Boceprevir is priced high

Anonymous

Guest
Now that boceprevir is out with WAC of $1100 per week. For treatment naive patients it will be around $33,000 p.a and $48,000 for full course of 44 weeks.

Can we expect telaprevir to be in the same price range? I don't want to lose my job!
 






Now that boceprevir is out with WAC of $1100 per week. For treatment naive patients it will be around $33,000 p.a and $48,000 for full course of 44 weeks.

Can we expect telaprevir to be in the same price range? I don't want to lose my job!

Pricing strategy is much higher.....cuz we're much better. Quotas will be outrageous so your job is at risk.
 


















Just get out there and sell the damn drug. You have a better product that patients will only have to take for 12 weeks, 1/2 the pill burden and many patients will be able to stop therapy at 24 weeks. You dont get that with Boceprevir.
 






Other things you don't get with Boceprevir:
Rash
Itching
Hemorrhoids
diarrhea
anal itching
other anorectal discomfort

oh and let's not forget, 4x the price.

Oh wait, but that's only for 12 weeks. Easy for you to say that to someone else huh? LMAO
 






Pill burden that's the best you could do. I'd rather take 3 times as many pills and not have a body rash and itch my asshole for 12 weeks then 6-8 weeks after stopping treatment.
 






Other things you don't get with Boceprevir:
Rash
Itching
Hemorrhoids
diarrhea
anal itching
other anorectal discomfort

oh and let's not forget, 4x the price.

Oh wait, but that's only for 12 weeks. Easy for you to say that to someone else huh? LMAO

SVR is key, Vertex = 80%, Merck = 66%; this is not even a fair fight, its not even close. BTW, I dont work for the company. Hey, my butt might itch, but I have a far greater chance of being cured.
 






It is obvious that you do not have virology experience. You cannot compare these numbers. Look at the control arms. You look at success by comparing how much you improved over your standard of care. Even then, sometimes low patient numbers in a given arm will throw this off. Doctors will make their decision by efficacy, safety, and support programs offered by the companies. This is triple therapy and patients will need help to reach these great svr numbers.
 






It is obvious that you do not have virology experience. You cannot compare these numbers. Look at the control arms. You look at success by comparing how much you improved over your standard of care. Even then, sometimes low patient numbers in a given arm will throw this off. Doctors will make their decision by efficacy, safety, and support programs offered by the companies. This is triple therapy and patients will need help to reach these great svr numbers.

It's obvious that you DO have virology experience and that you've been selling an inferior drug for several years now. You tried the same tired argument in trying to explain why PegIntron always had consistently lower SVR's. Doctors didn't buy that as evidenced by Pegasys 80+ market share and they won't buy it this time either. What's it like always having to explain away your data?
 






It is obvious that you do not have virology experience. You cannot compare these numbers. Look at the control arms. You look at success by comparing how much you improved over your standard of care. Even then, sometimes low patient numbers in a given arm will throw this off. Doctors will make their decision by efficacy, safety, and support programs offered by the companies. This is triple therapy and patients will need help to reach these great svr numbers.

You are right, I have NO virology experience! But I do have experience with OBFUSCATION, which is what your post is! Muddy the waters, and cause confusion as a way to misdirect attention from the important issue, whic is VERTEX SVR=80%, MERCK SVR=66%. No matter what you say, I do know that the higher the SVR, the better the product (assuming statistical significance).

If your above post is as good as "you got", good luck maintaining your credibility with your docs! I think begging, is a better alternative. Your better off simply stating that you'll lose your job if you dont get some scripts. You have expereince getting your butt kicked by Pegasys, so you know the drill.
 






Wow the attitude of the vertex reps is amazing. One of the post simply pointed out the basics of what you look for in a study which is improvement over control arm. You cannot compare these studies due to the patients enrolled being different. If you are not going to address compliance and patient needs good luck. Triple therapy will not be a cake walk for patients or for the doctors that treat these patients. The way these post talk truly show that these rep's care only about themselves and their sales. Physicians will begin to read this attitude and it will effect these rep's.
 






WOW! Had a physician tell me today that she finds NO REASON to use INCIVEK bc of the challenges to manage the multiple DDI's and it does NOT reflect a viable approach when looking at the cost to the healthcare system. SHE SAID: "VERTEX ought to be ashamed of themselves for pricing a 12wk. course of therapy at $48K. ARE THEY THAT DESPERATE FOR CAPITAL AT THE EXPENSE OF THIER REPUTATION?"
 






