melanoma

Welcome to the Save Your Skin Foundation media flashback- your weekly guide to the melanoma landscape, and the activities of the Save Your Skin Foundation! We would like to start off this week with a little gratitude; here is our six month review and big thank you to all of our supporters, sponsors, and social media followers. We couldn’t do this work without you, and we love you! We are also very excited to announce our upcoming webinar, a post-ASCO review with Dr. Omid Hamid, Director of the Melanoma Center at the Angeles Clinic and Research Institute! More details, and where to register, can be found in the banner below. Lastly, if you are interested in the process of melanoma diagnosis, check out our new blog post “Diagnosis: Melanoma and Other Skin Cancers” here.

Here are some links we shared with you this week:

–This throwback to Market Wired’s coverage of our #NotJustSkinCancer campaign!

–These details on the combination of Tafinlar and Mekinist being added to the BCCA “Formulary”

–This article on Doctors of BC about the Canadian Cancer Society’s new sun safety guidelines

–This piece and video on Mommy Talk Show about sun safety for children

-The Melanoma Just Got Personal web page, which has personal melanoma stories, information, and other resources

–This Global News piece on immunotherapy

–This Canadian Mining Journal article about the importances of sun safety in order to protect against skin cancer and increase morale

–This article in Business Wire covering Incyte Corporation’s announcement that the first patient in the ECHO-301 study- the combination of Incyte’s epacadostat and Keytruda as a treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma- has been treated

–These National Cancer Institute sun safety guidelines

–The Saskatchewan Cancer Agency’s “Formulary,” which now lists Tafinlar as approved for some cases of advanced unresectable or metastatic melanoma

Thank you for reading, stay sun safe out there!

Welcome to the Save Your Skin Foundation media flashback- your weekly guide to the melanoma landscape, and the activities of the Save Your Skin Foundation! This week, we’re pleased to announce our involvement with the United Way employee and workplace campaigns, meaning you can now donate to Save Your Skin if your workplace has a United Way Campaign! More information can be found here. If you haven’t already, be sure to check out our partnership with Innovicares, Canada’s only free manufacturer and patient benefit plan here, and our most recent blog post “The UV Index and You“.

Here are some links we shared with you this week:

–This article in The Globe and Mail with tips on being a better patient!

–This article in Medscape reporting the possibility of neurotoxicity side effects from immunotherapy treatment of advanced melanoma

–This story in the Daily Globe that highlights the importance of checking your skin to increase your chances of early melanoma diagnosis

–This PSA featuring the cast of The Big Bang Theory, on behalf of the Claire Marie Foundation! Article via the Baltimore Sun.

–This article in Science Daily about a study which saw improved survival when Ilipimumab was combined with local treatments!

–This CBS News story about melanoma rates in young people

–This article in the LA Times suggesting that the current screening system for skin cancer might be inadequate

Welcome to the Save Your Skin Foundation media flashback- your weekly guide to the melanoma landscape, and the activities of the Save Your Skin Foundation! We’ve got a lot of links to share with you this week, but we’d first like to call your attention to our partnership with Innovicares, Canada’s only free manufacturer and patient benefit plan! You can learn more here. We are also running a sunburn survey, and would love for you to take it! You can fill it out here. If you’re looking to brush up on your melanoma knowledge, we’ve been sharing this Aim at Melanoma list of statistics. We also shared with you that Aim at Melanoma is running a free nurse on call service that can be reached at nurseoncall@AIMatmelanoma.org or 1-877-246-2635! Cool, huh?

(WorkSafe BC, “Sun Safety at Work: Employers”)

Here are some links we shared with you this week:

–This Sydney Morning Herald piece criticizing health advice from celebrities

–This Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guide to protecting children from the sun

– This article in Melanoma News Today announcing that researchers have identified ways melanoma tumours can bypass immune checkpoints, leading to new research opportunities

–This article on 680 CJOB citing Manitoba as one of Canada’s leaders in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Way to go, Manitoba!

