From what I can see, Bristol-Myers Squibb really does plow profits from advertised but non-essential products like pravachol (good product, perhaps, but a generic alternative may do the job) into potential dramatic life-savers like this one. I wouldn't compare BMS to companies that only go after easier markets. I do think there are some expensive types of health care the government does not need to pay for, but if you want to pay for them out of your own pocket fine. I pray the OP product works as well when tested with more patients, and, if so, it will be worth a high priced charged. Of course, they won't be advertising this one on TV because they won't need to.
Also, if it was up to me, I would approve this drug for sale today. Let the independent university-based docs continue the research as they will, by all means, but there is no need to force BMS to do further research that will only jack up the eventual price. In any event, best use of the drug can only be determined after approval.
I suspect this med will be approved 'on the fast-track'. If it's as good as they say it is, and the side effects don't show up early, it would be almost unethical to withhold it.
I exist today because a simple inexpensive tablet was R&D's a number of decades ago. I believe in R&D and am not about to whine because the cost of being healthy is helping to pay for the development of the product.
There will be a number of phenomical gene related medical advances over the next couple of decades. I'll be pleased as can be to extend my good health or life by paying a reasonable cost for them, even if it turns into a bit of a struggle to do it.