Commercializing Breast Cancer Drugs: The Faster Route to......

I have a neighbor who worked in a Mayo Clinic as a researacher. According to her they were doing some new research about new cancer drug and big pharmaceutical companies came and shot down the whole program. Big pharma scared if they will be out of business. That incident made her very frustrated in the field and she went to law school and now she is a lawyer. This country everything is about making money and whole system is bought by big money.

I so wish I had tons of money to donate

I know Gracie, thanks for the link. I had read about DCA and watched the video, very compelling, but also nauseating and upsetting that they can't get the ball rolling for lack of funds.  They must be soooo discouraged.  I read that a lof of scientists commit suicide or go into very deep depression because their work doesn't get recognized for the same reason, and also because of bigpharm's monopoly, it's a very sick world and we're just pawns 

He's a very good man who knows the Pharm game. He has my deepest respect and admiration for not getting involved with the pharmaceutical companies. If he has to do it with private donations, so be it. It will take longer, but in the end we'll have a drug that will cost $10.00 instead of $10,000, that EVERYONE can benfit from. I'm sure they all sit around their big board-room tables cooking up ways to shut him down on a daily basis. Too bad, so sad....no patent. I do believe he has applied for one though, for HIS use. Yay!!!

Our new Dr. Salk!

Not sure how legitimate research can be compared to a conspiracy theory. To each his own. (I think that was directed at me, BTW).

"The highest number of described drug target strategies of breast cancer drugs belongs to Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Hoffmann-La Roche'"

Ruby, you highlighted this statement. What do you find wrong with it?  All it's saying is that these companies have the most drug target strategies, which as I interpret it either means that they have the greatest number of breast cancer drugs on the market and/or in the pipeline, or they have the most uses for the drugs that they have (i.e. a single drug might be targeted at several different types of breast cancer).  Is that a bad thing?

As thenewme points out, this is just a market research report. It's a summary of the drug strategies of all the breast cancer drugs on the market and all the breast cancer drugs in the pipeline.  For a company or researcher who is working on a new breast cancer drug, this report might be useful because it lists off all the other breast cancer drugs on the market and who those drugs are targeted to. For example: Astra-Zeneca make and market Faslodex, which is targeted to women who have metastatic breast cancer. Another example: Genentech's drug Pertuzumab, targeted at women with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, received approval in June 2012.  

Companies and researchers developing new drugs can understand whether a drug already exists for the purpose that they are looking at, who makes it and what their strategy and target market is. They can determine if they want to investigate possible synergies with other drugs already in existance; there are a lot of clinical trials going on right now that use two different drugs from different drug companies. Or they can decide to look for new, alternate uses for the drug they are developing, perhaps discovering new 'targets' for their drug.  If the drug provides a benefit to these new 'targets', that's actually a good thing.  An example of this would be the clinical trials currently underway that hope to expand the approval of the AIs from just women with invasive cancer to also include women with DCIS. The women with DCIS are the new "targets" for the AI drugs.  

It's interesting to me see the reaction to this. Some people are so wrapped up in their belief that harm is being done to us by big pharma that they will automatically assume the worst, even if they don't understand what something is all about. It's pretty clear that most of the people commenting on this article don't have a clue what it's actually promoting... but let's not let that stop us!   

"98% of people on this site are here looking for answers because:

1. They are not getting the care they need because the medical system is what it is

2. They are suffering through unspeakable pain because of treatment

3. They are suffering innumerable SEs because of treatment"

What?? Where in the world did you get the 98% number? Did you survey all the women who are members here?  Are you privy to some secret information that's not evident to anyone else?  

Maybe 98% of the women who post in the Alternate Forum feel the way you do, and if that's where you hang out, you might think that's representative of the board.  But I'd guess that less than 10% of women who come to this board ever even visit the Alternate Forum, never mind sticking around there.  (And this is the Clinical Trial forum, not the Alternate Forum.)

Here's the reality check for you.  This is a breast cancer website.  The women posting here have breast cancer.  Breast cancer is a brutal disease that can be fatal.  So yes, some women suffer pain from their treatment.  And yes, some women suffer side effects from their treatment.  There isn't a drug or treatment in the world that doesn't come with some side effects. Even natural treatments and non-traditional treatments come with side effects. That's the unfortunate reality of dealing with a deadly disease. Cancer doesn't go away on it's own, even if you wish really hard or use all your powers to try to will it away.  To get rid of cancer, you need to remove as much of the cancer as you can find. That means surgery. And surgery means pain. To get rid of any cancer that you can't find, many women need other treatments.  And these too can be painful and come with side effects and aren't always easy - that's because these treatments are trying to kill cancer.  And cancer is one mean SOB that doesn't just lay down and die. 

It would be wonderful if cancer could be treated painlessly and with no harsh drugs and with no side effects.  But I stopped believing in fairy tales more than 50 years ago.   

Have some women been improperly or poorly treated?  Without a doubt.  Not every doctor is good and caring.  And sometimes mistakes happen.  Do drug companies only do good? Of course not, but most of the people who work for these companies have a genuine interest in discovering and bringing to market new drugs that will help people, ease pain, extend lives and save lives.  The system isn't perfect, the players in the system aren't perfect and there are lots of things that everyone would change if they could.  But I won't judge the whole system based on a small percentage of cases that aren't handled properly and I won't write off the entire pharmaceutical industry because of a few people in the industry.