–This National Institutes of Health article about keeping elderly people safe from heatstroke, and some general tips to stay safe on hot days

–This OncLive peer exchange video about incorporating prognostic factors into melanoma (with more videos below!)

–This patient testimonial from Leo Pharma Global about living with actinic keratosis

–This article in Australia’s ABC News about Keytruda’s success in almost 50% of patients!

–This OncLive article reporting that long-term follow up has shown that Sonidegib can be beneficial for basal cell carcinoma

–This Leo Pharma Global informational video about actinic keratosis

–This article in Science Daily reporting that, despite the 2013 ban, indoor tanning rates of persons under 17 in New Jersey have not declined

–This OncLive article reporting the benefit of Vismodegib in basal cell carcinoma patients

–This Science Daily article announcing that Spanish researchers have uncovered some genetic reasons why men are more susceptible to skin cancer than women!

In a recent post by the Cameron Institute, Dr. John A. Bachynsky suggests that “there are a growing number of gaps in coverage that calls for some form of universal, comprehensive, national drug coverage to fill these gaps” (Bachynsky 5). These ‘gaps,’ Bachynsky maintains, are caused by the provincial health ministries’ focus on price reduction while not considering the need for specific drugs; he opens the piece with an example wherein a drug priced at $600,000 for only two patients is considered ‘unaffordable’ while a ‘cheaper’ drug can have greater overall costs while being distributed to more patients. Instead, “Canadian government drug plans use the comparison with older, generic drugs ‘which do the same thing’ at a lower price” (4), as opposed to introducing more specific, improved drugs into the market. According to Bachynsky, the government does so by supporting multiple groups that restrict access to drugs and none that improve access, and labelling the prices of new drugs as ‘cost increases’ while there is no prior price to compare it to (3,4).

Naturally, blanket marketing drugs to a population with varied medical needs is problematic, especially for Canadians that are being medicated for long-term chronic illnesses. As Bachynsky points out, the problem with even reasonable drug prices is that they are utilized most often by only a segment of the population, but in high amounts. As Canadians have to pay for medical prescriptions out of pocket, with or without medical insurance, these ongoing costs can be financially draining; Bachynsky states that 25% of the chronically ill patients in Canada attempt to lower costs by stretching or skipping their medication (5), which is inadvisable even if they are using the ideal drug. The “universal, comprehensive, national […] coverage” that Bachynsky calls for is to aid this percentage (5), whom he suggests national assistance programs were initially created to protect.

While medication costs are legitimately high for the average Canadian citizen, they are not as troublesome for the government as provincial bodies would have you believe; Bachynsky cites drug expenditures as only 8% of government health care costs (6). Health care costs for the government have increased via the technological advancement and increase in litigation that comes with the unique and improved drugs the pharmaceutical industry is developing. While this is ‘too costly’ for the government, Bachynsky points out that “use of new technology has increased physician and hospital expense to an even greater degree but there is no outcry over excessive costs or sustainability” (7). The alternative treatments for a patient with no appropriate drugs for their condition utilize the latter technologies in a manner that is expensive, inefficient, and distressing for the patient, with measures such as hospital care, tests, referrals and surgeries. This realization begs the question: “why can we fund a lot of less effective procedures without complaint but not afford to pay for medication that does a better job and is preferred by the patient” (7).

The problem with reducing medication costs, while this would be to the benefit of both the government and the patient, is that pharmaceuticals are less likely to market drugs at a lower price point. Thus, the government’s solution to cut costs directly affects the patient; Bachynsky cites the example of “proposed therapeutic substitution” (10), in which the government will only cover the lowest-cost medical therapy for a variety of related illnesses. If a patient wants the more expensive treatment that is specific to their illness, they have to cover the cost.

As the burden of medication costs is something not experienced by the entire Canadian populace, the relationship between pharmaceuticals and government can go unconsidered by many in a nation that boasts free health care. Thanks to Doctor Bachynsky for writing an angle on that relationship! You can read the original post here.

Works Cited

Bachynsky, John A. “Opinion: Drug Prices are Too High!?” Cameron Institute. Cameron Institute (2016).