Determinants of drug prices: a systematic review of comparison studies

Medicines prices in International (Geary-Khamis) Dollar. The comparison between regulated and deregulated markets

BACKGROUND

Affordability of medicines is key for effective healthcare. Thus, we compared medicine prices using International Dollar (I$), which allows confronting the values of different currencies. Besides, we intended to verify if pharmaceutical market deregulation leads to lower medicines prices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted the study between December 2019 and September 2022 collecting data from 21 countries. From the preliminary sampling of 30 medicines, we selected 10 brand names (5 Rx and 5 OTC brands) for the analysis. In each country, we collected price information from 3 pharmacies and then converted them to the I$ using the rates published by the International Monetary Fund.

RESULTS

There were differences between regulated and deregulated markets in prices presented in I$. For instance, Aspirin C® (10 soluble pills) was on average I$ 5.41 in Finland (regulated market) and I$ 13.25 in Brazil. The most expensive Xarelto® 20 x 28 pills (I$ 538.40) was in Romania, which in the case of other medicines, was in the group of cheaper countries. There was no statistical significance in price comparison between regulated and deregulated markets. In some cases, however, regulated markets offered lower prices of the same medicine than deregulated markets.

CONCLUSION

The analysis revealed differences in I$ prices between countries. Pharmaceutical market regulation does not mean higher prices of medicines. There is a need for affordable medicines. Hence, decision-makers should work on the medicines prices and adjust them to the local economies. I$ could be important in creating pharmaceuticals prices, and the conducted study should encourage other researchers to present their results using this currency.

Variables affecting new drug prices in South Korea's pricing system

Objective: The price of pharmaceuticals is important from the economic and industrial perspectives but as well as patients' access to treatment. This study aimed to analyze the variables affecting the prices of new drugs in South Korea's pricing system. Methods: Data on 192 new drugs listed in South Korea from 2012 to 2022 were collected from the official website of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The independent variables included drugs for severe diseases, alternatives, number of patients, number of advanced 7 countries listed, budget impact, and listing period. The dependent variables included annual treatment cost and the price ratio to the advanced 7 country's average adjusted price. Descriptive statistics of variables, linear correlations between quantitative independent and dependent variables, and associations between independent and dependent variables were analyzed. Results: The mean annual treatment cost and price ratio to the advanced 7 country's average adjusted price were higher for drugs for severe diseases and those with no alternatives. Annual treatment cost and price ratio to the advanced 7 country's average adjusted price were negatively correlated with the number of patients and positively correlated with the number of advanced 7 countries listed. Annual treatment cost was affected by the variables drugs for severe diseases, alternatives, number of patients, number of advanced 7 countries listed, and budget impact. The price ratio to the advanced 7 country's average adjusted price was affected by drugs for severe diseases, alternatives, and the number of patients. Conclusion: This study revealed the effect of different variables on the prices of new drugs in South Korea, allowing for the development of a more effective assessment system to evaluate the prices of new drugs while ensuring profitability for pharmaceutical companies, sustainability of public insurance, and accessibility to drugs by patients.

Timely, Cheap, or Risk-Free? The Effect of Regulation on the Price and Availability of New Drugs

The high level of regulation of innovative drugs on the market, which is necessary to protect consumers, produces important effects on drug availability and innovation. In public healthcare systems, the need to curb prices comes from expenditure considerations. The aim of price regulation is to obtain a more equitable allocation of the value of an innovative drug between industries and patients (by reducing prices to make drugs more affordable), but it may also reduce access. (In the listing process, the industry may find it more convenient to limit commercialisation to profitable subgroups of patients.) Furthermore, with the advent of personalised medicine, there is another important dimension that has to be considered, namely, incentives to invest in drug personalisation. In this paper, we review and discuss the impact of different pricing rules on the expenditure and availability of new drugs.

Comparative price analysis of biological medicines: disparities generated by different pricing policies

