<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: drug costs</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'drug costs'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22drug+costs%22&t=%22drug+costs%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:38:41 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>UK MS Patients May Lose One Medication Option</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5103426&amp;cid=t_148281_129_f&amp;fid=36038&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Ftrevis-life-with-multiple-sclerosis-ms%2Fuk-ms-patients-may-lose-one-medication-option%2F</link>
            <description>You know when the chief executive of the UK MS Society, Simon Gillespie, is quoted as saying “…people with MS would be better off living almost anywhere else in Europe…” in a press release, things are going terribly wrong for multiple sclerosis patients in that country.
Mr. Gillespie’s remarks came on the heels of a decision by the British National Institutes for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE (the agency that recommends action to the National Health Service (NHS) as to what medication costs the NHS should cover for patients), that the oral MS med Gileyna (fingolimod) should not be paid for by NHS. NICE seems to have flat-out ignored science in their decision and focused instead on cost alone.
Going so far as to compare the medication’s results to that of patients taki...</description>
            <author>Life with MS</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5103426</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 19:37:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5103426</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Docs Think Of Pharma &amp; Where They Get Info</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984686&amp;cid=t_148281_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F69M-eNcvLh4%2F</link>
            <description>As they say, every little bit counts. And so drugmakers may be heartened to hear that the perception held by physicians of the pharmaceutical industry has actually improved this year - 58 percent of docs say they have a somewhat positive or extremely positive overall impression. This is, however, up just 2 points from last year. But this is also the first time since 2004 that a positive impression increased.
Consumers, on the other hand, are heading in other direction - 46 percent have an extremely or somewhat negative impression this year, up 1 point from last year. Overall, one could argue the bottom line tallies for both groups is largely static, although perhaps docs are most sensitive to new approval and R&amp;#038;D issues, while consumers tend to focus on safety and price. The responses...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984686</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 13:56:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984686</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>MS Drug Presentations: They’ve Changed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704795&amp;cid=t_148281_129_f&amp;fid=36038&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Ftrevis-life-with-multiple-sclerosis-ms%2Fms-drug-presentations-theyve-changed%2F</link>
            <description>There was a day in my community when a person with MS could spend nearly one night per week at one of the pharmaceutical company-sponsored multiple sclerosis drug seminars around the country, complete with free meals. They were “dinner and a [multiple sclerosis] show”! Like many of our readers, I spent more than a few of these evenings learning about the disease modifying drugs, but also learning quite a lot about the doctors who presented at these meetings.
Nearing a decade post-diagnosis, I could safely say that I no longer attend (and am seldom invited to) these seminars. I get information in other ways when something new comes out – for example, at events such as the CCSVI program I attended in Seattle in January. Last week, however, I decided to sit in on one of the drug company...</description>
            <author>Life with MS</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704795</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:34:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704795</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Disabled in the United Kingdom to Be Hurt by Reforms</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4636561&amp;cid=t_148281_129_f&amp;fid=36038&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Ftrevis-life-with-multiple-sclerosis-ms%2Fdisabled-in-the-uk-to-be-hurt-by-reforms%2F</link>
            <description>In the United Kingdom, the letters ESA and DLA stand for programs similar to those in the United States (SSD &amp; SSI). 
Here, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues, (not Social Security taxes) which is designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people with little or no income. It provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing and shelter. Social Security Disability Insurance pays benefits to you and certain members of your family if you are &amp;#8220;insured,&amp;#8221; meaning that you worked long enough and paid Social Security taxes.
In the United Kingdom, the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and the Disability Living Allowance (DLA) are designed to help people who can’t work due to (among other things) disablin...</description>
            <author>Life with MS</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4636561</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:25:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4636561</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Cost Of Prescription Drugs Just Keeps Rising</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4606052&amp;cid=t_148281_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FFiK0SOKwv4Q%2F</link>
            <description>Where, oh where, did your health care budget go? A larger chunk apparently went to pay for brand-name* prescription meds which, on average, rose 6.9 percent last year. The increase nudged past the 6.8 percent average advance registered in 2008, which was the largest annual jump since Barclays Capital began tracking price hikes, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Some of the biggest: the Benicar blood pressure pill sold by Daiichi Sankyo rose 29.3 percent; the Gleevec cancer treatment marketed by Novartis jumped 20.9 percent; Johnson &amp;#038; Johnson&amp;#8217;s Concerta pill for ADD moved up 19.7 percent; Pfizer&amp;#8217;s Lipitor cholesterol blockbuster popped 12.4 percent, and the Plavix bloodthinner sold by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis rose 13.2 percent.
