Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Content Type
    • Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
282 result(s) for "Ernst R. Berndt"
Sort by:
Pricing in the Market for Anticancer Drugs
In 2011, Bristol-Myers Squibb set the price of its newly approved melanoma drug ipilimumab—brand name Yervoy—at$120,000 for a course of therapy. The drug was associated with an incremental increase in life expectancy of four months. Drugs like ipilimumab have fueled the perception that the launch prices of new anticancer drugs and other drugs in the so-called “specialty” pharmaceutical market have been increasing over time and that increases are unrelated to the magnitude of the expected health benefits. In this paper, we discuss the unique features of the market for anticancer drugs and assess trends in the launch prices for 58 anticancer drugs approved between 1995 and 2013 in the United States. We restrict attention to anticancer drugs because the use of median survival time as a primary outcome measure provides a common, objective scale for quantifying the incremental benefit of new products. We find that the average launch price of anticancer drugs, adjusted for inflation and health benefits, increased by 10 percent annually—or an average of $ 8,500 per year—from 1995 to 2013. We argue that the institutional features of the market for anticancer drugs enable manufacturers to set the prices of new products at or slightly above the prices of existing therapies, giving rise to an upward trend in launch prices. Government-mandated price discounts for certain classes of buyers may have also contributed to launch price increases as firms sought to offset the growth in the discount segment by setting higher prices for the remainder of the market.
Stratified medicine: strategic and economic implications of combining drugs and clinical biomarkers
The potential to use clinical biomarkers to better match therapies with specific patient populations — stratified medicine — is anticipated to have a major effect on both clinical practice and the development of new drugs and diagnostics. Trusheim, Berndt and Douglas discuss the implications of this approach to future product development strategies and market structures. The potential to use biomarkers for identifying patients that are more likely to benefit or experience an adverse reaction in response to a given therapy, and thereby better match patients with therapies, is anticipated to have a major effect on both clinical practice and the development of new drugs and diagnostics. In this article, we consider current and emerging examples in which therapies are matched with specific patient population characteristics using clinical biomarkers — which we call stratified medicine — and discuss the implications of this approach to future product development strategies and market structures.
Promotion of Prescription Drugs to Consumers and Providers, 2001–2010
Pharmaceutical firms heavily promote their products and may have changed marketing strategies in response to reductions in new product approvals, restrictions on some forms of promotion, and the expanding role of biologic therapies. We used descriptive analyses of annual cross-sectional data from 2001 through 2010 to examine direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) (Kantar Media) and provider-targeted promotion (IMS Health and SDI), including: (1) inflation-adjusted total promotion spending ($ and percent of sales); (2) distribution by channel (consumer v. provider); and (3) provider specialty both for the industry as a whole and for top-selling biologic and small molecule therapies. Total promotion peaked in 2004 at US$36.1 billion (13.4% of sales). By 2010 it had declined to $27.7B (9.0% of sales). Between 2006 and 2010, similar declines were seen for promotion to providers and DTCA (both by 25%). DTCA's share of total promotion increased from 12% in 2002 to 18% in 2006, but then declined to 16% and remains highly concentrated. Number of products promoted to providers peaked in 2004 at over 3000, and then declined 20% by 2010. In contrast to top-selling small molecule therapies having an average of $370 million (8.8% of sales) spent on promotion, top biologics were promoted less, with only $33 million (1.4% of sales) spent per product. Little change occurred in the composition of promotion between primary care physicians and specialists from 2001-2010. These findings suggest that pharmaceutical companies have reduced promotion following changes in the pharmaceutical pipeline and patent expiry for several blockbuster drugs. Promotional strategies for biologic drugs differ substantially from small molecule therapies.
Advance market commitment for pneumococcal vaccines: putting theory into practice
Markets for life-saving vaccines do not often generate the most desired outcomes from a public health perspective in terms of product quantity, quality, affordability, programmatic suitability and/or sustainability for use in the lowest income countries. The perceived risks and uncertainties about sustainably funded demand from developing countries often leads to underinvestment in development and manufacturing of appropriate products. The pilot initiative Advance Market Commitment (AMC) for pneumococcal vaccines, launched in 2009, aims to remove some of these market risks by providing a legally binding forward commitment to purchase vaccines according to predetermined terms. To date, 14 countries have already introduced pneumococcal vaccines through the AMC with a further 39 countries expected to introduce before the end of 2013.This paper describes early lessons learnt on the selection of a target disease and the core design choices for the pilot AMC. It highlights the challenges faced with tailoring the AMC design to the specific supply situation of pneumococcal vaccines. It points to the difficulty - and the AMC's apparent early success - in establishing a long-term, credible commitment in a constantly changing unpredictable environment. It highlights one of the inherent challenges of the AMC: its dependence on continuous donor funding to ensure long-term purchases of products. The paper examines alternative design choices and aims to provide a starting point to inform discussions and encourage debate about the potential application of the AMC concept to other fields.
The geography of prescription pharmaceuticals supplied to the USA: levels, trends, and implications
Prescription pharmaceuticals are frequently used consumer products whose manufacturing location is commonly held as a trade secret by firms and US regulatory agencies. Here we use previously non-publicly available data to describe levels and trends in the manufacturing locations of the most commonly used prescription pharmaceuticals, off-patent generic drugs, intended to be consumed by Americans. We find that the base ingredients required for the manufacturing of these prescription drugs are overwhelmingly and increasingly manufactured in non-domestic locations, specifically India and China. The manufacturing of finished prescription drugs for the American market is more equally split between domestic and foreign locations, but is increasingly foreign as well. The American reliance on non-domestic manufacturing of prescription drugs is important for stakeholders to appreciate, given current quality and pricing concerns and their potential susceptibility to interruptions in supply due to natural disasters, pandemics, and international trade negotiations. We discuss implications of these levels and trends for current domestic and international policy discussions.
Promotion of Prescription Drugs to Consumers
Spending on direct-to-consumer advertising of drugs tripled between 1996 and 2000, when it reached $2.5 billion. The majority of this advertising is on television. Highly selected drugs are targeted for this form of advertising, and the intensity of such advertising may fluctuate markedly over time (antihistamines, for example, are advertised seasonally). Spending on pharmaceuticals has accelerated greatly in recent years and is now the fastest growing component of the health care budget. 1 Part of the growth in pharmaceutical spending is almost surely the result of an increase in the number of highly effective medications. There is widespread concern, however, that increased expenditures too often result from more advertising of drugs that do not provide more effective or efficient care. 2 Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs has become controversial. Proponents argue that such communication by the pharmaceutical industry leads to better-informed consumers and improved quality of care. Critics despair that direct-to-consumer advertising causes . . .
Biosimilars And Follow-On Products In The United States: Adoption, Prices, And Users
Biologic drugs account for a disproportionate share of the increase in pharmaceutical spending in the US and worldwide. Against this backdrop, many look to the expanding market for biosimilars- follow-on products to biologic drugs-as a vehicle for controlling pharmaceutical spending. This study explores the early years of entry of biosimilars and related follow-on products in the US. Using monthly sales data from the period 2005-19 for ten drug classes, we examine how quickly biosimilars/follow-on products gained market share and the subsequent trajectory of prevailing (national average invoice) prices. Our analysis suggests that although uptake has been slower than what is typically seen in generic drug markets, the most recent entrants have captured market share more rapidly than comparable earlier biosimilars/ follow-on products. We also document that from biosimilar/follow-on products' time of entry, their lower prices help offset the overall trend in average annual reference-product price increases. Our findings can provide insight into future policy reforms aimed at increasing competition and use of biosimilars, leading to expanded patient access and significant cost savings.