Wow the attitude of the vertex reps is amazing. One of the post simply pointed out the basics of what you look for in a study which is improvement over control arm. You cannot compare these studies due to the patients enrolled being different. If you are not going to address compliance and patient needs good luck. Triple therapy will not be a cake walk for patients or for the doctors that treat these patients. The way these post talk truly show that these rep's care only about themselves and their sales. Physicians will begin to read this attitude and it will effect these rep's.

HUH?
 






WOW! Had a physician tell me today that she finds NO REASON to use INCIVEK bc of the challenges to manage the multiple DDI's and it does NOT reflect a viable approach when looking at the cost to the healthcare system. SHE SAID: "VERTEX ought to be ashamed of themselves for pricing a 12wk. course of therapy at $48K. ARE THEY THAT DESPERATE FOR CAPITAL AT THE EXPENSE OF THIER REPUTATION?"

As I said, the ONLY hope for Merck is built upon economic strategy. One doctor means nothing. There is a reason that ALL analysts believe that the Vertex drug will capture AT LEAST 75% of the market, and that reason is that the Vertex drug is clearly superior. If you are a Merck rep, just put your market share where your mouth is. Allowing for parity coverage, if your drug is superior, in a few months we should all expect to see your drug at 51%+. There is no need to argue here; the market will determine who is correct.
 






As I said, the ONLY hope for Merck is built upon economic strategy. One doctor means nothing. There is a reason that ALL analysts believe that the Vertex drug will capture AT LEAST 75% of the market, and that reason is that the Vertex drug is clearly superior. If you are a Merck rep, just put your market share where your mouth is. Allowing for parity coverage, if your drug is superior, in a few months we should all expect to see your drug at 51%+. There is no need to argue here; the market will determine who is correct.

Hey Dope! VTRX have you noticed the stock price recently?
 






Hey Dope! VTRX have you noticed the stock price recently?

No, but whats that got to do with my comment? The fact is that NO ANALYST expects Merck to get more than 25% of the market, none. Please do us all a favor and include a link to an article that suggests an expectation that Merck will prevail. You simply cant do it. This battle will be won or lost by science. If the SVRs in the studies playout in the clinics, Merck has no shot. I dont work for Vertex, just being objective.

By the way, no need to use immature insults, lets stick to fgacts, science, logic.
 






No, but whats that got to do with my comment? The fact is that NO ANALYST expects Merck to get more than 25% of the market, none. Please do us all a favor and include a link to an article that suggests an expectation that Merck will prevail. You simply cant do it. This battle will be won or lost by science. If the SVRs in the studies playout in the clinics, Merck has no shot. I dont work for Vertex, just being objective.

By the way, no need to use immature insults, lets stick to fgacts, science, logic.

Get over yourself you big dope! Forget science, logic, fgacts (try spell check) etc...Merck and Roche will outspend, outman and outsmart Vertex.

This is pharma and cash rules! Get with the program or get out!
 






Get over yourself you big dope! Forget science, logic, fgacts (try spell check) etc...Merck and Roche will outspend, outman and outsmart Vertex.

This is pharma and cash rules! Get with the program or get out!

Roche will not spend at all, they dont sell the Merck product, reps only get paid on message recall of a few points; if merck drug tanks, no skin off their backs. In fact, most will partner with both merck and vertex to expand market. They are completely neutral. Perhaps when all things are equal, you might be correct. The problem is according to the PIs and the advisory boards, ALL THINGS ARE NOT EQUAL.. Again, there is a serious reason that no analyst expects merck to exceed 25% market share.

PS: The juvenile attemps at insults are a clear indication that you know that your arguments are irrational and weak.
 






It is obvious that you do not have virology experience. You cannot compare these numbers. Look at the control arms. You look at success by comparing how much you improved over your standard of care. Even then, sometimes low patient numbers in a given arm will throw this off. Doctors will make their decision by efficacy, safety, and support programs offered by the companies. This is triple therapy and patients will need help to reach these great svr numbers.

You can typically only look at relative efficacy by comparing one directly against the other in the same trial. Comparing one drugs relative performance against control versus another requires far more data than clinical trials generate. This is usually the stuff of meta-analyses. Companies would prefer to keep it cloudy for fear of clearly losing the contest. Customers would prefer to make it clear because they desire the best therapy.

Far too much of the medical knowledge that becomes "common physicians' knowledge" is statistically too weak for the claims that are made for it. And what % of physicians have ever studied statistics.

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124