Preemie birth preventive spikes from $10 to $1,500

"ATLANTA – The price of preventing preterm labor is about to go through the roof.

A drug for high-risk pregnant women has cost about $10 to $20 per injection. Next week, the price shoots up to $1,500 a dose, meaning the total cost during a pregnancy could be as much as $30,000.

That's because the drug, a form of progesterone given as a weekly shot, has been made cheaply for years, mixed in special pharmacies that custom-compound treatments that are not federally approved.

But recently, KV Pharmaceutical of suburban St.Louis won government approval to exclusively sell the drug, known as Makena (Mah-KEE'-Nah). The March of Dimes and many obstetricians supported that because it means quality will be more consistent and it will be easier to get."

From the AP, I saw this on Yahoo today. This seems ridiculous. It is almost as if this pharmaceutical company has been assured a monopoly by the government, and because of that they can charge outrageous prices, and not a damn thing can be done about it. Also, maybe by making pregnancies more expensive, less people will want to get pregnant, knowing that the cost of being pregnant, giving birth, and raising a child in this economy is becoming increasingly difficult. Is this part of a greater population control agenda?

While I find people tend to go after pharma companies regardless of the facts in this case I have to say its outrageous.

This is not an orphan drug nor a drug that KV spent billions researching. Its already avalible simply not as an "FDA approved" medication.

However, given the obvious gouging here other companies will be quick to hop on this profit bandwagon and drive the unit cost down quite a bit. But in the meantime KV does enjoy a virtual monopoly.

That being said Ill do a bit of research and see if the FDA ruling absolutly prohibits the old method.

[color=deepskyblue]There are other options aside from this one drug.

Other drugs that are commonly used to stop preterm labor.
[color=deepskyblue]
I wonder what the incredible price jump of the drug in question will do to the prices of other commonly used drugs?

Some of the alternatives are riskier and boast a long list of unpleasant side effects, even some for the baby.

Can you post a link to the source of the quote in the OP? I may just be gettingcross eyed, but I did not see it.

Why does this company taking an existing common market drug and labeling it mean they can increase the price 100 fold? It's not like they have billions in R&D monies to recoup. And even then, that's not a valid excuse.

What's next? Is some company going to developer a concentrated form of chicken soup and call it poultrsteron and sell it for $1500/oz because it reduces the symptoms of severe cold?

reply to post by rogerstigers


Sorry about that. Here is the link to the news article:

news.yahoo.com...