Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

[Q]: Developed by Eli Lilly and Co’s (LLY.N) Loxo Oncology and marketed by German drugmaker Bayer (BAYGn.DE), it fights a rare genetic mutation that appears in less than 1% of solid tumors, regardless of where they appear in the body. Finding those patients will require widespread adoption of sophisticated tests that look for multiple genetic alterations that could be driving the cancer. So far, progress has been slow. Adoption of so-called next-generation sequencing (NGS) tests has been stalled by lack of reimbursement from insurers over concerns that the evidence is not there yet to support widescale use, according to more than a dozen interviews with oncologists and pharmaceutical and diagnostic industry executives. As a result, pharma companies from small biotech Blueprint Medicines Corp (BPMC.O) to larger rivals Lilly and Roche Holding AG (ROG.S) are taking matters into their own hands, bulking up staff to increase patient and physician awareness about testing and building up a gene testing infrastructure that for many community hospitals still does not exist. Bayer executives told Reuters it plans to spend $70 million to increase patient and physician awareness of testing for rare mutations and to encourage regulatory approval of more tests. They expect that budget to expand as Vitrakvi continues to win approval in other countries. Lilly told Reuters the company has signed an agreement with Thermo Fisher Scientific (TMO.N) to develop a companion diagnostic test for its experimental drug, LOXO-292. The deal adds RET mutations - the target of both Lilly’s and Blueprint’s drugs - to Thermo’s Oncomine Dx Target Test, which local pathology labs can use to identify multiple genes linked with non-small cell lung cancer. The agreement is aimed to help identify more lung and thyroid cancer patients who may benefit from the Lilly or Blueprint therapies. The Thermo test is already approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration - a key standard for Medicare coverage, the companies said. According to Dr. Brian Alexander, chief medical officer of Roche’s gene testing company Foundation Medicine, only about 15% of U.S. patients with advanced cancers get comprehensive genomic  profiling. Another 25% get single-gene testing, he said, and a large proportion “are not getting any testing at all.”  At MD Anderson, which sees 100,000 new cancer patients a year, only around 10,000 eventually have their tumors sequenced. For a rare few, the tests are lifesaving. Xin Zheng, 47, a mother of three in Michigan who was referred to Reuters by Blueprint, was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer in 2016. After failing several treatments, she was out of options. Her husband, Zhigang Wei, asked for genetic sequencing, and the test turned up a RET mutation. After contacting multiple lung cancer experts, Zhigang found an early-stage clinical trial treating patients with Blueprint’s experimental drug, BLU-677. Now, Xin is nearly back to normal. “My wife is lucky,” he said, adding her quality of life is much better and she has hope for the future. Finding patients with such rare mutations is like “looking for the needle in the haystack,” said Stefan Oelrich, head of pharmaceuticals at Bayer. Dr. David Hyman of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, who tested Vitrakvi in clinical trials, said making these tests the norm for advanced cancer patients will require a huge shift in the way oncology is practiced. “It’s painful to know there are patients out there with these alterations who are dying without knowing about it and without getting any treatments,” he said. For Bayer’s Vitrakvi and Roche’s Rozlytrek, along with similar drugs in development, genomic testing is critical to finding patients who can benefit from them. Cancer patients and drug companies alike got a boost last year when the federal Medicare health program for the elderly and disabled said it would cover FDA-approved tests for advanced cancer patients that can identify hundreds of genetic mutations at once. A Medicare endorsement is generally followed by widespread coverage decisions by private insurers. But the final regulations dropped a requirement that testmakers prove the tests are cost-effective and improve patient care. That created an “evidence gap” that has allowed some insurers, also known as third-party payers, to withhold coverage or demand more proof that they benefit patients, said Jeff Schreier of Diaceutics PLC (DXRX.L), a data analytics company that works with drugmakers to improve diagnostic testing. “More payers are coming around, but it’s slow,” he said. The most recent coverage policy from CVS Health Corp’s (CVS.N) Aetna approves many single-gene tests for specific cancers, but still largely considers multi-gene tests experimental. Anthem Inc’s (ANTM.N) policy limits testing to “medically necessary” use and states there’s “insufficient published evidence” to support widespread testing. And while Foundation Medicine’s and Thermo Fisher’s tests are getting reimbursed from Medicare, many hospitals such as MD Anderson, which have developed their own tests, are not guaranteed payment. “Reimbursement is still a driving force,” MD Anderson’s Kenna Shaw said of genomic testing, which costs an average of $5,000 per patient globally. Lilly bought Loxo in January for $8 billion to profit from its targeted drugs in early-stage development. Bayer secured the rights to Loxo’s two leading compounds in a 2017 alliance. Dr. Anthony Sireci, Loxo’s senior medical director, said the company has been working to “democratize” testing in the United States by increasing its use in local pathology labs, where most cancer testing has traditionally been done. The Thermo Fisher agreement will support those goals and expand patients’ access to “high-quality genomic testing,” he said. Bayer has hired diagnostic experts to help its medical and sales staff assess the barriers to genomic testing and ensure that local pathology labs are including the genetic alterations targeted by its drugs when they profile tumors, the company’s oncology strategic business chief Robert LaCaze said in an interview. Bayer also launched a public awareness campaign called “Test Your Cancer” that urges patients to ask their doctors about genomic cancer testing. The company is working with testing providers to ensure test reports are easy to understand. Blueprint, which has six genomically-targeted drugs in development, told Reuters it plans to hire six diagnostics experts to increase awareness of the mutations their drugs target, especially in community medical practices, where 70% of cancers are treated. Bayer sees signs of progress. Based on internal data, the company estimates average sequencing rates across tumors neared 30% last year, and the company saw a two-fold increase in the number of labs offering tests that carry the mutation targeted by Vitrakvi. Bayer has not released sales figures for Vitrakvi. Asked for an update in the most recent earnings call in July, Bayer’s Oelrich said uptake is going “according to plan,” but declined to say how many patients are using the drug. LaCaze said with very rare cancers like the ones Vitrakvi targets, sales growth is “something that will build over time.”
