‘Disclose the pricing rationale used for COVID-19 drugs'

Korean Pharmacists for Democratic Society, "disclose the results of the cost-effectiveness evaluation for COVID-19 drugs"

"MOHW’s decision to set the price of Paxlovid-Veklury Inj at KRW 0.94 million-KRW 3.12 million is not acceptable”

"Healthcare finances is not MOHW’s private finances… stop filling the bellies of pharmaceutical companies”

The Korean Pharmacists for Democratic Society (CEO Kyungrim Jeon, KPDS) has called for the disclosure of the cost-effectiveness evaluation results of the COVID-19 treatments Paxlovid and Veklury Inj.

 

“The Ministry of Health and Welfare is engaging in the atrocity of setting excessive drug prices for COVID-19 treatments,” said the KPDS on the 30th, adding, “Much question remains on the clinical utility of current COVID-19 treatments among vaccinated elderly patients, and the KPDS criticizes the Ministry of Health and Welfare for setting an unreasonable price and the arbitrary co-payment rates, which only filling the bellies of pharmaceutical companies.” “In addition to filling the medical gap with national health insurance finances, the MOHW is now lining the back pockets of pharmaceutical companies,” criticized KPDS.

 

“One course of Paxlovid and Veklury is priced at KRW 941,940 and KRW 312,000, respectively.

 

In principle, the price of drugs is set based on clinical utility, taking into account the cost of existing treatments, but the cost of COVID-19 drugs is tens of times more expensive than drugs for similar diseases.’ Oseltamivir (brand name: Tamiflu), a treatment for influenza, a type of respiratory system infection, costs about KRW 17,000 per course, and zanamivir (brand name: Relenza Rotadisk) costs KRW 23,000.

 

In addition, the influenza treatment PeramiFlu, which was not reimbursed in 2012 despite its high clinical utility but high price, is currently purchased by patients at KRW 100,000 to KRW 150,000.

 

“According to the statutory infectious diseases classifications set by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, novel influenza is a Class 1 reportable disease.

 

On the other hand, COVID-19 is not highly contagious or fatal - which is why it falls under Class 4.

 

Why is the price of a Class 4 treatment drug set several times more expensive than the price applied for the common respiratory infectious disease treatments?,” questioned KPDS.

 

He also demanded an explanation as to why cancer patients and those with severe, rare, and incurable diseases have to pay higher coinsurance rates than those infected with COVID-19.

 

The claim follows the MOHW’s decision to limit the out-of-pocket costs for Paxlovid and remdesivir to KRW 50,000.

 

“Considering the prices of the drugs - being KRW 940,000 and KRW 312,000 - the co-insurance rates of the drugs are 5% and 1.6%, respectively, which is the same or lower than the 5% co-insurance rate paid by patients with severe, rare and incurable diseases or cancer to purchase the drugs,’ the KPDS pointed out.

 

“The amendment to the enforcement decree was made in response to the provision which stipulates the Minister of Health and Welfare can lower the co-insurance rate for infectious disease treatments to reduce the burden of infectious disease treatment and increase access, but the logic of the bill does not disallow lowering access to treatment for patients with severe, rare and difficult diseases and cancer,” he said.

 

The general consensus is that the co-insurance rate needs to be lowered for all essential medical treatments to increase access.

 

The KPDS pointed out, “The Ministry of Health and Welfare should not our requests for clarification while charging suspicious prices for treatments that are not yet clear in terms of reimbursement standards or proven effectiveness, and applying suspicious co-insurance rates to increase the burden on health insurance finances.

 

The national health insurance finances are not the MOHW’s private finances.” ‘The MOHW should stop its recent rush of determining drug benefits at questionable prices in the name of rewarding innovative value.

 

It must increase transparency in the drug price determination process and consider the public interest first in drug production and supply.”