Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contribution of Pharmaceutical Innovation to Longevity Growth in Germany and France, 2001–7

  • Leading Article
  • Pharmaceutical Innovation and Longevity Growth
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates the contribution of pharmaceutical innovation to recent longevity growth in Germany and France. The effect of the vintage of prescription drugs (and other variables) on the life expectancy and ageadjusted mortality rates of residents of Germany is examined, using longitudinal, annual, state-level data during the period 2001v7. The estimates imply that about one-third of the 1.4–year increase in German life expectancy during the period 2001–7 was due to the replacement of older drugs by newer drugs. The effect of the vintage of chemotherapy treatments on age-adjusted cancer mortality rates of residents of France is also investigated, using longitudinal, annual, cancer-site-level data during the period 2002–6. The estimates imply that chemotherapy innovation accounted for at least one-sixth of the decline in French cancer mortality rates, and may have accounted for as much as half of the decline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Table V
Table VI
Fig. 3
Table VII

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Growth may also be driven by technological change arising from R&D investment by public organizations, e.g. the National Institutes of Health.

  2. I hypothesize that innovations may be embodied in nondurable goods (e.g. drugs) and services as well as in durable equipment.

  3. In 1997, “medical substances and devices firms had by far the highest combined R&D intensity at 11.8 percent, … well above the 4.2-percent average for all 500 top 1997 R&D spenders combined. The information and electronics sector ranked second in intensity at 7.0 percent.”[17] The pattern of 1997 R&D spending per employee is similar to that for R&D intensity, with medical substances and devices again the highest at $US29 095 per employee. Information and electronics is second at $US16 381. Combined, the top 500 R&D firms in 1997 spent $US10 457 per employee.

  4. European Pharmaceutical Market Research Association (EphMRA) drug classification codes are shown in parentheses. The EphMRA classification is a modified version of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification. See http://www.ephmra.org/classification/anatomical-classification.aspx.

  5. Population-weighted averages of my state-level life expectancy estimates were verified as being very consistent with published estimates for Germany as a whole.

  6. In the Federal Republic of Germany, health authorities must be informed about cases of certain notifiable diseases, which are listed in the Infection Protection Act.[21] Data on the incidence and prevalence of other diseases were not available.

  7. Data on educational attainment by state and year were not available.

  8. Lichtenberg found that diagnostic imaging innovation as well as pharmaceutical innovation increased life expectancy in the US during the period 1991–2004.[26]

  9. The CEA Registry is produced by the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, part of the Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, MA, USA.

  10. As shown in table II, the average prescription is for a drug launched about 20 years earlier.

  11. The Eurocare 3 and Eurocare 4 databases[32] provide data on survival rates of French cancer patients diagnosed during the following periods: 1983–5, 1986–8, 1989–91, 1992–4 and 1995–9.

  12. Data on non-pharmaceutical innovation are not available for any period. According to the European Cancer Observatory, annual data on cancer incidence, by site, are only available during the period 1983–1997.[34]

  13. If a patient was treated with n chemotherapy agents, that patient would be counted n times.

  14. The age distribution of the French population in 2002 was used to obtain age-adjusted mortality rates.

  15. GERS provides data on the quantity of each drug, by year, but not by cancer site.

  16. The GERS vintage measures are based on the year each drug was first commercialized in France, rather than the world launch year, which is not available for all drugs. For the 11 drugs for which both dates were available, there is generally a close correspondence between the two dates. For 8 of the 11 drugs, the year of commercialization in France was 0–2 years after the world launch year.

References

  1. Nordhaus WD. The health of nations: the contribution of improved health to living standards. In: Murphy KM, Topel RH, editors. Measuring the gains from medical research: an economic approach. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 2003: 9–40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Murphy KM, Topel RH. The value of health and longevity. J Polit Econ 2006 Aug; 114 (5): 871–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wikipedia. Human development index [online]. Available from URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  4. Solow RM. A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quart J Econ 1956; 70 (1): 65–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Solow RM. Technical change and the aggregate production function. Rev Econ Stat 1957; 39 (3): 312–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Romer P. Endogenous technological change. J Polit Econ 1990 Oct; 98 (5 Pt 2): S71–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones C. Introduction to economic growth. New York: Norton, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  8. Solow RM. Investment and technological progress. In: Arrow K, Karlin S, Suppes P, editors. Mathematical methods in social sciences 1959. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press, 1960: 89–104

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grossman GM, Helpman E. Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bresnahan TF, Gordon RJ. The economics of new goods. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bils M. Measuring the growth from better and better goods [NBER working paper no. 10606]. 2004 Jul [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w10606 [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Hercowitz Z. The ‘embodiment’ controversy: a review essay. J Monetary Econ 1998; 41: 217–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wikipedia. Exogenous growth model [online]. Available from URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exogenous_growth_model [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  14. Bahk BH, Gort M. Decomposing learning by doing in new plants. J Polit Econ 1993; 101 (4): 561–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hulten CR. Growth accounting when technical change is embodied in capital. Am Econ Rev 1992 Sep; 82 (4): 964–80

