Skip to main content

Table 2 Pros and cons of making sponsors responsible

From: Who should pay for the continuity of post-trial health care treatments?

Pros Cons
Avoid family expenses Could weakens the local clinical research groups participating in the trials and decreases research
Protects the patient’s health Could jeopardizes the financing of the tests
Immediate access to medication for the patient / Ensuring continuity of treatment (gives patient peace of mind - possibility of placebo effect) Reduce industry investment in countries with high prevalence of rare diseases
The public health system would not pay Could create an iatrogenic risk for the patient to whom the medication is given even without registration if there is no ongoing medical follow-up.
The cost to the industry would be defined more clearly, knowing the future (the cost is internalized, knowing that it will have to be paid) Could make the treatment more expensive and unfeasible