Evidence of meeting #119 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was procysbi.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Erin Little  President, Liv-A-Little Foundation
Mary Jane Vowles  Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada
Caryn Vowles  Board Member, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada
Raj Grewal  Brampton East, Lib.
Catherine Parker  Director General, Biologics and Genetic Therapies Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health
John Patrick Stewart  Director General, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Department of Health
Karen Reynolds  Executive Director, Office of Pharmaceuticals Management Strategies, Department of Health

October 30th, 2018 / 9:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

We'll commence our 119th meeting of the Standing Committee on Health. We're going to continue our study on barriers to access treatment and drugs for Canadians affected by rare diseases and disorders.

Today, we have two panels. The first panel has two organizations, and then at 10:10 or so, we're going to have the Department of Health come in.

In our first panel, we have Erin Little, the president of the Liv-A-Little Foundation. Welcome. From the atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada, we have Mary Jane Vowles and Caryn Vowles, board members. Welcome.

I'm going to invite Ms. Little to make a 10-minute opening statement.

9:10 a.m.

Erin Little President, Liv-A-Little Foundation

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, thank you very much for having me speak to you about how we've been directly affected by life with the rare disease cystinosis.

I would also like to personally thank MP Ben Lobb for caring about our ongoing issue since the first day that our medication access became an issue. We wouldn't be here today if he didn't have an interest in our family's battle.

I'm the president and co-founder of the Liv-A-Little Foundation, which was founded in 2013, two years after our daughter was diagnosed with the rare, genetic, metabolic disease cystinosis at the age of one.

Liv-A-Little Foundation is committed to supporting the advancements of treatments and ultimately a cure for cystinosis, by educating, promoting and funding progress. I'm also a board member for the Cystinosis Research Foundation in Irvine, California, where they are currently funding the most progressive research in our cystinosis community. We are proud to partner with them to fund global research, some of which is proudly Canadian.

My most important role, however, is being Olivia Little's mom. Olivia has cystinosis. Since the day she was born, I have taken my role seriously, and even more so when we received the devastating news that she had a life-altering disease with a life expectancy of 27 years young. I committed myself to caring for her and advocating for her until she can one day take that role on herself. When she was first diagnosed, I believed that advocacy meant parenting her with her father, collaborating with her pediatric nephrologist and medical team, and providing her with proper nutrition, a healthy environment and a strong sense of normal, in spite of living with a rare incurable disease.

I had no idea that in addition to all of that, I would have to fight for medication access here in Canada. On July 4, 2011, we nearly lost Olivia due to acute kidney failure. We had already been in and out of the hospital three times a week, tirelessly pursuing answers to her failure to thrive since she was three months old. That day, July 4, we got lucky that the final doctor ordered blood work.

We were told to go to the hospital immediately and be prepared to stay for a few days. We hoped for and expected a quick recovery, but those few days turned into a month-long stay at the Children's Hospital in London. When we left, we did not have the healthy child we expected. Instead, we had a diagnosis with no cure, a grocery bag full of medications that I could barely pronounce, eye drops required hourly, and a heart full of information, sorrow and anxiety.

We learned that cystinosis is a rare, incurable, metabolic disease affecting only 75 to 100 Canadian children and young adults, and approximately 2,000 worldwide. In patients with cystinosis, cells cannot release the amino acid cysteine from their cells. In people without cystinosis, proteins degraded with the lysosomes of cells are transported from the lysosome to the cell's cytoplasm via specific transporters. The cells of those with cystinosis have defective transporters, causing the cysteine to crystallize within the tissue. The crystal buildup eventually destroys all the body's organs, including the kidneys, liver, muscles, white blood cells, eyes and central nervous system.

Without specific treatment, Olivia, like all those with cystinosis, will progress to end-stage renal failure by an average age of nine years old. In the past, this meant childhood death. Now these patients can receive renal dialysis or renal transplantation. However, even with successful renal transplantation, these children go on to develop abnormalities in their organs.

