Cheaper eye drug proves as good as pricier one
WASHINGTON
The results are expected to lead many doctors and patients to
turn away from the pricier Lucentis and instead use $50 shots of
Avastin for an age-related condition called wet macular
degeneration.
Vision improvement after one year was the same for those given
Avastin or Lucentis, the 1,200-patient study found.
The results are a blow to Roche's Genentech unit, which sells
both medicines. Avastin (ah-VAS-tin) is a cancer drug that doctors
have used for many years to treat the eye disease even though it is
not approved for that purpose. Genentech later developed Lucentis
(loo-SEN-tis) for the eye disease, and it was approved in 2006. A
company spokesman said Thursday that the company had no plans to
seek approval to sell Avastin for eye use or to lower the price of
Lucentis.
Yet the results are a boon for patients and insurers -- mostly
Medicare -- because nothing prevents use of the cheaper Avastin, eye
specialists said. Doctors who use it for the eye disease must get a
pharmacist to prepare lower doses for injection rather than the
intravenous way it's used for cancer.
"It's always good news for patients when there are more than
one option for a condition. It's good news for the country. Now we
have potential for significant savings at a time when the cost of
health care is skyrocketing," said Dr. Paul Sternberg, chairman of
the Vanderbilt Eye Institute.
He had no role in the study, whose results were published online
Thursday by the New England Journal of Medicine and will be
presented at an eye research conference on Sunday.
Anyone wanting to use Lucentis now will have to justify its cost
to insurers and policymakers, Dr. Philip Rosenfeld of Bascom Palmer
Eye Institute at the University of Miami wrote in an editorial with
the study. He has no ties to Genentech but has consulted for
several other companies developing eye treatments.
More than 250,000 Americans are treated for macular degeneration
each year, mostly with Avastin, said Dr. Paul Sieving, director of
the National Eye Institute, the federal agency that paid for the
study. About 1.6 million Americans have advanced macular
degeneration and another 7 million are at risk of developing it, he
said.
The disease occurs when abnormal blood vessel growth damages the
part of the retina responsible for central vision. Avastin and
Lucentis aim at a protein that spurs blood vessel growth. They are
injected through the white part of the eye into the central cavity.
Numbing drops are used and patients generally feel pressure more
than pain, Sternberg explained.
"The first time you tell a patient they're going to have to
receive one they are taken aback and apprehensive, but they are
remarkably tolerated," he said of the shots.
In the study, patients were given one of four treatments for one
year: Avastin or Lucentis every four weeks, or either drug on an
as-needed basis depending on response. Those on "as needed"
dosing required four to five fewer shots over a year than the
others.
Vision improvement was nearly identical for either drug. Giving
either drug less often produced slightly less vision improvement --
reading two fewer letters on a vision chart, something one
researcher compared to a smudge on one's glasses.
"This is an extremely small difference," Sieving of the
federal Eye Institute said.
Study leader Maureen Maguire at the University of Pennsylvania
agreed.
Giving either drug as needed "is certainly a viable option"
that spares many elderly patients the burden of monthly shots, she
said.
Adverse events, mostly hospitalizations, were more common among
Avastin users, but many of these were for side effects not thought
to be related to the drugs, and the study is too small to give a
clear picture on these.
"We saw more adverse events when we gave less drug," and don't
know what that means, said study co-leader Dr. Daniel Martin of the
Cleveland Clinic's Cole Eye Institute.
No major differences were seen in big problems like heart
attacks, strokes and deaths.
In a statement, Genentech said that proving Avastin's benefit
for the eye disease would take "substantial resources and years of
clinical development," and that patients' best interests are
better served by exploring new medicines.
"We still believe that Lucentis is the most appropriate
treatment," because it was specifically designed for use in the
eye, said Genentech's ophthalmology chief, Dr. Anthony Adamis.
Although Genentech sells both drugs, PDL BioPharma Inc. gets
royalty payments on Lucentis, and Novartis AG has exclusive rights
on it outside the U.S.