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sakellaris P, Wilson DJ. Quantifying embodied technological change. Rev Econ Dyn 2004; 7 (1): 1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. National Science Foundation. US corporate R&D. Volume 1: top 500 firms in R&D by industry category [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf00301/expendit.htm [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  18. IMS. IMS national prescription analysis database [inGerman; online]. Available from URL: http://www.imshealth.de/sixcms/detail.php/375 [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  19. US Food and Drug Administration. Drugs@FDA data files [online]. Available from URL: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/InformationOnDrugs/ucm079750.htm [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. The information system of the Federal Health Monitoring [in German; online]. Available from URL: http://www.gbe-bund.de/ [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  21. Robert Koch Institute [in German; online]. Available from URL: http://www.gbe-bund.de/oowa921-install/servlet/oowa/aw92/dboowasys921.xwdevkit/xwd_init?gbe.isgbetol/xs_start_neu/&p_aid=i&p_aid=94387221&nummer=179&p_sprache=E&p_indsp=-&p_aid=81869878 [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  22. European Commission. Eurostat: statistics database [online]. Available from URL: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  23. Uchida E, Araki S, Murata K. Socioeconomic factors affecting the longevity of the Japanese population: a study for 1980 and 1985. J Biosoc Sci 1992; 24: 497–504

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hupfeld S. Non-monotonicity in the longevity-income relationship. J Pop Econ 2011; 24 (1): 191–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ruhm CJ. Macroeconomic conditions, health and mortality [NBER working paper no. 11007]. 2004 Dec [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w11007 [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lichtenberg FR. The quality of medical care, behavioral risk factors, and longevity growth. Int J Health Care Finance Econ 2011; 11 (1): 1–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. OECD. OECD health data 2011 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.oecd.org/document/30/0,3746,en_2649_37407_12968734_1_1_1_37407,00.html [Accessed 2011 Oct 30]

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Tufts Medical Center, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, The Center for Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry [online]. Available from URL: http://research.tuftsnemc.org/cear4/ [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson JR, Williams G, Pazdur R. End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21 (7): 1404–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of new drug treatments for rheumatoid arthritis: etanercept and infliximab. London: NICE, 2001 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/RAAssessmentReport.pdf [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lichtenberg FR. Have newer cardiovascular drugs reduced hospitalization? Evidence from longitudinal country-level data on 20 OECD countries, 1995-2003. Health Econ 2009; 18 (5): 19–34

    Google Scholar 

  32. Instituto Superiore di Sanita. EUROCARE databases [online]. Available from URL: http://www.eurocare.it/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  33. Welch HG, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Are increasing 5-year survival rates evidence of success against cancer? JAMA 2000; 283 (22): 2975–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. European Cancer Observatory. Table of cancer incidence and mortality rates [online]. Available from URL: http://eu-cancer.iarc.fr/16-table.html,en [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lichtenberg FR. Has medical innovation reduced cancer mortality? [NBER working paper no. 15880]. 2010 Apr [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15880 [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

    Book  Google Scholar 

  36. IMS [online]. Available from URL: http://ims-america.com/portal/site/imshealth/menuitem.a46c6d4df3db4b3d88f611019418c22a/?vgnextoid=1314e69040fb2210VgnVCM100000ed152ca2RCRD&cpsextcurrchannel=1 [Accessed 2011 Oct 30]

  37. CépiDC, INSERM. Examination of data on causes of death from 1979 to 2009 [in French; online]. Available from URL: http://www.cepidc.vesinet.inserm.fr/inserm/html/index2.htm [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

  38. Eurostat. Causes of death: standardised death rate (per 100,000 inhabitants) (annual data) [online]. Available from URL: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=hlth_cd_asdr&lang=en [Accessed 2011 Oct 31]

  39. GERS [in French; online]. Available from URL: http://www.gie-gers.fr/index.php3 [Accessed 2011 Oct 29]

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by Merck Sharpe and Dohme Corporation and by Servier Laboratories. The sponsors placed no restrictions or limitations on the data, methods or conclusions, and had no right of review or control over the outcome of the research. The author has received honoraria and grants from the aforementioned pharmaceutical companies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, 504 Uris Hall, 3022 Broadway, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Frank R. Lichtenberg

  2. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Frank R. Lichtenberg

Authors
  1. Frank R. Lichtenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frank R. Lichtenberg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lichtenberg, F.R. Contribution of Pharmaceutical Innovation to Longevity Growth in Germany and France, 2001–7. PharmacoEconomics 30, 197–211 (2012). https://doi.org/10.2165/11587150-000000000-00000

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11587150-000000000-00000

Keywords

Search

Navigation