It is with enormous gratitude that we learned about the drug cysteamine, which slowed the progress of cystinosis by removing the cysteine from the cells. Cysteamine is the active ingredient in Cystagon, which was the first treatment of cystinosis and still is one of the only two treatment options today.

However, in order for the drug treatment to be effective, it must be taken every six hours. Although this has led to a much better future for these children, cysteamine is not a cure. When we administer it every six hours, we're always reminded that while the progression is slowed significantly, cystinosis still progresses in Olivia's body.

We adjusted to our new normal and all of its side effects, including interrupted sleep, constant medical preparation, and attention to Olivia's growth and eating along the way. This normal became routine, and our daughter thrived under the regime of electrolytes and Cystagon, which was primarily a life-sustaining medication to slow the unrelenting progress of cystinosis. This routine is hardly normal, but it worked well and she was healthy.

On November 7, 2017, we received a letter that introduced another level of fear to this rare disease situation. It was a letter which stated that here in Canada, Olivia could no longer access her life-sustaining treatment of Cystagon. This letter arrived five months after the new drug Procysbi—claimed to be the same drug as Cystagon but merely administered differently—was approved by Health Canada. The price tag for Procysbi, however, came at a hundred times the cost. When questioned about this extreme discrepancy, the response was that this new drug is a breakthrough drug.

Health Canada provided Procysbi without considering that they were replacing the drug Cystagon that was both physically effective and cost-effective. The company that produced it, Horizon pharmaceuticals, entered the Canadian market with an extremely overpriced drug.

In the U.S., Horizon already raised the price of Procysbi by 9.9% in January 2018, with another anticipated increase in January 2019. Pharmaceutical companies are allowed to increase the price of drugs by 10% per year in the United States, and Horizon is certain to go as close to its margins as possible.

I do support building healthy relationships with pharmaceutical companies and want new drug advancements for children and adults with diseases and illnesses, both rare and common. If a drug can enhance the quality of life for our fellow Canadians, we need to find a way. However, we need to hold companies to high standards of ethics, as well. Health Canada seems to have placed high standards on drug efficacy without considering the integrity of these companies that are benefiting on the backs of vulnerable populations.

To my knowledge, Horizon has one fellow Canadian employed here in our country, which is not contributing meaningfully to our local economy. With a drug at the price of Procysbi, we should expect the company to contribute to our local economy as well as mandate that it conduct research and development to improve life among the rare disease population.

In our capitalist democracy, being a for-profit company is expected and acceptable, but we must have higher expectations for pharmaceutical companies than price gouging patients and, more importantly, our taxpayer dollars. By approving Procysbi without an effective and all-encompassing understanding of the company, its ethics and history, Health Canada made a decision that will have an enormous effect and impact on cystinosis patients and Canadian taxpayers.

This is a policy issue. Policies are made for people, and not the other way around. If a policy is going to remove choice, security and health from Canadian citizens, then it is a policy that should be changed, and errors made by that policy need to be rectified to protect Canadian citizens.

On a more personal and immediate note, if our family made the switch from Cystagon to Procysbi, our original costs of $14,590.80 per year for Cystagon would now be over $300,000 per year for Procysbi, all of which the Province of Ontario covers for patients with cystinosis.

Adding Procysbi to the list of available cystinosis treatments would be a win for everyone, because the case of each is so different. However, Procysbi was not added to a list of treatments. Procysbi replaced our current treatment entirely.

Procysbi is not the same drug, although Horizon would like us to think it is. Its administration and dietary restrictions are only two challenges patients face when they switch.