Introduction: Biological medicines have been assuming an important role among the therapeutic options for several diseases, however, due to their complex production process, the products obtained from this technology have a high added value and do not reach the purchasing power of most patients, which overwhelms the budget of health systems. With the development of biosimilars, which have reduced production costs, it is expected that access to biological medicines will become broader. However, in Brazil, the criteria for determining the price of biosimilars, unlike the generic policy in the country, do not foresee a price reduction due to the reduction of development costs. Objective: To understand the impact of the current model of economic regulation on the availability and access of these products in the country, based on a comparative analysis in selected countries, and identify trends that can help to expand the availability and access to biological medicines. Method: Quantitative and qualitative study, to identify the variation between the entry prices of biological medicines in Brazil and in selected countries, as well as the differences in the economic regulation policies established in these countries. Results: The results demonstrate that the current pricing model in Brazil has generated distortions in the prices of biosimilars in the market, which, consequently, makes it difficult for the population to access this category of products, in addition to allowing unsustainable market practices for the systems of public and private health in Brazil. It was also found that most of the analyzed countries, unlike Brazil, seek to harmonize the prices of different brands of the same molecule marketed in the country and with the international market, in addition to establishing incentive policies for indication and replacement by biosimilars, which expands the participation of biosimilars in the market significantly. Conclusion: Based on the data presented, it is concluded that it is essential to build a broader political and regulatory debate on the market for biologicals and biosimilars in the country to guarantee the access of the Brazilian population to more cost-effective technologies, generate a more competitive market and consequently contribute to the financial sustainability of health systems.

[Variability in Drug Procurement within Group 1B of the Pharmaceutical Specialized Scheme in Brazil]

In the Brazilian Health System (SUS), drugs covered by the Specialized Pharmaceutical Scheme (CEAF) receive federal funding and can be procured either centrally (Group 1A) or by individual states (Federal Units - UF) (Group 1B). Unlike other countries where national procurement prices are negotiated centrally by the government, public procurement in Brazil follows a public auction procedure, potentially resulting in varying purchase prices. To facilitate price comparisons, it is a legal requirement to register public acquisitions in the Health Prices Registry (BPS). This study aimed to assess the variability in the procurement prices for Group 1B drugs across the 27 Brazilian states during 2021. Data on the acquisitions of Group 1B drugs by the 27 Health Secretariats were obtained from the BPS. Drugs with no reported reimbursement prices as of December 2021 were excluded from the analysis. The total reimbursement amount for each state was sourced from the SUS Ambulatory Information System. The findings revealed significant variability in drug procurement prices both across and within states. The study underscored a potential disparity in CEAF access, favoring wealthier states (those with larger populations and higher economic status) by securing lower drug prices.

Prices of Orphan Drugs in Four Western European Countries Before and After Market Exclusivity Expiry: A Cross-Country Comparison of List Prices and Purchase Prices

BACKGROUND

Increasing pharmaceutical expenditure challenges the sustainability and accessibility of healthcare systems across Europe. Confidentiality restraints hinder assessment of actual prices of Orphan Medicinal Products (OMPs). Hence, we assessed the real prices of brand-name OMPs around market exclusivity expiry (MEE).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore developments in published list prices (LPs) and confidential hospital purchase prices (PPs) of brand-name OMPs relative to their market exclusivity status in Western European countries with similar GDPs.

METHODS

We analyzed LPs and PPs of 13 selected OMPs purchased by university hospitals in Western European countries between 2000 and 2020. For confidentially reasons, proportions were used, with the Dutch LPs of the selected OMPs at the year of MEE serving as reference values. PPs included pre-purchase discounts. Rebates were not considered.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from hospitals in Denmark (DK) (n = 1), France (FR) (n = 1), Germany (DE) (n = 2), and the Netherlands (NL) (n = 1). Average LPs and PPs of included OMPs dropped gradually but limited over time, with no explicit price drop after MEE. LP levels differed more per country than PP levels: LP range before MEE was 164% (DE)-101% (FR) and after MEE was 135% (DE)-82% (FR); PP range before MEE was 150% (DE)-102% (FR) and after MEE was 107% (DE)-80% (FR). Overall differences between LPs and PPs were < 3% in all countries, except for Denmark.

CONCLUSION

No evident price drops of included brand-name OMPs were observed around MEE and differences in purchase prices are modest in the selected Western European countries. Results were not subject to significance testing. More robust data are needed to strengthen negotiations with suppliers.

Socioeconomic aspects of incretin-based therapy

Incretin-based therapies, particularly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), have demonstrated cardiovascular benefits in people with type 2 diabetes. However, socioeconomic disparities in their uptake may constrain the collective advantages offered by these medications to the broader population. In this review we examine the socioeconomic disparities in the utilisation of incretin-based therapies and discuss strategies to address these inequalities. Based on real-world evidence, the uptake of GLP-1 RAs is reduced in people who live in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, have low income and education level, or belong to racial/ethnic minorities, even though these individuals have a greater burden of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Contributing factors include suboptimal health insurance coverage, limited accessibility to incretin-based therapies, financial constraints, low health literacy and physician-patient barriers such as provider bias. Advocating for a reduction in the price of GLP-1 RAs is a pivotal initial step to enhance their affordability among lower socioeconomic groups and improve their value-for-money from a societal perspective. By implementing cost-effective strategies, healthcare systems can amplify the societal benefits of incretin-based therapies, alongside measures that include maximising treatment benefits in specific subpopulations while minimising harms in vulnerable individuals, increasing accessibility, enhancing health literacy and overcoming physician-patient barriers. A collaborative approach between governments, pharmaceutical companies, healthcare providers and people with diabetes is necessary for the effective implementation of these strategies to enhance the overall societal benefits of incretin-based therapies.