[A]: Inside drugmakers' strategy to boost cancer medicines with 'Lazarus effect'.


[Q]: The Utah Senate and House of Representatives voted unanimously Monday evening during a special session to send the proposal to Republican Gov. Gary Herbert’s desk. The measure would replace plans for an unusual state-run dispensary system with 14 privately run pharmacies and adopt protections for patients who are concerned they could be prosecuted for drug crimes, among other changes. Utah backtracked from the state-run dispensary after county attorneys expressed concern that such a system would put public employees at risk of being prosecuted under federal drug laws. Republican Senate Majority Leader Evan Vickers, who drafted the law, said his team is “doing everything we can” to improve patient access and have product ready by next March. Some lawmakers said they still have heartburn over certain aspects of the bill, sharing reservations about product distribution and a looming fear of federal prosecution. Democratic Sen. Derek Kitchen said he’s concerned patients in rural parts of the state may have to pay more to access marijuana. Before the House vote, Republican Rep. Keven Stratton suggested Utah seek a federal waiver to protect the state program from prosecution under federal drug laws. Marijuana is banned at the federal level, though a congressional amendment blocks the Justice Department from interfering with states’ medical marijuana programs. The measure dictated that the courts may not treat a medical marijuana patient differently than someone who uses any other prescribed, controlled substance. Another change prohibited the state from issuing cultivation and pharmacy licenses to legislators. “A lot of money flows through this industry, some back to legislators,” Vickers said. “We don’t want legislators to have undue influence in an industry they want to have ownership in.” Debates in the chamber reflected ongoing tensions over amendments regarding distribution and prosecution of drug crimes. During a tense public hearing last week, members of the conservative group Utah Eagle Forum lamented the loss of the state-run dispensary system, while some medical marijuana advocates raised concern that there wouldn’t be enough private dispensaries to meet growing patient demand. An earlier version of the law imagined 12 privately run dispensaries instead of the state-run system. In the same meeting, a proposal outlining patient protections caused an emotional back-and-forth between conservative attorneys who argued parents couldn’t take care of children while using marijuana and patients who said the drug makes them better caretakers and helps them manage their pain. Utah residents voted to legalize medical marijuana via ballot measure in November. The revised law became effective in December after a compromise that secured the support of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and some marijuana advocates. However, the deal drew backlash from other advocates as it banned many marijuana edibles, placed additional restrictions on growing cannabis and made fewer medical conditions eligible for treatment with pot. Other changes addressed issues with land ordinances for cultivation facilities and marijuana research at in-state universities. Marijuana advocates said they are optimistic about the changes adopted. “There’s a light at the end of the tunnel, we see legislators working together, and they’re willing to work out a plan for patients,” Desiree Hennessy, director of the Utah Patients Coalition, said. Republican Rep. Brad Daw acknowledged the measure as a good first step but expects additional changes to the program in January. “I have close friends who, for them, cannabis is the only option, it relieves the kind of pain they have ... we have every right and responsibility to work toward a law that allows medical cannabis to patients who need it,” he said. “Is this bill perfect? Of course not. Is this done? No, it’s not.”
[A]: Utah lawmakers approve changes to medical cannabis law.