Cystagon has been an effective medication in our case. While it is administrated every six hours and is taxing on our sleep and overall quality of life, Olivia's health has been unbelievably stable on it. She experiences very few side effects. We are extremely proud of the track record, as creating and maintaining her diet to minimize constant vomiting and headaches is very involved and tricky for us. She has been so stable, in fact, that we haven't had to adjust her Cystagon treatment since August 2015. The medication she takes, along with our constant compliance to the administration, is doing its job. When the time is right for Olivia, Procysbi should be available as an option. Remaining on Cystagon should also be an option.

The bottom line is that the patients with cystinosis and their families should be the ones selecting treatment in collaboration with their nephrologists. No one knows their children better than the parents, and no one knows how the children respond to treatment or the impact of treatment on the family than the parents. They should have primary decision-making ability in the treatment for their child, or in the case of adult patients, for their own treatment.

It seems that our Canadian system eliminates the power of choice for the parents, for which Health Canada says it advocates. Even Canadian doctors and medical specialists, who have been licensed by our government and have given oaths to provide best for their patients, are not given the authority to choose patient treatment for the patients they know so well.

When Procysbi was approved and Cystagon was so abruptly removed from Canada, and our letter of cancellation was issued, our doctor was shocked, because she had not been informed about the approval of Procysbi, and did not necessarily feel it was the best choice for her patients. When our nephrologist spoke with someone from Health Canada, giving verbal medical reasoning for Olivia to remain on her current treatment, she was denied that choice, leaving us terrified about what to do next. We were stunned that someone, however highly educated, sitting in an office, who did not know cystinosis or our child, was able to make a decision overruling our child's physician. As Olivia's primary caregiver and someone who trusts our doctors and medical system, I was disgusted that our physician was not trusted to make the most important decision for her patient.

We, as Olivia's parents, have adjusted every aspect of our lives to take the best care of our daughter, keeping her healthy and out of the hospital, and a broken policy and someone who does not know the first thing about cystinosis was able to make a life-altering decision against our will.

I'm not saying we have the answers. In a perfect world, there'd be no disease. In a perfect world, cystinosis would not exist. Until that time comes, though, let us focus on perfecting what we do have, and correcting policies that put pharmaceutical companies before patients and policies before people.

All lives matter. There has to be a way to correct the mistakes made last year, and if there isn't currently a way, then it's time to pave one.

Again, I would like to thank everyone for inviting me to address the committee. On behalf of our organization and the cystinosis community, we are grateful to see the rare disease community on a potential pathway to better the lives of those with rare disease.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Thank you very much for sharing your story. It's certainly quite a tale. You've been through a lot.

Now we'll go to Ms. Vowles, for a 10-minute opening statement.

9:15 a.m.

Mary Jane Vowles Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

Thank you very much.

My name is Mary Jane Vowles and I'm one of the volunteer members of the board of aHUS Canada.

My daughter has aHUS, also known as atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. This ultra-rare, life-threatening disease is a disorder of the immune system that can damage or destroy any organ by creating blood clots that stop the normal flow of blood to the organ.

At six months of age, my daughter developed flu-like symptoms. The pediatrician on call diagnosed her with the flu. The next day, there was blood in her urine. I took her to the family pediatrician, who diagnosed aHUS, and she was admitted to hospital.

Over a week, she received several red blood transfusions, appeared to stabilize and was discharged. Two weeks later, the flu-like symptoms returned. The same pediatrician was on call and claimed the first diagnosis was incorrect and repeated that she had the flu. The next day my own pediatrician sent us to SickKids.

In the next few days, Caryn's kidneys shut down and a nephrologist diagnosed aHUS. They installed a central line, followed immediately with dialysis, and then plasmapheresis. Her blood pressure was out of control. Medicines didn't work. After two weeks, they were able to cease dialysis and weaned her off plasmapheresis, replacing it with treatments of plasma infusion.

After six months, she was discharged, returning weekly and then bi-weekly for infusions of plasma. Many attempts were made to increase the span to three weeks, but each attempt failed and the aHUS recurred, requiring readmission to the hospital and plasmapheresis. She frequently had reactions to the plasma and went into anaphylactic shock many times.