Obviously, drugmakers are &amp;#8220...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4606052</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:15:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4606052</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“What’s Wrong?” It’s A Generic-Drug Rip Off, That’s What</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4322509&amp;cid=t_148281_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fwhat%25e2%2580%2599s-wrong-it%25e2%2580%2599s-a-generic-drug-rip-off-thats-what%2F2011.01.07</link>
            <description>Cute packaging and product placement in the checkout lane at Duane Reade will get you generic Tylenol for a price equivalent to $50 for 100 tabs, as opposed to $6 per 100 count in the usual package.


			
			*This blog post was originally published at tbtam* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4322509</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:00:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4322509</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Help With the Cost of MS Drugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4055840&amp;cid=t_148281_129_f&amp;fid=36038&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Ftrevis-life-with-multiple-sclerosis-ms%2Fhelp-with-the-cost-of-ms-drugs%2F</link>
            <description>Just over a week ago, we told you about the price of the new oral disease-modifying therapy for multiple sclerosis, Gilenya. Many of you responded with surprise, disappointment, and disgust. Some of you, however, pointed out the price of your current DMT versus the actual cost you pay.
There is a big difference between the wholesale price of a drug and what we actually pay for them.
Without factoring in ancillary expenses like doctors visits, infusion supplies, and the like, the biggest factors in our out-of-pocket costs for our disease-modifying drugs are our individual insurance coverage, co-pays, and co-insurance rates.
Then, for those of us not on Medicare Part D, there is eligibility for drug manufacturer’s assistance programs.
I say for those not on Part D because the lawmaking pro...</description>
            <author>Life with MS</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4055840</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:29:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4055840</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Top Gripes About Drugs And What They Cost</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4040561&amp;cid=t_148281_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Ftop-gripes-about-drugs-and-what-they-cost%2F2010.10.07</link>
            <description>I used to defend pharmaceutical companies. ”What companies out there have contributed more good? Should care manufacturers make more when all they do is make transportation that breaks after a few years?”
It made sense to me that you should put a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow so that companies are motivated to invent more drugs and innovate. We throw a lot of money to athletes and movie stars who simply entertain us, shouldn’t we do better to those who heal us? I used to say that. I don’t anymore.
No, I don’t think the drug companies are “evil.” People who say that are thinking way to simplistic. These companies are doing exactly what their shareholders want them to do: make as much money as possible for as long as possible. That’s what all companies do, right? They...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4040561</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:00:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4040561</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The High Price of the New MS Pill</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4023039&amp;cid=t_148281_129_f&amp;fid=36038&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Ftrevis-life-with-multiple-sclerosis-ms%2Fthe-high-price-of-the-new-ms-pill%2F</link>
            <description>I’ve read and quoted figures for annual economic impact of multiple sclerosis at around $50,000-$75,000 per patient.
Those numbers are HUGE, and some may not understand the term “economic impact.” It’s not necessarily out-of-pocket expenses each of of us has to pay. It refers, rather, to the cumulative cost of missed work time, insurance rate hikes, travel expenses to and from doctors’ appointments, lost pay raises and unoffered job advancements and the like – plus the out-of-pocket stuff.
That is why there is such a broad range in those figures – loads of variables.
One variable is obviously how much a drug costs us.
The price we each pay for our disease-modifying MS therapies is loaded with variables. Included in such variables would be the “quality” of insurance covera...</description>
            <author>Life with MS</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4023039</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:38:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4023039</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Universal Drug Care Could Save Canada Billions?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3969185&amp;cid=t_148281_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FZNSkdvTLV6k%2F</link>
            <description>A universal prescription drug plan could save Canada about $10.7 billion, or 43 percent of annual spending on medicines, according to a report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. The projection is based on the premise that private insurance is more expensive to administer and consolidating existing coverage networks would allow the government to make lower-cost bulk purchases.
As an example, the report states that administrative fees for public plans in Ontario and Quebec were estimated at 2 percent, but were 8 percent for private plans. In total health spending, Canada’s public program had administrative costs of 1.3 percent compared with 13.2 percent for private plans. And so the authors &amp;#8220;conservatively infer&amp;#8221; that at least 6 percent of costs for drug insuranc...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3969185</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2010 12:48:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3969185</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Generic Drugs: Not So Cheap</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3935799&amp;cid=t_148281_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fgeneric-drugs-not-so-cheap%2F2010.09.05</link>
            <description>I received the following e-mail from a patient (paraphrased):
Dear Dr. Fisher,
Thank you for trying to switch me from lisinopril to generic losartan (Cozaar) to help me with the irritating cough that has been nagging me since I was placed on lisinopril. I did not pick up my prescription, though. At nearly $200 for a three-month supply, I&amp;#8217;ve decided to live with the cough, since the same amount of lisinopril costs me about $12.
