Sign up for our daily briefing

Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa Bay news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Charlotte news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

The World Health Organization says the cost of developing new cancer treatments doesn’t seem to justify those drugs’ high prices, as the pharmaceutical industry argues.

The big picture: "The costs of R&D and production may bear little or no relationship to how pharmaceutical companies set prices of cancer medicines,” WHO officials said in a recent research paper.

The report says new cancer treatments have translated into better survival rates, but that high prices are the main factor limiting access to those life-saving drugs.

  • And it sharply contradicts the industry’s argument that those prices are necessary to recoup the cost of developing new drugs — including the money they spend on products that fail.
  • “Pharmaceutical companies set prices according to their commercial goals, with a focus on extracting the maximum amount that a buyer is willing to pay for a medicine,” the report says. “This pricing approach often makes cancer medicines unaffordable, preventing the full benefit of the medicines from being realized.”

The other side: “The report is wrong on the facts and deeply flawed,” a spokeswoman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America said. “The report’s narrow scope fails to properly account for the value that cancer medicines provide to patients, health care systems and societies.”

  • And the WHO report does say that government price-setting doesn’t always work.
  • “In some countries, cost-containment measures ... have resulted in reduced, delayed and even cancelled treatment,” the report says.

By the numbers: Even after accounting for failed clinical trials and other opportunity costs, drug companies saw a median return of $14.50 for every $1 they spent on research and development, the paper says, citing earlier research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

  • By the end of 2017, 5 cancer drugs had each accumulated more than $60 billion in lifetime sales. (The top 3 are all manufactured by Roche, followed by Amgen and Novartis.)

The report also questions whether some new drugs are adding value commensurate with their price.

  • A product that extends a patient’s life by a few weeks or months, for example, means a lot to the patient but perhaps shouldn’t be priced like a bigger breakthrough.

The bottom line: “We’re spending a lot, but maybe we should expect more from those dollars that we’re spending,” said Stacie Dusetzina, a professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

Go deeper

Dan Primack, author of Pro Rata
1 hour ago - Economy & Business

Scoop: Red Sox strike out on deal to go public

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

The parent company of the Boston Red Sox and Liverpool F.C. has ended talks to sell a minority ownership stake to RedBall Acquisition, a SPAC formed by longtime baseball executive Billy Beane and investor Gerry Cardinale, Axios has learned from multiple sources. An alternative investment, structured more like private equity, remains possible.

Why it matters: Red Sox fans won't be able to buy stock in the team any time soon.

Trump political team disavows "Patriot Party" groups

Marine One carries President Trump away from the White House on Inauguration Day. Photo: Patrick Smith/Getty Images

Donald Trump's still-active presidential campaign committee officially disavowed political groups affiliated with the nascent "Patriot Party" on Monday.

Why it matters: Trump briefly floated the possibility of creating a new political party to compete with the GOP — with him at the helm. But others have formed their own "Patriot Party" entities during the past week, and Trump's team wants to make clear it has nothing to do with them.