Have your say on the Herceptin debate

I agree - let's cut all funding to the All Blacks and the world cup to fund Herceptin, a drug that may work for 4 out of every 100 people treated. It's just a pity that we can't take back the money that's already been spent on the NZ Olympic squad (who needs to be represented at the Olympics anyway? complete waste of public money).

Robert... wake up to the bottom line man! Check out the figuers in my post 129 and which are freely availible on the Roche website. The Pharmaceuticals marketing and distribution machine has worked on you - they spend as much on marketing as they do on R&D! I know a Pharmacuticals sales rep that used to head off to Fiji every year with their company to celebrate the yearly profit take.

Robbie,

Please don't highlight your complete ignorance of this issue.

To suggest that Pharmac, essentially a body set-up to ration funds has the expertise to compare clinical data, or discount studies already undertaken is laughable. The R&D expenditures by companies such as Genentech are simply massive and an investment return is required especially given the time-frame of drug development and the number of drug candidates that fall-over in trials.

Unfortunately the penny pinching attitudes expressed don't lead us anywhere. It is little wonder pharma don't bother having clinical trials of the latest drugs in this country. If we did our citizens would be able to access new trial drugs, for free.

Next time you are paying for that overpriced brown liquid on Friday night, ask yourself who the real price gougers are.

Problem is we are being constantly being mislead by drug company stats.As a cancer sufferer myself I have learnt to educate myself on what is fact and what is fiction,especially for such an emotional issue as one looks to prolong life. For example, I have seen stats that claim Herceptin offers a 33% chance of prolonged life.(note this drug is NOT a cure...it just prolongs life in a few people...and thats good,especially if you are one of the few) In reality the 33% is the difference between say 2 and 3.The real measure should be the number of lives prolonged per 100 patients treated.In the case of herceptin this ranges between 1 and 13,depending on which study is used.Fact is some of these people would have survived anyway...thats the way it goes with cancer.The highest survival rate for herceptin is currently for women treated for the shortest time. Also be very wary of side effects of these type of drugs (or any drug for that matter.

The real question in the Herceptin debate is, "how come it is so expensive". Roche, the Swiss company that produces the drug made a profit of $15,000,000,000 (NZD) last year. That's a 15 billion dollar overall profit after allowing for research and development costs. They spend about the same on marketing as they do on research and development. The CEO in 2007, a Dr Franz Humer took home a pay packet of $8 Million (NZD). About 96% of Roche's revenue comes from Europe and America. These guys are making products that can give life or death and not many in Africa, Asia and the Pacific (including New Zealand) can afford them. Shame on you Roche and all the greedy profit takers in the Pharmaceuticals Industry.

The money wasted on govement Department Retreats and Catering would be better spent on Herceptin. At least the money would be getting put to a far better use and helping people.

This country spends millions on sports related activities, sending free-loading politicians on pointless trips overseas and so on... Where are our priorities? Surely the health of these women who would benefit from Herceptin is more important to the future of our nation? These are our mothers, wives, sisters, best friends,colleagues etc. Without them our world would be a poorer place.

If a 12 month course of Herceptin is accepted by the majority of oncology experts as giving women diagnosed with HER2 breast cancer the best chance of survival, it should not be a political decision to decline it. This aggressive form of breast cancer strikes mostly younger women, and, despite a heartening increase in hands-on fatherhood, it is still women who bear the major role of raising children, so it is imperative that HER2 women get the best available therapy to empower them to live long enough to raise their children. Can't see the wood for the trees? Let's not lose sight of the big picture.

The nine week treatment is based on the result of a Danish Trial done several years ago. Most research scientists and oncologists agree that the study was not only flawed, but had too few patients enrolled to be statisticly valid.

I am a HER2+ breast cancer survivor living in the United States. I was diagnosed as stage IV HER2+ in 1999. Herceptin has been my savior as I am still cancer free after 9 years.

We also maintain a website for patients and their caregivers at: www.her2support.org

Results of a study was released at the ASCO Meeting in Chicago, IL, USA by MD Anderson a major cancer research center. Breast cancer patients who are HER2+ and treated with Herceptin - outlive those who are not.

Hugs to all my sisters, Christine

Aaron asks if health insurance pays for drugs like Herceptin. Most do not. They have a clever little clause in their contract that says they fund only drugs that Pharmac fund. There is one company ING that does cover Herceptin. Having said that, Southern Cross, my health insurance company, does cover the hospital and specialist costs of my Herceptin treatment. I am grateful for that even though it is a very small amount of the total cost. Jude obviously missed the point I was making in my article 'Enough to make you sick'.The full article I wrote explains where drugs like Losec for indigestion are extremely valuable and should always remain fully funded for New Zealanders. Losec for covering a young man's stag party or Losec taken 'so you can eat and drink what ever you like and not suffer the consequences' are not something I want to see my health dollars spent on. I used the indigestion drug example to compare and contrast Pharmac's handling of the different drug categories. Expensive drugs like Herceptin are always going to be disadvantaged by Pharmac's method of comparing cost and benefit with what is currently funded. Herceptin for 12 months is only going to be funded if they change their methods and ask for more funding from vote health. Pharmac Medical Director Peter Moodie and Dr Jackie Evans visited me at home in April to discuss my article. We had an excellent discussion and agreed on most things. Pharmac agreed to make changes in the patient information to reflect the uncertainty in the 9 week trial data. I am pleased with that. We all agreed indigestion drug prescribing needed urgent attention and they are adressing this issue.