.

Needy Meds
www.needymeds.org
1-978-281-6666
NeedyMeds is a non-profit with the mission of helping people who cannot afford medicine or healthcare costs. The information at NeedyMeds is available anonymously and free of charge.

Patient Services Inc. (PSI)
www.uneedpsi.org
1-800-366-7741
Assists patients in locating health insurance policies. Provides health insurance premium assistance (including COBRA) and co-payment assistance (including helping satisfy Medicare Part D true-out-of-pocket.

Advocacy Attorney through Crohn’s Foundation
Email: patient_advocate@sbcglobal.net
1-860-674-1370

Patient Advocate Foundation
www.patientadvocate.org
1-800-532-5274
Patient Advocate Foundation is a national non-profit organization that seeks to safeguard patients through effective mediation assuring access to care, maintenance of employment and preservation of their financial stability relative to their diagnosis of life threatening or debilitating diseases.


OTHER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS



Chrohn’s & Colitis Foundation of America – www.ccfa.org - 1-800-932-2423

American Cancer Society – www.cancer.org – 1-800-227-2345

Brain Tumor Society – BTS Cares – www.tbts.org – 1-800-770-8287

Cancer Care – www.cancercare.org – 1-800-813-4673

Leukemia and Lymphoma Society – www.LLS.org – 1-800-955-4572

Lymphoma Research Foundation – www.lymphoma.org – 1-800-500-9976

National Brain Tumor Foundation – www.braintumor.org – 1-800-934-2873

National Marrow Donor Program – www.marrow.org – 1-888-999-6743

A Good Word For Big Pharma

Huge multi-national pharmaceutical companies, aka Big Pharma, tend to have a bad reputation among many of the people who study health care issues or are in need of exotic drugs to treat diseases. These companies are often portrayed as greedy, rapacious, and insensitive and that’s just how they are described in polite company. While I understand where the opinions of these folks come from, from the point of view of a Hepatitis C sufferer, my opinion is a bit different.

I am somewhat familiar with the issues of drug research. Several folks I know are gene-splicers involved in medical research working at companies as large as Genentech down to small, privately held startup level concerns. My wife has a science background (MS level) and has worked for research companies and I have a lifelong interest in scientific issues and some familiarity with the protocols and problems of medical research. I admit I have tended to be on the side of the folks with low opinions of Big Pharma in the past, due in no small part to the insider stories I have heard over the years. This has changed since I was diagnosed with Hepatitis C and changed even more so since I entered treatment.

There are two reasons for the change. The first is that private sector drug companies are the drivers for research into new ways to treat Hep C. The taxpayer-funded National Institutes of Health (NIH) does not exactly throw money at Hep C. For instance, while there are estimated to be 4,000,000 people in the USA infected with Hepatitis C compared to a bit over 1,000,000 infected with HIV, the NIH spends only about $20 per patient on Hep C research versus roughly $2,750 per patient for HIV. They have also been known to siphon off bits of that pathetically low amount and send it to other research areas. On the other hand, recognizing that 4,000,000 people is a large market for their products, the major drug companies are funding a wide and ever-increasing range of studies to discover new and more effective treatments for Hepatitis C. This is an example of how the profit motive can result in far more benefits for disease sufferers than waiting around for government funded research projects to begin to address the issues.

The other reason is the benefits that I and other people undergoing Hepatitis C treatment have received from the drug companies researching and selling the drugs to treat the disease. When I moved from treatment on the RO5024048 study to out-patient standard of care treatment, there was a gap between the time when I left the study to the time when my treatment and prescription authorizations cleared the insurance company bureaucracy. The people at Roche provided some samples of both Ribavirin and interferon that allowed me to continue treatment without missing any doses as the paperwork cleared. I don’t know whether the samples “fell off the truck” or are routinely provided so that the people at the Hepatology Center can deal with just such issues as mine, but they were a godsend. Likewise when my prescription for procrit fell through the cracks at the specialty pharmacy for a week and it looked like I might have to drastically cut my Ribavirin dose until it arrived, a sample of procrit was also provided by a drug company to give me the chance to address my red blood count issues more quickly and keep me on the maximum dose of Ribavirin.

Big Pharma also has programs to assist uninsured and underinsured patients to receive the treatment they need. There are programs directly from the companies themselves as well as foundation programs funded in part by drug companies that provide treatment almost entirely for free for low-income patients. One of the people in my support group had their entire treatment paid for this way. The only time they had to pay was if a part of the treatment was done outside of the California Pacific Medical Center.

