Really interesting comment on cost-benefit analysis on cancer drugs:
I'm not familiar with the specifics
of Tarceva, but I do work in anti-cancer drug development. There are a
couple things that folks should consider which might add some nuance to
this particular drug/disease combination.
Fist, pancreatic cancer has one of the highest mortality rates of
any form of cancer (it's right up there with lung cancer). The
statistic I'm most familiar with is 3% chance of surviving five years.
That statistic is from about four years ago, but I'm fairly certain
that I would have heard about any major advances in this area. So like
Megan mentioned, small advances against this disease can be really good.
The other situation people should consider is that efficacy from
clinical trials is a worst case scenario. Patients who qualify for
these trials are generally not responsive to the current standard of
care and can have complications which might not exist in the general
patient population. So it's not unreasonable to expect that someone
recently diagnosed with pancreatic cancer might derive more benefit
than someone in a clinical trial. These data can take a while to
accumulate after a drug has been approved, and this is also the period
where drugs are the most expensive.