My husband has had gout in the past, localized mostly to one or two joints on one foot. When he had the symptoms, the pain kept him from being able to walk. Last year, our doctor had x-rays done and said that there is some joint damage and that he should consider starting to take a medication which would prevent future attacks and also prevent more joint damage. He said the medicine, once started, has to be taken forever; apparently if the medicine is stopped it raises the risk that gout will flare up again.
Since my husband was successfully controlling outbreaks with diet and home remedies (black cherry juice, for example) he declined this medicine at that time.
This year our doctor brought it up again, and even though he hasn’t had any gout symptoms during the year, my husband decided to go ahead with it. It turns out there are two medicines, one temporary and the permanent one. The permanent medicine costs under $20 a month which is ok. The temporary medicine is colchicine, which due to FDA policy and corporate greed costs roughly $400 per month, and he was supposed to take it for 2 months. (The doctor warned us this prescription was very expensive.) Although this medicine is not covered by our insurance (Medicare plus part F supplement), we could afford this, but we are not happy. We filled the prescription the same day as the doctor visit and he started taking them that day.
We got a call today from the doctor, which went to voicemail as we weren’t home. My husband’s lab results (he had blood drawn the next day after the doctor visit) indicate that his kidney function apparently won’t support these medications and “if you haven’t picked up the prescriptions yet, don’t, and if you have, don’t start taking them.” In fact, when we got this message he had been taking the medications for 4 days. He has since stopped.
We haven’t been able to reach the doctor back yet, but from his message it seems likely that we have to throw out (i.e. turn in to some proper facility) $400+ worth of medicine. I should also note that the kidney function must have changed during the past year, since last year’s labs did not indicate any problem.
My question is this: considering the cost of the medicine, the lack of current symptoms, and the possibility (however remote) that the labs might indicate that the medicine would be contra-indicated, should the doctor have told us to wait until the lab results before picking up and paying for the prescription?