How to fund trials
Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:34 pm
What if radiologists (and other appropriate physicians) chose to fund CCSVI trials?
In the past, most MS trials have involved drugs and were funded by pharmaceutical companies. This was a logical business decision since those companies would profit by the success of the trial.
WHY IT WOULD HELP PATIENTS
Why not apply that same model to the testing and treatment of CCSVI by doctors and the clinics with which they are associated? Creating centers that could both diagnose and treat CCSVI would be extremely helpful for the patient population as well as facilitating the transfer of information between the various disciplines that will make future treatments even more effective.
THE ADVANTAGES FOR DOCTORS
Of course, the most obvious benefit is that this would enable physicians to offer potentially life-changing treatment to patients in a manner that would be both efficient and cost effective. We have already seen that our doctors are as awestruck and elated over the success of some procedures as are the patients they treat.
We should also be realistic in recognizing that there is a business component, and there is a vast, underserved customer base that is clamoring for service.
Let's assume that there are 400,000 MS patients in the US (some estimates are significantly higher). If only one percent of those people were treated annually, there is currently no clinic or group of doctors who could handle 4,000 patients! Capturing that population (and its revenue stream) would certain involve an investment in facilities, personnel, training and equipment. But the economies of scale would enable a clinic or multi-clinic practice to provide convenient, comprehensive care at a relatively small price, even as the effectiveness of the treatment is increased by the building of a patient data base that compares treatment methodologies to outcomes.
US physicians worry about desperate patients who use medical tourism services to locations that are too expensive for the patient to return for follow-up care. The response to that problem is to create regional centers that serve as magnet facilities that offer the additional transportation, housing and medical services required by patients with advanced disease.
As indicated above, some patients will restenose or require additional treatment. That adds to the revenue projections.
Further, although the MS population has embraced the concept of CCSVI treatment, there is also speculation that there are other chronic conditions that might also be related to, and treated by, similar procedures.
The proposal above is obviously over-simplied, but it provides a service that potentially improves the life of the MS patient, rewards the physician with the satisfaction of healing and makes a very profitable business model.
Any comments?
In the past, most MS trials have involved drugs and were funded by pharmaceutical companies. This was a logical business decision since those companies would profit by the success of the trial.
WHY IT WOULD HELP PATIENTS
Why not apply that same model to the testing and treatment of CCSVI by doctors and the clinics with which they are associated? Creating centers that could both diagnose and treat CCSVI would be extremely helpful for the patient population as well as facilitating the transfer of information between the various disciplines that will make future treatments even more effective.
THE ADVANTAGES FOR DOCTORS
Of course, the most obvious benefit is that this would enable physicians to offer potentially life-changing treatment to patients in a manner that would be both efficient and cost effective. We have already seen that our doctors are as awestruck and elated over the success of some procedures as are the patients they treat.
We should also be realistic in recognizing that there is a business component, and there is a vast, underserved customer base that is clamoring for service.
Let's assume that there are 400,000 MS patients in the US (some estimates are significantly higher). If only one percent of those people were treated annually, there is currently no clinic or group of doctors who could handle 4,000 patients! Capturing that population (and its revenue stream) would certain involve an investment in facilities, personnel, training and equipment. But the economies of scale would enable a clinic or multi-clinic practice to provide convenient, comprehensive care at a relatively small price, even as the effectiveness of the treatment is increased by the building of a patient data base that compares treatment methodologies to outcomes.
US physicians worry about desperate patients who use medical tourism services to locations that are too expensive for the patient to return for follow-up care. The response to that problem is to create regional centers that serve as magnet facilities that offer the additional transportation, housing and medical services required by patients with advanced disease.
As indicated above, some patients will restenose or require additional treatment. That adds to the revenue projections.
Further, although the MS population has embraced the concept of CCSVI treatment, there is also speculation that there are other chronic conditions that might also be related to, and treated by, similar procedures.
The proposal above is obviously over-simplied, but it provides a service that potentially improves the life of the MS patient, rewards the physician with the satisfaction of healing and makes a very profitable business model.
Any comments?