You are right that women with breast cancer shouldn't be insulted.  They should be respected.  Personally I find it insulting to women with breast cancer to paint them all with the same brush.  It is insulting - and very narrow-minded - to believe that your own experience and anger is representative of, or should be representative of, all women with breast cancer.  If you want to be angry and bitter, that's your right; you may have a very good reason, from your own experience, to feel that way.  But don't insult me by telling me that I'm wrong to not share your anger.   

Back to the article that we've been debating. The simple fact is that a number of people have jumped to completely wrong assumptions about what the article was saying, and used it as a vehicle to spout their anger about big pharma.  And that's not what the article is about at all.  That's really all I was saying. 

By the way, to my question in my previous post, you haven't explained what you found objectionable about the statement that you highlighted in your earlier post.  I'd be interested to understand what angered you about the fact that these companies have the most breast cancer drugs. 

Well, CP, looks like the congregation is setting up camp.  Weekend is here, nice beautiful breeze so if you'll excuse me, I'm off enjoying both.  Have a great one 

Nice post Beesie.  They can't answer so its bye bye for now!

Wow Wow Wow Beesie. I wonder how i found your excellent response and post.

15 hours ago, edited 15 hours ago by Beesie

"98% of people on this site are here looking for answers because:

1. They are not getting the care they need because the medical system is what it is

2. They are suffering through unspeakable pain because of treatment

3. They are suffering innumerable SEs because of treatment"

What?? Where in the world did you get the 98% number? Did you survey all the women who are members here?  Are you privy to some secret information that's not evident to anyone else?  

Maybe 98% of the women who post in the Alternate Forum feel the way you do, and if that's where you hang out, you might think that's representative of the board.  But I'd guess that less than 10% of women who come to this board ever even visit the Alternate Forum, never mind sticking around there.  (And this is the Clinical Trial forum, not the Alternate Forum.)

Here's the reality check for you.  This is a breast cancer website.  The women posting here have breast cancer.  Breast cancer is a brutal disease that can be fatal.  So yes, some women suffer pain from their treatment.  And yes, some women suffer side effects from their treatment.  There isn't a drug or treatment in the world that doesn't come with some side effects. Even natural treatments and non-traditional treatments come with side effects. That's the unfortunate reality of dealing with a deadly disease. Cancer doesn't go away on it's own, even if you wish really hard or use all your powers to try to will it away.  To get rid of cancer, you need to remove as much of the cancer as you can find. That means surgery. And surgery means pain. To get rid of any cancer that you can't find, many women need other treatments.  And these too can be painful and come with side effects and aren't always easy - that's because these treatments are trying to kill cancer.  And cancer is one mean SOB that doesn't just lay down and die. 

It would be wonderful if cancer could be treated painlessly and with no harsh drugs and with no side effects.  But I stopped believing in fairy tales more than 50 years ago.   

Have some women been improperly or poorly treated?  Without a doubt.  Not every doctor is good and caring.  And sometimes mistakes happen.  Do drug companies only do good? Of course not, but most of the people who work for these companies have a genuine interest in discovering and bringing to market new drugs that will help people, ease pain, extend lives and save lives.  The system isn't perfect, the players in the system aren't perfect and there are lots of things that everyone would change if they could.  But I won't judge the whole system based on a small percentage of cases that aren't handled properly and I won't write off the entire pharmaceutical industry because of a few people in the industry.

You are right that women with breast cancer shouldn't be insulted.  They should be respected.  Personally I find it insulting to women with breast cancer to paint them all with the same brush.  It is insulting - and very narrow-minded - to believe that your own experience and anger is representative of, or should be representative of, all women with breast cancer.  If you want to be angry and bitter, that's your right; you may have a very good reason, from your own experience, to feel that way.  But don't insult me by telling me that I'm wrong to not share your anger.   

Back to the article that we've been debating. The simple fact is that a number of people have jumped to completely wrong assumptions about what the article was saying, and used it as a vehicle to spout their anger about big pharma.  And that's not what the article is about at all.  That's really all I was saying. 

By the way, to my question in my previous post, you haven't explained what you found objectionable about the statement that you highlighted in your earlier post.  I'd be interested to understand what angered you about the fact that these companies have the most breast cancer drugs. "

Excellent post Beesie. Too bad your question was not answered. Another question-if not these three companies then which pharmacutical companies would you prefer to make breast cancer drugs, Ruby?

It would be nice to have an exchange of ideas here.

Good question thenewme...

Ruby writes: 98% of people on this site are here looking for answers because:



1. They are not getting the care they need because the medical system is what it is - I have received perfect care from my team. Zero complaints.



2. They are suffering through unspeakable pain because of treatment - no pain from treatment. None.



3. They are suffering innumerable SEs because of treatment - the only thing I would call innumerable is the amount of hair I lost. Couldn't begin to count.



Based on my experience on BCO, 98% is a fantasy number. Totally made up. Can we enter back into reality now? Geesh.