[Q]: "During a press conference on April 30, 2013, President Barack Obama addressed a number of high-profile issues, including the fighting in Syria, the Boston Marathon attack, immigration legislation and the across-the-board cuts to federal spending known as the sequester. On the sequester, Obama expressed his ambivalence about signing a bill that passed Congress a few days earlier. The bill, which would ease the sequester’s hit on the Federal Aviation Administration, moved quickly through the House and Senate amid public frustration. The flight delays stemmed from cuts to air traffic control staffing; the bill shifted $253 million from an airport improvement fund to the air traffic control system. Obama said the pressure on air travelers left him with little choice but to sign the bill, but he also decried the piecemeal approach to solving the nation’s budget and infrastructure challenges. If lawmakers were ""seriously concerned about passenger convenience and safety,"" Obama said, ""then they shouldn't just be thinking about tomorrow or next week or the week after that. They should be thinking about what's going to be happening five years from now, 10 years from now or 15 years from now. … How are we making sure that we're investing in things like rebuilding our airports and our roads and our bridges, and investing in early childhood education?"" Obama added: ""There was a recent survey of the top airports … in the world, and there was not a single U.S. airport that came in the top 25. Not one U.S. airport was considered by the experts and consumers who use these airports to be in the top 25 in the world. I think Cincinnati airport came in around 30th. What does that say about our long-term competitiveness and future?"" We wondered whether this survey really showed U.S. airports to be such a dismal lot. As it turns out, Obama got the numbers right. He was referring to the World Airport Awards, an independent, annual survey of 12 million travelers that ranks nearly 400 airports. The survey has been conducted by a British-based firm called Skytrax since 1999. The top-ranked U.S. airport in the group’s 2013 survey was indeed Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport in the 30th spot. The airports ranking higher than that include a dozen in Asia (including the top two, Singapore Changi Airport and Incheon International Airport), seven in Europe, three in Africa, two in Australia, and just one in North America (Vancouver International Airport, at No. 8). In all, 17 U.S. airports cracked the top 100, with Denver 36th, San Francisco 40th, Atlanta 48th and none of the rest ending up higher than 50th. The 2013 results were not a fluke: We checked the 2012 and 2011 surveys as well and found that the top U.S. airport in both years was also Cincinnati, ranking 24th. We checked with Angela Gittens, director general of Airports Council International, a trade group for airports, to see what she thought of the rankings. She began by expressing skepticism about the survey’s rigor. (The firm says it surveys passengers online and by phone and uses systems to detect fraudulent submissions.) She added that the U.S. faces some stiff challenges competing in a global comparison of this sort. ""Major international hubs in the U.S. are sometimes hampered by long immigration and security queues, which would hurt their rankings in comparison to an airport with primarily domestic service, such as Cincinnati,"" Gittens said. Cincinnati, which outperformed no fewer than 50 U.S. airports that have larger traffic, is hardly an international hub on the scale of New York’s JFK, Los Angeles or Miami. Peter Miller, a spokesman for Skytrax, agreed. He said the U.S. may be suffering in the survey because of the importance of security processing and immigration to many passengers -- ""not just actual waiting times, but also traveler treatment in these areas."" Gittens added that U.S. airports have a hard time competing with newer airports in Asia. In many countries, she said, ""the national governments see their airports as key assets for their economic vitality and strive to make the visitors’ journey through the airport as smooth as possible."" So the rankings Obama cited should be taken with a grain of salt. More important, the rankings don’t entirely support the president’s argument that the federal government needs to spend more money ""rebuilding our airports"" and providing for ""passenger convenience and safety."" Of the 39 factors that went into the survey’s rankings, we count only 13 that address airport capital improvements -- projects like terminal and waiting-area design, signage, public transit access, ease of navigation, and baggage-handling systems. Another five factors in the survey involve security. This leaves a slight majority of factors that concern amenities and hospitality -- factors such as choice of bars, shopping options, restaurant prices, entertainment facilities, washroom cleanliness, availability of luggage trolleys, and ""friendliness of airport staff."" ""The survey covers a wide cross-section of amenities and facilities at every airport, but it is true to say that one of the most prominent sections is the focus on service, staff, convenience, and waiting times,"" said Peter Miller, a spokesman for Skytrax. ""These are the issues that are of prime importance to travelers, and which cause the biggest distinction between airports worldwide."" Our ruling Obama said the United States needs to invest more in its airports over the long term in part because ""there was a recent survey of the top airports … in the world, and there was not a single U.S. airport that came in the top 25."" He is spot-on about the rankings, but the survey in question offers only imperfect support for the argument that the federal government should invest more in its airports, since the survey measures not just major infrastructure aspects of airports (which the federal government would help fund) but also passenger amenities (something the government would not get directly involved in)."
[A]:
"Long-term federal investment in U.S. airports is urgent because ""there was a recent survey of the top airports … in the world, and there was not a single U.S. airport that came in the top 25."