Skip to main content
Log in

New Drug Innovation and Pharmaceutical Industry Structure: Trends in the Output of Pharmaceutical Firms

  • Published:
Drug information journal : DIJ / Drug Information Association Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines what is generally regarded to be the most important measure of innovation in the pharmaceutical industry—the extent to which new drugs are developed and marketed by pharmaceutical firms. Pharmaceutical industry output, as measured by new chemical entity (NCE) approvals in the United States since the 1962 Amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, is examined at the firm level. This long-term historical perspective permits us to observe the extent to which this industry has been concentrated with respect to innovative output and how stable company leadership positions have been over time. Databases containing detailed information on all NCEs approved in the United States from 1963 to 1999 and on a large sample of investigational NCEs taken into clinical testing since 1963 were utilized to examine productivity in developing new products at the firm level according to the following stratifications: period of approval, therapeutic class, whether the compounds were self-originated (ie, developed by one firm) or acquired (eg, licensed), and Food and Drug Administration ratings of therapeutic significance. The data indicate that innovation in the pharmaceutical industry is fairly widely dispersed and has become less concentrated over time. Turnover in company rankings based on the number of new drug introductions is substantial. Nonetheless, firms have differed in the productivity of their development programs and some firms have consistently maintained high ranks for their level of innovative output over a lengthy period.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG, Lasagna L. Cost of innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. J Health Econ. 1991;10(2):107–142.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG, Lasagna L. Research and development costs for new drugs by therapeutic category: a study of the US pharmaceutical industry. PharmacoEcon. 1995;7(2):152–169.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. DiMasi JA. Success rates for new drugs entering clinical testing in the United States. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1995;58(1):1–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Grabowski HG, Vernon J. Returns to R&D on new drug introductions in the 1980s. J Health Econ. 1994;13:384–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. DiMasi JA, Seibring MA, Lasagna L. New drug development in the United States, 1963 to 1992. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1994;55(6):609–622.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG, Vernon J. R&D costs, innovative output and firm size in the pharmaceutical industry. Int J Economics Bus. 1995;2(2):201–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Henderson R, Cockburn I. Measuring competence? exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Manage J. 1994;15(Winter special issue):63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gambardella A. Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: the US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s. Research Policy. 1992;21:391–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lamoreaux N, Galambos L. Understanding innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Presented at Understanding Innovation, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, June 6, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Goodwin JS. The empirical basis for the discovery of new therapies. Perspectives Biology Med. 1991;35(1):20–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Grabowski HG. Drug Regulation and Innovation: Empirical Evidence and Policy Options. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute; 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Grabowski HG, Vemon J. Innovation and structural change in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. Industrial and Corporate Change. 1994;3(2):435–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pharma Marketletter. The role of mega-mergers in the future of the pharma industry. Pharma Marketletter. 1997;Feb 10, 24(6):26–27.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tompkins R. Analyzing the impact of mergers and acquisitions. Scrip Magazine. 1996;Oct, 50:6–8.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dranove D, Meltzer D. Do important drugs reach the market sooner? RAND J Economics. 1994;25(3):402–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Shulman SR, Bienz-Tadmor B, Seo PS, DiMasi JA, Lasagna L. Implementation of the orphan drug act: 1983–1991. Food Drug Uw J. 1992;47(4):363–403.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Shulman SR, Manocchia M. The U.S. orphan drug program: 1983–1995. PharmacoEcon. 1997;12(8):312–326.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Scherer FM, Ross D. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Grabowski HG, Vernon J. New studies on market definition, concentration, theory of supply, entry, and promotion. In Chien RI, ed. Issues in Pharmaceutical Economics. Lexington, MA: DC Heath; 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hirschman AO. The paternity of an index. Am Econ Review. 1964;54:761.

    Google Scholar 

  21. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1992 Census of Manufacturers: Concentration Ratios in Manufacturing, [MC-92-S-2]. Washington, DC: US Bureau of the Census; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Grabowski HG, Vernon J. Structural effects of regulation on innovation in the ethical drug industry. In Mason RT, Quails PT, eds. Essays on Industrial Organization in Honor of Joe Bain. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger; 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Stigler GJ. Introduction. In Business Concentration and Price Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cocks DL. Product innovation and the dynamic elements of competition in the ethical pharmaceutical industry. In Helms RB, ed. Drug Development and Marketing. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute; 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Schwartzman D. Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ravenscraft DJ, Scherer FM. Mergers, Sell-offs, and Economic Efficiency. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Galambos L, Sturchio JL. Sustaining innovation: critical transitions at Merck & Co., Inc. Presented at Understanding Innovation, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, June 7, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Vagelos PR. Are prescription drug prices high? Science. 1991;252:1080–1084.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Henderson R, Cockburn I. Scale, scope, and spillovers: the determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J Econ. 1996;Spring, 27(1):32–59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Schumpeter JA. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. 3rd ed. New York: Harper & Row; 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Chandler AD. Scale and scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Drews J. In Quest of Tomorrow’s Medicines. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nelson RR, Winter SG. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nelson RR. Recent theorizing about economic change. J Econ Literature. 1995;33(1):48–90.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph A. DiMasi PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

DiMasi, J.A. New Drug Innovation and Pharmaceutical Industry Structure: Trends in the Output of Pharmaceutical Firms. Ther Innov Regul Sci 34, 1169–1194 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1177/009286150003400425

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/009286150003400425

Key Words

Navigation