When Caryn was in grade 8, she developed antibodies to that plasma and again was hospitalized for six months. After many unsuccessful attempts with treatments, they finally succeeded, using IVIG prior to plasma. She began peritoneal dialysis.

In grade 11, Caryn began a trial of eculizumab, also known as Soliris, injected every two weeks. It was sponsored by Alexion. Life was good.

At 18, she was transferred to the adult patient world, with a nephrologist from Credit Valley Hospital. She continued to receive the eculizumab treatments through SickKids.

In Caryn's second year of university, she fell, rupturing the tendons in both of her knees. In emergency, she received dialysis in hallways, despite protests.

She had successful surgery at Credit Valley Hospital. After a few weeks, she developed pains in her stomach while here in Ottawa and was diagnosed with aspergillus. She was airlifted back to her nephrologist at Credit Valley Hospital.

In the meantime, her father had been convinced to have the cost of the eculizumab covered by his health insurance plan. This had been done for several treatments. The insurance company would not cover the cost when she was admitted to hospital, and Credit Valley Hospital refused to cover it. At $750,000 a year, the family budget could not afford it. The nephrologist at Credit Valley knew nothing about aHUS and the hematologist there refused to see her or look at her case.

The experts in that adult field were at Toronto General and Saint Mike's. Both hospitals refused to admit her because of the cost of the drug. After a battle, the chief of staff at Credit Valley facilitated a transfer to TGH under the condition that they would not treat her with eculizumab. Instead they would use a detergentized blood to minimize reactions and prevent recurrence.

She was in hospital for five months, had many allergic reactions, and some were severe.

In January 2014, the aHUS recurred. She was put back on eculizumab under her father's plan. In May 2014, she no longer had insurance. Alexion, the drug company, agreed to continue the eculizumab on compassionate grounds. It continues to do so.

Caryn had to go on to hemodialysis. She's often in extreme pain as a result of the dialysis and has debilitating headaches.

Caryn is now 25. She has a degree in biomedical engineering from the University of Guelph, where she will shortly complete her master's degree in applied science. She has been accepted with a scholarship to complete a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering at Queen's.

Caryn's success story is only possible because of eculizumab.

Recently there have been other success stories in young patients treated with eculizumab as soon as diagnosed and they've been able to recover completely and resume absolutely normal lives. One 12-year-old was admitted to SickKids' coronary unit, vomiting and enduring internal bleeding. He suffered a blood clot and was put on oxygen. He received blood transfusions and plasmapheresis. His kidneys failed, requiring dialysis. Once diagnosed and treated with Soliris, his health improved. His kidneys recovered completely.

The onset can be very different for patients, and the age of diagnosis can vary. One patient was misdiagnosed with another ailment, lost kidney function, and then had a transplant and seemed to be doing well. Soon he became ill and also lost the kidney. Further testing showed he had aHUS. He has had multiple relapses, is on dialysis now, and has been approved under the Ontario government new format to receive the drug. The administrative team at the hospital are delaying. There's no guarantee the government will fund the drug continually following the transplant. A recurrence would lead to kidney loss and perhaps death.

In March 2013, after its extensive testing process for safety, quality, production and efficacy, Health Canada approved eculizumab. The Province of Quebec began to fund the drug immediately. Other provinces awaited the CDR report from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Five months later, the CDR recommended provinces not fund the drug due to its high cost and lack of evidence of efficacy, criticizing the lack of using a placebo on a control group. This was purposely not done, because aHUS can be lethal. aHUS Canada questions why a drug that science supports, that is very safe and effective, was not recommended for these treatments.

Under the leadership of the deputy minister of Ontario public drug programs, meetings were held with aHUS Canada to create possible solutions. Headway has been made in some areas and patients are receiving the drug for transplants. Though most provinces now fund the drug, the issue is that patients are now being removed from the drug arbitrarily without scientific support or doctors' recommendations.

