Jan 16, 2004  |  By: RYAN LEE  | COMMENTS     

Mason contends Norvir’s price hike was triggered by R&D costs.

“We did not make this pricing decision lightly,” Mason said. “We carefully considered many things, and ultimately our very complex decision process allowed us to reach this difficult conclusion that this new price is necessary to be able to support our ability to continue research to bring the next generation of HIV medications to market.”

In their complex decision process, Abbott officials never considered that Kaletra would benefit from Norvir’s price increase, Mason said.

Grossman scoffed at such explanations. “It’s all about their market position,” he charged. “This is as anti-patient a move as I have ever seen.

“Their feeling is Kaletra is the best, strongest drug, and it should be the first, last and only drug used by HIV patients,” he said. “They don’t understand why that hasn’t happened, and instead of lowering Kaletra’s price, they’ve raised everybody else’s.”

As for Fuzeon’s $20,000 price tag, Trout said he believes it is a test case for pharmaceutical companies to see how much they can charge.

What is most troubling to some activists is that in addition to inflating drug prices, the pharmaceutical companies relentlessly fight any efforts to cut into their large profit margins — even at the expense of those needing medications.

“Everybody recognizes that their bottom line is about profit making,” said Rachel Cohen, U.S. director of Campaign for Access to Essential Medicines for Doctors Without Borders, an activist group that focuses on diseases in Third World countries. “The pharmaceutical companies are actively promoting policies that would delay development of generic drugs in developing countries, which significantly limits access to treatment.”

HIV drugs used to cost the same amount in Africa as they did in the United States, until countries like India began developing generic drugs, a move fiercely opposed by brand-name drug companies. Whereas an annual HIV regimen was costing people $16,000-$18,000, some generic regimens are now available for as low as $140 annually, Cohen said.

Both generic and brand-name manufacturers still generate a profit in Africa, despite the cheap prices — further proof, Cohen said, that companies can easily recoup R&D costs without high prices.

Mason,