[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 5704]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                AVASTIN, A PHARMACEUTICAL USED ON CANCER

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, April 5, 2006

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I sent the attached letter in support of 
compulsory licensing for Avastin on February 21, 2006.

                                                February 21, 2006.
     Mike Leavitt,
     Secretary; Department of Health and Human Services, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Leavitt: I request that you issue a 
     compulsory license for Avastin in order to bring the price 
     under control and to send a clear signal to the 
     pharmaceutical industry that price gouging will not be 
     tolerated.
       As you know, the New York Times reported on February 15, 
     2006 that Roche and Genentech plan to charge $100,000 for a 
     year's supply of Avastin to late stage lung and breast cancer 
     victims. This represents a price increase over the already 
     astronomical $50,000 price tag for its current use for colon 
     cancer. These exorbitant prices bear little on the cost of 
     production, which is ``a fraction of what Genentech charges 
     for it.''
       Roche and Genentech's pricing decisions will force many 
     cancer victims to choose between extending their lives and 
     leaving their family a burden of irreconcilable debt. In 
     fact, the Times reports that some are already opting for less 
     life for cost reasons. Furthermore, the poorest and sickest 
     among us will be the most likely to refuse the treatment. 
     Even those patients with insurance are not protected because 
     the copays are likely to approximate $1000 per month for 
     Avastin alone, to say nothing of the cost of chemotherapy 
     pharmaceuticals that often accompany it.
       Pricing schemes like these will have ripple effects. They 
     will make it easier for other companies with similar drugs to 
     charge higher prices. Insurance companies will pass on much 
     of the cost, accelerating already out of control health care 
     costs. If the trend of this legal price gouging proceeds 
     unchecked, Medicare's own future is imperiled, especially in 
     the absence of the ability to negotiate prices with drug 
     manufacturers.
       In the past, the pharmaceutical industry's excuse for 
     charging substantially higher prices for their drugs as 
     compared to the cost of generics in the U.S. has been that 
     they needed to recover their research and development costs. 
     But Roche and Genentech cited a different reason: it is what 
     they can get away with charging. ```As we look at Avastin and 
     Herceptin pricing, right now the health economics hold up, 
     and therefore I don't see any reason to be touching them,' 
     said William M. Burns, the chief executive of Roche's 
     pharmaceutical division and a member of Genentech's board.''
       Roche and Genentech have the legal latitude to act in this 
     way through the patent system, which gives pharmaceutical 
     companies a monopoly on drugs they bring to market. But it is 
     not an absolute, unchecked right to extort.
       You have the authority to issue a compulsory license. Doing 
     so would allow other manufacturers to compete with Roche/
     Genentech and therefore drastically lower the price of 
     Avastin. Roche and Genentech would be guaranteed ``reasonable 
     and entire compensation'' as required by law (28 USC 1498). A 
     compulsory license would also send a clear signal to the 
     pharmaceutical industry that abuse of the patent system, 
     especially when at the expense of health, will not be 
     tolerated.
       I look forward to your immediate response.
           Sincerely,
                                               Dennis J. Kucinich,
     Member of Congress.

                          ____________________