Availability, price, and affordability of medicines used for the management of Covid-19 in health facilities of Dessie town WHO/HAI survey

BACKGROUND

The rapidly spreading nature of Covid-19 virus associated with its high mortality and mortality rate is triggering an unprecedented public health crisis. The study assessed the availability, price, and affordability of medicines used in the management of Covid-19 in health facilities of Dessie town.

METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional study design was employed in the health facilities of Dessie town from September 1 to September 20, 2021. Data was collected using a standard checklist adopted from the Logistics Indicator Assessment Tool and WHO/HAI. WHO/HAI methodology was applied to select the surveyed health facilities (30) and medicines (44). The daily wage of the lowest-paid unskilled government worker is used to estimate affordability.

RESULTS

Fifteen and five medicines were not found at all public and private health facilities, respectively. The originator brand (OB) and lowest price generic (LPG) availability in private health facilities was 2.03% and 51.33%, respectively. In the public sector, the availability of OB and LPG was 0% and 34.44%, respectively. In public and private health facilities, the mean number of stock-outs was 2.25 and 2.91, and the mean number of stock-out days was 177.83 and 106.16 days, respectively. Eight and one LPG medicines were out of stock in public and private health facilities, respectively. Eight (33.33%) and 6 (28.57%) had higher prices than international prices in private and public health facilities, respectively. The median price ratio in public and private health facilities ranged from 0.02 and 3.05 and 0.04 to 2.70, respectively. Eighty percent of the products were unaffordable in both sectors.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of medicines was low. One-third of the medicines had higher prices than international prices. Eighty percent of the products were unaffordable. The regular supply of these medicines is crucial for better management of the disease.

Determinants of drug expenditure in the Swiss healthcare market in 2006

BACKGROUND

Several measures are in force in Switzerland to control the cost of drugs, but are not effective enough. There are many determinants influencing these expenditures, related to treatments, markets, physicians, patients and regions, but their impact on costs is not clear.

METHODS

We applied a Bayesian multilevel model with five levels to adjust for patients, drugs' market, and physicians 'characteristics, treatment type, and district (i.e. Swiss canton). We used data of the Swiss drugs' market in 2006, offering real choices for doctors and patients (multiple products for similar active substances), with a neutral position of pharmacists (no financial incentives).

RESULTS

Variance partitioning of yearly drugs' cost per insured showed that market level (delivered substance) contributed to 76% of the variance, treatment level (delivered product) to 20%, whereas patients' and physicians' levels accounted for only 2% each, without significant differences between Swiss cantons. After adjusting for covariables at each level, the model explained about 51% of the variation at the market and 20% at the treatment levels. We found that older but substitutable drugs, generics, larger size of the market and physician's specialty were associated with lower expenditure, whereas drugs requiring a physician's prescription, the number of prescribers per patient, patient' age, male gender, and comorbidities increased expenditure. Our results show that for a specific medication the yearly cost of recently released drugs was 36 CHF higher than for similar and substitutable drugs introduced 15 years earlier, corresponding to one third of the average annual treatment cost observed in our dataset. Competition did not seem to be effective to reduce expenditure on the drug market.

CONCLUSION

The main finding of this study is that recentness of drugs was associated with an increase in drug expenditure in 2006, even after adjustment for all non-controllable determinants. Further research is recommended to confirm those results with updated data.

Aggregate Online Brand Name Pharmacy Price Dynamics for the United States and Mexico

Virtual cross-border medical tourism allows many residents in the United States to purchase brand name medicines from companies in Mexico without travelling there. Monthly economic reports indicate that the online brand name pharmaceutical product prices in Mexico are noticeably lower than the corresponding internet prices in the United States. There have been very few econometric studies on how these prices are linked and the dynamic nature of those relationships. Results in this study indicate that online medicine prices in Mexico respond very rapidly to online prices changes in the high-price market.