Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are the economics of pharmaceutical research and development changing?

Productivity, patents and political pressures

  • Review Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pharmaceutical research and development (R&D) competition in the 1980s and 1990s was characterised by rising R&D expenditures, favourable returns to innovators and the introduction of many new classes of drugs with high social benefits. However, in the past 3 years, the number of new drug introductions has been well below the historical trend, while the cost per new drug continues to increase. In addition to lagging R&D productivity, the industry has been characterised by other economic and policy uncertainties. These include a wave of early patent challenges and growing political pressure to contain pharmaceutical expenditures. This paper examines the consequences of these developments.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig 3
Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.

References

  1. Grabowski HG, Vernon J, DiMasi JA. Returns on research and development for 1990s new drug introductions. Pharmcoeconomics 2002; 20 Suppl. 3: 11–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Scherer FM. The link between gross profitability and pharmaceutical R&D spending. Health Aff 2001; 20 (5): 136–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ, 2003; 22: 141–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Med Ad News, April issue, various years

  5. Baily MN. Research and development costs and returns: the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. J Pol Econ, 1972; 80: 70–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Scherer FM. Technological maturity and waning economic growth. Arts and Sciences, Fall 1978; 1: 7–11

    Google Scholar 

  7. Tollman P, Guy P, Altschuler J, et al. A revolution in R&D: the impact of genomics. Boston: The Boston Consulting Group, June 2001

    Google Scholar 

  8. Landers P. Drug industry’s big push into technology falls short. Wall Street Journal, Feb 24, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  9. Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office. How increased competition from generic drugs has affected prices and returns in the pharmaceutical industry. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, July 1998

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America [PhRMA]. Pharmaceutical industry profile 2003. Washington, DC: PhRMA, 2003. p. 62

    Google Scholar 

  11. Schulman S, Healy EM, Lasagna L, editors. PBMs: reshaping the pharmaceutical distribution network. New York: Haworth Press, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  12. Grabowski HG, Vernon JM. Longer patents for increased generic competition: The Waxman-Hatch Act after one decade. PharmcoEconomics 1996; 10 Suppl2: 110–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Federal Trade Commission. Generic entry prior to patent expiration: an FTC study. Washington, DC: FTC, July 2002

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bulow J. The gaming of pharmaceutical patents, forthcoming in Jaffe AB, Stern S, and Lerner J, eds. Innovation policy and the economy, Volume 4, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bear Stearns. Attack of the clones: 18 years post Waxman-Hatch, New York; Bear Stearns, October 2, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  16. Emmons W, Nimgade A. Burroughs Wellcome and AZT, Case 9-792-004. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grabowski H. Comment, in Triplett JE, ed. Measuring the Prices of Medical Treatment, Washington: Brookings Institution, 1999, 190–195

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pauly MV. Medicare drug coverage and moral hazard. HealthAffairs, 2004, 22 No. 1: 113–122

    Google Scholar 

  19. Office of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Fiscal year 2002 mid session Review of Medicaid spending projections. Washington, DC: CMS, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  20. Smith, et al. Medicaid spending growth: a 50 state update for FY 2003. Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, Washington, DC, January 2003

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wang YR, Pauly MV and Lin YA. Impact of Maine’s Medicaid drug formulary change on non-Medicaid markets: spillover effects of a restrictive drug formulary. Am J of Managed Care, 2003; 9 [10]: 686–696

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bernasek C, Harringtone C, Ramchand R, et al. Florida’s Medicaid Prescription Drug Benefit: A Case Study. Washington: Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. February 2002

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mendelson D. State medicaid Rx cost containment, Washington, Health Strategies Consulting, May 2, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  24. Danzon PM, Ketcham JD. Reference pricing of pharmaceuticals and Medicare: Evidence from Germany, the Netherlands, and New Zealand. National Bureau of Economic Research [NBER] Working Paper No. W10007, Cambridge, MA, October 2003

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bernasek C, et al. Case study: Michigan’s Medicaid Prescription Drug Benefit. Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, Washington, DC, January 2003

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Duke University, Box 90097, Durham, North Carolina, 27708, USA

    Henry Grabowski

Authors
  1. Henry Grabowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henry Grabowski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grabowski, H. Are the economics of pharmaceutical research and development changing?. Pharmacoeconomic 22 (Suppl 2), 15–24 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422002-00003

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422002-00003

Keywords

Search

Navigation