There needs to be a separate program that evaluates health technologies for rare diseases, as they so differ from common disorders. The CADTH should have a rare disease review in addition to its common drug review and the pan-Canadian oncology drug review. Just as PCODR was created due to unique needs, so should RDR. Without this change, rare disease therapies will be evaluated against the same criteria as common diseases, and this is unfair. The same robust statistics will never be available in rare illnesses because of the low number of patients, and that also will increase the cost of the therapy. A different viewpoint is needed.

Four problems face patients. The first is the difficulty of a quick and accurate diagnosis of the illness. We live in a vast country where not all patients can reach a major city for that diagnosis and treatment. The second is timely access to a drug for a disease that can permanently damage organs and cause death within days. Third, as long as specialists do not have decision-making capability for the dosing of eculizumab, patients remain at risk of recurrence. Finally, the cost of the drug needs to be addressed.

A world expert doctor from SickKids has offered a solution that seems plausible for the treatment of aHUS. He made the suggestion for Ontario, but I believe it should be considered as a Canadian option. We need a centre or hub here in Canada where blood can be tested for illness promptly and results returned to the physician. The centre would have at least three expert doctors in the field who are involved in current studies and research. Tests for the illness could be done promptly and effectively. Upon confirmation of a diagnosis, these experts would make medical treatment decisions, instead of provincial governments. This could prevent strokes, heart disease and kidney failure and reduce costs for hospital stays, dialysis, patient home support and disability payments.

Through this centre, patients' response and well-being could be monitored and drug treatments could be decreased in dosage or frequency as deemed beneficial. This model would follow one that is working in England.

Last, if Canada, as a country, negotiated the drug cost, prices could be further reduced. Other drugs are currently being developed, and research is promising, but at this point the only drug known to treat aHUS and change the lifetime prognosis of patients is eculizumab. It's time for Canada to recognize those with rare diseases and find solutions that are appropriate for 2018. We need a country-wide plan so we do not discriminate against the minority who have a rare disease.

Research has come a long way in 25 years. When Caryn was diagnosed, the statistics were that there were 100 patients in the civilized world with atypical HUS and over half of those had died. Recent research suggests that aHUS affects about 200 patients in Canada. It is possible to change the outcome for patients with aHUS.

I trust I have successfully addressed the barriers that patients with aHUS face, suggested recommendations, and stressed the need for action. Eculizumab must be made available to aHUS patients through public funds.

I thank you very much for listening to us today.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

We thank you for sharing that with us.

I'm going to start our seven-minute round of questions with Mr. McKinnon.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

Thank you, Chair.

I'm going to start with Ms. Vowles.

You mentioned the suggestion of a national centre, a hub for blood testing. I was wondering if you could speak more about how that might work. Would all children get tested as a matter of course, or how would one determine when to use this service as a system?

9:30 a.m.

Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

Mary Jane Vowles

There are certain symptoms of blood breakdown and the mechanisms in it that are different in aHUS from in other illnesses, so the blood would be sent to the centre and they would be able to diagnose aHUS, because it's very difficult to diagnose.

Caryn, do you want to add to that?

9:30 a.m.

Caryn Vowles Board Member, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

There are a bunch of tests. I think one of them is for ADAMTS13. If you were having problems, that would also distinguish between ITP and aHUS. There are some tests that would go with those symptoms, and you'd send this test in and it could determine which disease you have.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

This hub concept is not specific to aHUS. Is that correct?

9:30 a.m.

Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

Mary Jane Vowles

That would be correct. You could have other rare diseases that could also be covered by this hub. The situation we were looking at was more for diseases that would be related to kidney or nephrology.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

It would require the physician to know that they didn't know, right? It seems in both these stories there were cases in which one physician made a diagnosis and was quite comfortable with that. In your case, it was a diagnosis of flu. If they're confident in that diagnosis, they're not going to go the next step to get blood tests, right? I guess I'm wondering how—

9:30 a.m.

Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

Mary Jane Vowles

That would be correct, but I would say that once the illness persists and it's not looking like the flu, they would then take that blood and they would treat it like your blood or my blood or regular people's blood and they would test for all those other possibilities and when those possibilities aren't there, then they would send it to this centre.

What currently happens is that blood is being sent to the States, and it's taking much longer to get back the results, and so by that time it's not possible to diagnose. With the way the provinces work the funding, you have to put the funding request in and it takes days for them to come back with it. If you've already spent days getting your blood tested too, it's much more difficult, whereas this would do the two things simultaneously.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

Right now you can get that testing done in the United States, but this basically takes that service and reimplements it in Canada for Canadian domestic use. Is that correct?

9:30 a.m.

Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

Mary Jane Vowles

Right, and because the illness is rare, it also puts together the facts on current research. Some of the provinces are suggesting that you do not need eculizumab quite so regularly or that we should remove the eculizumab, and so once the diagnosis is there, if we're going to start increasing the distance between the treatments of eculizumab, we need to have a blood testing facility that's going to be accurate and quick so, should the illness recur, there would be instant access to the eculizumab again.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

I'm also interested in the high cost of these drugs.

I direct this to Ms. Little as well as Ms. Vowles.

Is there anything afoot to reduce the high cost of these drugs? As it goes forward, the drug has existed for a longer period and the company has had an opportunity for a return on its investment. Is there any evidence or thought that prices will go down or that there can be some relief to that?

9:35 a.m.

President, Liv-A-Little Foundation

Erin Little

Speaking in general about the States, which is the closest to us and we're the most involved with them, I know that Horizon pharmaceuticals owns the patent for the new drug Procysbi. It has a seven year...and now they've added another three-year extension. Basically, for the next 10 years the price will continue to go up.

I can't speak to that in Canada because I think once the price is set, it's set. In the States, they will continue to increase it to make a profit, which these companies are known for—the rare disease market. It's a niche market when you have 2,000 patients, or in Canada you have 75 to 100 patients. You need their drug. It's a product that our kids couldn't live without.

I would really like to hear Horizon pharmaceuticals answer the question of why it's so expensive and what they can do to reduce the cost. Logistically, it's not a drug that should cost a lot of money to make.

9:35 a.m.

Board Member, Canada, atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Canada

Mary Jane Vowles

In Erin's case, we don't hear of any upcoming credits or bonus sales going on for the drug cost. The cost is the cost. However, in our disease case there is current research going on with, I believe, three other companies to produce other drugs that look promising to be cheaper. They're just not available yet. Down the road they may work just as well as the eculizumab but eculizumab is the only one currently available.

9:35 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

I take it from both your testimonies that one of the problems here that needs to be addressed is the ability to have drugs approved in Canada for use, particularly for the unique circumstances of rare diseases. Is that correct?

9:35 a.m.

President, Liv-A-Little Foundation

Erin Little

That's correct.

9:35 a.m.

Liberal

Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC

Those are my questions.

9:35 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bill Casey

Mr. Lobb.

9:35 a.m.

Conservative

Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON

Thank you very much.

I have a question for both parents who are here.

Erin, how much per year is the cost for the Cystagon?

9:35 a.m.

President, Liv-A-Little Foundation

Erin Little

We are just under $15,000 per year.

9:35 a.m.

Conservative

Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON

Who pays for that? Does the province pay for that?

9:35 a.m.

President, Liv-A-Little Foundation

Erin Little

Under the inherited metabolics disease program Olivia's Cystagon is covered. With the new approval, Procysbi is as well. Our access to Cystagon is through SAP right now. Currently, we have to apply every three months for Olivia to stay on this treatment as it's flawless for her. That is covered under that program.

If our family were to switch to the new drug, in Ontario specifically, or if any other families switch to the new drug, it would also be covered under the same program—the new drug, as well.