While Big Pharma is far from perfect, they are the folks that those of us infected with Hep C have to look towards for improvements in treatment. Until the public profile of the disease is raised and the government actually begins to dedicate serious money to research, it is the private sector that will drive the research into new treatments. We 4,000,000 potential customers are all saying, you get something that is highly effective and we will push the insurance companies to get it to us and to cover it.

Treatment Update - 5 weeks along in Standard Therapy

My latest viral load test results came back and I have a viral load of just a hair over 5,000 I.U./ml. That is a 3.76 log reduction from the 12,900,00 I registered at the beginning of treatment 29 weeks ago. It also shows a trend in the right direction following the viral breakthrough. My numbers from week 24 going forward are 17,000; 40,000; 10,000 and now 5,000. While the 5,000 number is not yet a truly significant reduction from the peak of my breakthrough viral load, it is getting awfully close.

Two other numbers are showing some change as well. My hemoglobin has dropped to 8.2 from the 11.4 it had climbed to after they reduced my Ribavirin dose to 1000 mg. during the final 6 weeks I was in the research study. My neutrophil count has dropped to 500 in the five weeks since they reinstituted a full dose of interferon. The response to these test results by my hepatologist illustrates clearly the difference in being treated outside of a research study. As I discussed in this post, the researchers running the study need to control, as thoroughly as they possibly can, the drugs that are utilized in the study. One of the primary goals of studies like this, after they determine the drug is effective against the virus, is to determine the side effects and potential dangers of the drug. They know the side effects of the standard of care and by adding only the new drug to the treatment, they can see if it amplifies or minimizes or introduces completely new side effects to the standard treatment. So when presented with test results that show that the research subject has anemia or low neutrophil counts they adjust the doses of the standard of care drugs or the research drugs to determine whether this is what is causing the problems. Unfortunately this can result, as in my case, in reducing the effectiveness of the treatment.

Now that I am being treated outside the research study in the standard of care therapy, they have a panoply of treatments they can use to address the problems and keep me on the full doses of the anti-viral drugs. In my case, the hemoglobin count went down fairly quickly and they put me on folic acid to attempt to build up my red blood cells. When that did not have much effect after about 10 days of taking it and my hemoglobin continued to fall, they prescribed procrit, a drug that directly stimulates red blood cell production. It is a drug that has to be injected once a week under the skin, like the interferon. In doing this for the first time, I tried to inject it into a pinched-up roll of fat on the right side of my belly area and discovered that the skin in that part of my body is like rubber. After trying three times to push the needle through this highly resilient and puncture-resistant patch of skin, I gave up and tried my left side. On that side it went right in and the injection was no problem. I’m thinking of offering the skin on the right side of my spare tire as a new material for bicycle tires. Spare tire tires; alligator skin tires; super skin tires; there has to be some money in selling skin outside the skin industry.

They are also attacking the low neutrophil count by prescribing neupogen another injectable drug that stimulates white blood cell production. I am currently in the process of urgent insurance authorization for that drug and should start using it next week. My wife thinks all this is turning me into a pincushion, as I will now be injecting three different drugs every week. I am also taking levothyroxine to stabilize my thyroid function. The change in thyroid function is also a side effect of the interferon. Luckily, this drug is in pill form and I take it once a day. The three drugs mentioned here are all being taken to enable me to continue taking full doses of interferon and Ribavirin to combat the Hepatitis C virus.

So the drug roster being taken either weekly or daily to fight the Hep C or the side effects of the drugs is:
Pegylated Interferon
Ribavirin
Procrit
Neupogen
Levothyroxine
Celexa
Trazadone
Tramadol
Ativan
The final numbers are not in yet as my nurse AR is working to find the cheapest drugs with the lowest copays but so far it works out to be a bit over $375 per month in copayments. This may go up or down some but if it holds at that number it is about $4500 for the duration of the treatment, assuming no additional drugs are needed.

Considering the only drugs I ever really took up until this time were the occasional course of antibiotics; painkillers after surgery or some muscle relaxants after throwing my back out, this level of involvement with the pharmaceutical industry is a whole new world…

The Cost of Stress

The results of the first viral load test since I began treatment outside the study came back yesterday and my viral load numbers are trending back down. This is enormously good news. The first test indicating the viral breakthrough showed a viral load of 17,000. The retest number was a touch above 40,000. Now, one month after the initial breakthrough and two weeks after resuming full doses of interferon, the number has dropped to 10,000. This offers confirming evidence for the theory that the breakthrough resulted from the series of reduced and interrupted doses over the final few months of my participation in the study and not because the Hepatitis C virus had begun to develop resistance to interferon. This also adds weight to the belief that it is indeed worthwhile to continue treatment and potentially clear the virus.

