Scientific research that leads to
new drugs is usually funded by the National Institutes of Health via federal
grants, the researchers found. (Heidi de Marco/KHN)
August
23, 2016--The “most important factor” that
drives prescription drug prices higher in the United States than anywhere else
in the world is the existence of government-protected “monopoly” rights for
drug manufacturers, researchers at Harvard Medical School report today.
The researchers reviewed thousands
of studies published from January 2005 through July 2016 in an attempt to simplify
and explain what has caused America’s drug price crisis and how to solve it.
They found that the problem has deep
and complicated roots and published their findings in JAMA, the journal of the American Medical
Association. The study was funded by the Laura and John Arnold
Foundation with additional support provided by the Engelberg Foundation.
“I continue to be impressed at what
a complex and nuanced problem it is and how there are no easy solutions
either,” said lead study author Dr. Aaron Kesselheim, a professor who runs the
Program on Regulation, Therapeutics and Law at Harvard Medical School and
Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
“As I was writing, the enormity of
the problem continued to shine through.”
Five key findings in the JAMA
review:
1. Drug manufacturers in the U.S. set their own
prices, and that’s not the norm elsewhere in the world.
Countries with national health
programs have government entities that either negotiate drug prices or decide
not to cover drugs whose prices they deem excessive. No similar negotiating
happens in the U.S.
When a
Republican-majority Congress created the Medicare drug benefit in 2003,
they barred the program that now covers 40 million Americans from negotiating
drug prices. Medicaid, on the other hand, must cover all drugs approved by the
Food and Drug Administration, regardless of whether a cheaper, equally or more
effective drug is available.
And private insurers rarely
negotiate prices because the third party pharmacy benefits managers that
administer prescription drugs, such as Express Scripts and CVS Health, often
receive payments from drug companies to shift market share in their favor,
according to the study.
2. We allow “government-protected monopolies” for
certain drugs, preventing generics from coming to market to reduce prices.
In an effort to promote innovation,
the U.S. has a patent system that allows drug manufacturers to remain the sole
manufacturer of drugs they’ve patented for 20 years or more. The FDA also gives
drug manufacturers exclusivity for certain products, including those that treat
people with rare diseases.
But sometimes, drug companies deploy
questionable strategies to maintain their monopolies, the study says. The
tactics vary, but they include slightly tweaking the nontherapeutic parts of
drugs, such as pill coatings, to game the patent system and paying large “pay
for delay” settlements to generics manufacturers who sue them over these
patents.
And this is a serious problem, the
study concludes, because drug prices decline to 55 percent of their original
brand name cost once there are two generics on the market and to 33 percent of
original cost with five generics.
3. The FDA takes a long time to approve generic
drugs.
Application backlogs at the FDA have
led to delays of three or four years before generic manufacturers can win
approval to make drugs not protected by patents, the study says.
4. Sometimes, state laws and other
“well-intentioned” federal policies limit generics’ abilities to keep costs
down.
Pharmacists in 26 states are
required by law to get patient consent before switching to a generic drug, the
authors wrote. This reportedly cost Medicaid $19.8 million dollars in 2006 for
just one drug: a statin called simvastatin whose brand name is Zocor. Costs ran
higher because pharmacists didn’t get patient consent and Medicaid had to pay
for the costlier brand name drug even though a cheaper product was available.
5. Drug prices aren’t really justified by R&D.
Although drug manufacturers often
cite research and development costs when defending high prescription prices,
the connection isn’t exactly true, Kesselheim and his team found, citing
several studies. Most of the time, scientific research that leads to new drugs
is funded by the National Institutes of Health via federal grants. If not, it’s
often funded by venture capital. For example, sofosbuvir, a drug that treats
hepatitis C, was acquired by Gilead after the original research occurred in
academic labs.
“Arguments in defense of maintaining
high drug prices to protect the strength of the drug industry misstate its
vulnerability,” the authors wrote, adding that companies only spend 10 percent
to 20 percent of their revenue on research and development.
“The biotechnology and
pharmaceutical sectors have for years been among the very best-performing
sectors in the U.S. economy.”
Instead, the price tags are based on
what the market will bear, they wrote
In general, fixing America’s drug
price problems won’t be easy, the study authors concluded. Congressional
gridlock and the power of the pharmaceutical lobby make allowing Medicare to
negotiate Part D prices an unlikely possibility. And leaving that aside,
policymakers must find a way to tighten rules and strengthen oversight
surrounding patent protections and exclusivity without chilling innovation,
Kesselheim said.
Those not involved in the study said
the fact that it was published in JAMA is meaningful because the authors are
able to speak directly to doctors.
“I think the most significant thing
about this is not necessarily what he’s saying but who he’s saying it to,” said
Kenneth Kaitin, who directs the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development.
“In part, the concern over rising
drug prices is something that physicians have been more aware of lately…They’ve
still been for the most part on the sidelines of these issues.”
Kaitin said the exception has been
the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the physicians at Memorial Sloan
Kettering Cancer Center.
Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, the Associate
Dean for Public Health Practice and Training at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg
School of Public Health, said Kesselheim’s study provides a “bird’s eye view”
of how the U.S. became an outlier when it comes to drug prices, without getting
lost in the weeds.
“It also illustrates that there is
not a single policy that is going to address the range of challenges that our
health system faces around drug pricing,” Sharfstein said.
KHN’s coverage of
prescription drug development, costs and pricing is supported in part by the Laura and John Arnold
Foundation.
No comments:
Post a Comment