Sorry, but there is imho to little regulation going on here. The market seems rigged against patients - esp. patients with terminal (or at least grave) illnesses that are pretty wide spread. These people are hey are prone to be exploited and there are enough of them. Mostly pharma does not dev drugs for wide spread illnesses that mostly occur in poor countries for example. Or grave illnesses, that only affect very, very few people.
But dev a "new" cancer drug and you got your license to print money (lot of people get cancer, a lot is payed by insurance, and people and their loved ones want healing).
I'm missing your point. Most diseases is characterized that way - lots of people get them, healthcare paid by insurance, people want healing. Cancer is not special.
I think the argument for patents, as incentive for development, is quite strong. There is no alternative system in place yet.
Also you probably underestimate the value and purpose of pharmaceutical regulation. Most rules revolve around production quality, scientific soundness, safety monitoring and so on. Come to think of it, the degree of safety in pretty much any drug on the legal market is quite astounding, despite exceptions and accidents.