Tracing the path of stress during the past month leading up to this result has been a learning experience of the first order. The initial news of the breakthrough brought a tremendous jolt of adrenaline and anxiety. I was convinced the breakthrough had everything to do with the interferon dosing changes due to my low neutrophil counts and was intent on continuing treatment in some form. The uncertainty of whether or not the study doctors and my doctors would agree and what this would mean for ongoing relations with the researchers resulted in a solid seven days of anxiety. The agreement and support of the doctors involved was an all-too-brief relief as the stress shifted to getting rapid treatment and prescription authorizations from the health insurance company and attempting to secure bridge doses of interferon and ribavirin that would allow no further dose interruptions until the prescriptions were filled. Having accomplished that, the stress shifted to finding the best suppliers for the prescriptions which would result in the lowest possible co-payments so as to make ongoing treatment affordable. Finally, the wait for the first round of tests indicating whether the renewal of full-dose interferon treatment would knock the viral load back down continued the grind.

The first 10 days were actually a period of relatively high-energy as news was received, reactions were dealt with, research was done, meetings were planned for, calls were made and decisions were arrived at. The next 10 days were a marathon of waiting for authorizations, arranging prescriptions and deliveries and generally feeling my physical and mental energy drain away. The final days were a series of forced marches through each day. It became hard to sleep and harder to stay awake. I woke up tired, had to take several catnaps a day at my job to be able to keep any mental focus at all and when not at work found myself falling asleep after any activity that required mental effort.

The relief of seeing the new viral load numbers bestowed the great gift of sleeping through the night for the first time in weeks; and sleeping through the following day, and continuing to doze off throughout the day today. Who knows, a few more days of 16 hours of sleep and I might be able to watch the knock-out round of the World Cup with the attention it deserves.

The Cost of Treatment

Going on the Standard of Care Hepatitis C Treatment of Pegylated Interferon and Ribavirin that is paid for via your insurance plan or out of your own pocket, causes a major restructuring of you financial budgets. The meds to treat Hep C are not cheap. Pegylated interferon is a relatively new drug and thus does not have a generic version available. It is available only via brand name preparations. As anyone dealing with drugs knows, brand name is always more expensive than generic. Ribavirin is a bit of a different story. It is available in generic form as well as brand name and thus is available at a lower cost, but that lower cost is not necessarily cheap.

None of this is news to anyone who approaches the treatment through their hepatologist and insurance company. For those folks, the cost of treatment has been a major component of their decision whether or not to even begin the process. For people who have been involved in research trials where the drugs are provided free of charge by the drug company sponsoring the research plan, it is a rude shock. Complicating the situation is the fact that people entering treatment through their insurance company or via their hepatologist have been thinking long and hard about the cost of the treatment, they have been making plans as to how to pay for it. They may have contacted the drug companies if they are underinsured or uninsured to see whether they qualify for any financial assistance. In short they have been thinking about it seriously for a considerable time.

When you suddenly make the decision to continue treatment through you insurance or out of your own pocket in order to try to continue the gains you have made during the research trial, the cost issue is thrust upon you without a real chance for reflection and planning. You find out that Pegylated interferon is runs up to $550 per dose; That a months supply of Ribavirin might be $1000; making the monthly bill over $3000 if you are paying for it yourself. Even if your insurance is paying for some of the cost of the drugs, it might not be for the same prescription co-payment you have grown used to with the other drugs you have received over the years.

In my case, I am already on 5 drugs to manage the side effects of the interferon and ribavirin, they are Celexa, Trazadone, Levothyroxin, Ativan and Tramadol. I don’t take all of them every day and the scrips run for various lengths but it is safe to say that the co-payment bill is $60 per month for those 5. As we have hustled to continue the Standard of Care treatment without interruption to the dosing schedule, we have heard several different numbers for the co-payments for Ribavirin and Pegasys (which is the drug that is on my insurance company formulary). It started out being a flat 20% of cost or $450 per month, then was reported to be $165 per month, then a test payment run by the specialty pharmacy supplying the Pegasys reported it at $250 per 4-week supply. The ribavirin will be covered at the standard $15 per prescription copay. So what it looks like is that it will cost from $325 per month for the 7 drugs in question up to $525 per month under the worst-case scenario.

In easy to understand terms, it means from $3900 to $6300 per year for the drugs that will give me at best a 40% chance to clear the virus; about $100 per percentage point of potential success. And this does not include any additional drugs which may be prescribed to counteract the low blood cell counts caused by the interferon and ribavirin. This is yet another reason that some people wait years to undergo treatment. It can be hugely expensive.

More on the personal costs in upcoming posts.