7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Projected spending for brand-name drugs in English primary care given US prices: a cross-sectional study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Objectives

          To estimate additional spending if NHS England paid the same prices as US Medicare Part D for the 50 single-source brand-name drugs with the highest expenditure in English primary care in 2018.

          Design

          Retrospective analysis of 2018 drug prescribing and spending in the NHS England prescribing data and the Medicare Part D Drug Spending Dashboard and Data. We examined the 50 costliest drugs in English primary care available as brand-name-only in the US and England. We performed cost projections of NHS England spending with US Medicare Part D prices. We estimated average 2018 US rebates as 1 minus the quotient of net divided by gross Medicare Part D spending.

          Setting

          England and US

          Participants

          NHS England and US Medicare systems

          Main outcome measures

          Total spending, prescriptions and claims in NHS England and Medicare Part D. All spending and cost measures were reported in 2018 British pounds.

          Results

          NHS England spent £1.39 billion on drugs in the cohort. All drugs were more expensive under US Medicare Part D than NHS England. The US–England price ratios ranged from 1.3 to 9.9 (mean ratio 4.8). Accounting for prescribing volume, if NHS England had paid US Medicare Part D prices after adjusting for estimated US rebates, it would have spent 4.6 times as much in 2018 on drugs in the cohort (£6.42 billion).

          Conclusions

          Spending by NHS England would be substantially higher if it paid US Medicare Part D prices. This could result in decreased access to medicines and other health services.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Medication Costs, Adherence, And Health Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            OpenPrescribing: normalised data and software tool to research trends in English NHS primary care prescribing 1998–2016

            Objectives We aimed to compile and normalise England’s national prescribing data for 1998–2016 to facilitate research on long-term time trends and create an open-data exploration tool for wider use. Design We compiled data from each individual year’s national statistical publications and normalised them by mapping each drug to its current classification within the national formulary where possible. We created a freely accessible, interactive web tool to allow anyone to interact with the processed data. Setting and participants We downloaded all available annual prescription cost analysis datasets, which include cost and quantity for all prescription items dispensed in the community in England. Medical devices and appliances were excluded. Primary and secondary outcome measures We measured the extent of normalisation of data and aimed to produce a functioning accessible analysis tool. Results All data were imported successfully. 87.5% of drugs were matched exactly on name to the current formulary and a further 6.5% to similar drug names. All drugs in core clinical chapters were reconciled to their current location in the data schema, with only 1.26% of drugs not assigned a current chemical code. We created an openly accessible interactive tool to facilitate wider use of these data. Conclusions Publicly available data can be made accessible through interactive online tools to help researchers and policy-makers explore time trends in prescribing.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Public sector financial support for late stage discovery of new drugs in the United States: cohort study

              To determine the extent to which late stage development of new drugs relies on support from public funding. Cohort study. All new drugs containing one or more new molecular entities approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between January 2008 and December 2017 via the new drug application pathway. Patents or drug development histories documenting late stage research contributions by a public sector research institution or a spin-off company, as well as each drug’s regulatory approval pathway and first-in-class designation. Over the 10 year study period, the FDA approved 248 drugs containing one or more new molecular entities. Of these drugs, 48 (19%) had origins in publicly supported research and development and 14 (6%) originated in companies spun off from a publicly supported research program. Drugs in these groups were more likely to receive expedited FDA approval (68% v 47%, P=0.005) or be designated first in class (45% v 26%, P=0.007), indicating therapeutic importance. A review of the patents associated with new drugs approved over the past decade indicates that publicly supported research had a major role in the late stage development of at least one in four new drugs, either through direct funding of late stage research or through spin-off companies created from public sector research institutions. These findings could have implications for policy makers in determining fair prices and revenue flows for these products.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J R Soc Med
                J R Soc Med
                JRS
                spjrs
                Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                0141-0768
                1758-1095
                10 September 2020
                September 2020
                10 September 2020
                : 113
                : 9
                : 350-359
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The DataLab, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK
                [2 ]Ringgold 1811, universityHarvard Medical School; , Boston 02115, USA
                [3 ]Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston 02120, USA
                [4 ]Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston 02115, USA
                Author notes
                [*]Ben Goldacre. Email: ben.goldacre@ 123456phc.ox.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2724-8797
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3786-9063
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4932-6135
                Article
                10.1177_0141076820918238
                10.1177/0141076820918238
                7488930
                32910868
                6365fe5f-b48d-41d7-9b0e-9127808e395d
                © The Royal Society of Medicine
                History
                : 19 February 2020
                : 20 March 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                ts2

                Medicine
                primary healthcare,drug costs,brexit
                Medicine
                primary healthcare, drug costs, brexit

                Comments

                Comment on this article