text_1: Hard questions about chemo
text_2: "This is an important piece about a major problem in healthcare costs in the U.S. Even for people with life-threatening illness (that is not acute, and treated as an inpatient), care is not guaranteed for those who cannot pay. There is enough variation in costs of potential treatment regimens that the practice of informing patients about cost with treatment options should be encouraged. Although distressing, launching a family into financial disaster is an adverse outcome as well. This particular story focuses on the increasing cost of 2nd or 3rd-line chemotherapy drugs aimed at advanced cancer. The story notes that patients are often forced to choose between these treatments and their financial savings. The story explains that because the market for  certain drugs is small and focused, the cost of these chemotherapy drugs is higher. The story appropriately notes that cost should be discussed as an additional side effect of treatment. The story notes via an American Cancer Society rep that it ""costs a billion dollars"" to bring a drugs to market; however, we are not told of the typical profit made from these drugs once they are available to patients. This is an oversight in reporting about cost. There is also considerable debate about the validity of that claim about pharma’s R&D costs – which the story does not address. The story does not discuss how these newer drugs work, or how much quantity and quality of life they add to patients’ lives. The story does not discuss if newer drugs are any better than older drugs for treating cancer. We are told that some newer drugs have fewer or different side effects. The story provides information on alternative older drugs that may be an option for cancer treatment. The story also provides some resources for patients who may qualify for free or reduced-cost medicines."