-Ms. Patient
Interesting how the generic drug market for some drugs only marginally discounts prices. Since the companies that make generics did not have to absorb research and development costs, how do they justify the exorbitant prices? Simple: The middlemen still have to get theirs.
-WesMusings of a cardiologist and cardiac electrophysiologist.

			
			*This...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3935799</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 16:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3935799</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>For Adults, Drug Costs Doubled From ‘96 to ‘06</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3075765&amp;cid=t_148281_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Frr47beVX4Cs%2F</link>
            <description>The average cost for an American between 18 and 44 years of age was double the inflation-adjusted average for 1996, according to recently released data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, or AHRQ. To be precise, the cost went from $79 to $161.
Prescription meds also accounted for what AHRA calls a &amp;#8220;notably larger share of all health care expenses&amp;#8221; for this age group in 2006 - it was 18 percent compared with 10 percent in 1996. This occurred even though the proportion who purchased prescription drugs dropped over the same period from 60 percent to 54 percent.
For Americans age 18 to 44, health care expenses totaled $231 billion in 2006 or about $40 billion more than in 1996 after accounting for inflation; a smaller proportion incurred health care expenses in 200...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3075765</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:37:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3075765</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>US Should Lower Co-Pays To Save Money: Study</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2047638&amp;cid=t_148281_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F486641887%2F</link>
            <description>Imposing European-style price controls on meds in the US would yield only modest savings that would be more than offset by shortened life spans as the pace of drug innovation slows, according to a paper in Health Affairs*. Instead, lowering insurance co-payments would more effectively combat rising prrices in the US, which pays more per capita for pharmaceuticals than any other nation.
&amp;#8220;We found policies that regulate the prices of drugs could result in modest savings for consumers, in the best cases on the order of $5,000 to $10,000 per person over a lifetime,&amp;#8221; Darius Lakdawalla of the nonprofit Rand Corporation, who worked on two studies appearing in a special report on drug pricing, tells Reuters. &amp;#8220;But in many other cases, those policies resulted in very substantial lo...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2047638</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:20:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2047638</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Generic Growth Slowed Drug Costs In 2007</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1268600&amp;cid=t_148281_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F243302671%2F</link>
            <description>The ongoing use slowed the growth of US prescription drug costs last year to its lowest level since 1996, according to Express Scripts, the pharmacy benefits manager which, by the way, pushes generics. Total spending on prescription drugs last year rose 4.7 percent, while the average price of a generic drug fell 3.1 percent.
That compared with a 7.4 percent increase in the average price of a brand-name drug, according to data compiled from a random sampling of 3 million of the PBM&amp;#8217;s members. Meanwhile, generics amounted to 63.7 percent of prescriptions as of the end of last year, compared with 59.7 percent a year ago.
&amp;#8220;You hear nothing but bad news about healthcare expenses going up. This is the lowest this has been in 12 years that we&amp;#8217;ve tracked this,&amp;#8221; said Steve M...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1268600</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:58:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1268600</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What is the &quot;Walmart Effect&quot;?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=891625&amp;cid=t_148281_97_f&amp;fid=35050&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmaGazette%2F%7E3%2F159594569%2Fwhat_is_the_walmart_effect.html</link>
            <description>An article today in The New York Times, by Stephanie Saul, debates&amp;nbsp;different reasons for the slowing of inflation in drugs cost.One of the aspects she discusses is &amp;quot;the WalMart effect&amp;quot; which is the initiative that was launched last fall where many generic prescriptions were made available at a cost of $4 a month. Other stores such as Target, Kmart and other retailers quickly followed suit with similar offers.&amp;quot;A Labor Department economist, Francisco Velez, said his office noted a drop in generic drug prices shortly after the large stores&amp;rsquo; promotions began, particularly in the South, where Wal-Mart started its program. His colleague, Mr. Ginsburg, called the drop in prices for generic drugs &amp;ldquo;dramatic.&amp;rdquo; Wal-Mart and other large chain stores make up 15 to ...</description>
            <author>PharmaGazette</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=891625</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 20:00:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">891625</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

