Hyperinflation: Definitions and Causes

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-186
Author(s):  
Manny Saltiel ◽  
Marvin Finnefrock

Hundreds of oral and injectable generic drugs have seen dramatic price increases during the 2010s. Several reasons for the astronomic price increases have been postulated, ranging from reduced competition, shortages in the manufacturing supply chain, very small markets, market consolidation, the Unapproved Drugs Initiative of 2006, and unanticipated manufacturing safety issues. In one survey, over 90% of hospital administrators reported that higher drug prices had a moderate or severe impact on their budgets. Whereas compounding pharmacies may present an effective solution to high drug prices, it is a potentially dangerous one, as the case of New England Compounding Center makes clear. The risks make a meticulous vetting process necessary.

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 370-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manny Saltiel ◽  
Marvin Finnefrock

Hundreds of oral and injectable generic drugs have seen dramatic price increases during the 2010s. Several reasons for the astronomic price increases have been postulated, ranging from reduced competition, shortages in the manufacturing supply chain, very small markets, market consolidation, the Unapproved Drugs Initiative of 2006, and unanticipated manufacturing safety issues. In one survey, over 90% of hospital administrators reported that higher drug prices had a moderate or severe impact on their budgets. Whereas compounding pharmacies may present an effective solution to high drug prices, it is a potentially dangerous one, as the case of New England Compounding Center makes clear. The risks make a meticulous vetting process necessary.


Author(s):  
Suerie Moon ◽  
Ellen 't Hoen

Access to medicines has been a fierce battleground in global health, with the most polarising debates focused on medicine prices and the role of patent monopolies. The way ‘access to medicines’ has been framed has evolved considerably since the 1970s, when the focus was primarily on rational use of generic drugs widely available in developing countries. In the 1990s the advent of the WTO TRIPS Agreement clashed directly with a growing global HIV crisis; the politics of ‘access to medicines 1.0’ that emerged centred squarely on antiretrovirals for HIV/AIDS and intellectual property rules. Subsequently, significant ideational and political shifts have resulted in an ‘access politics 2.0,’ characterised by an expansion of concerns to all diseases, tighter linkages between innovation and access concerns, and shifting political dynamics as high-income countries began to experience directly the challenge of high drug prices. These shifts imply a more complex and potentially more consequential politics of access to medicines in the future.


2017 ◽  
Vol 98 (5) ◽  
pp. 822-826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ch M Razzakova ◽  
L E Ziganshina

Aim. Performing comparative analysis of drug prices in 2011 and 2015 in Kazan to assess the effectiveness of state initiatives to ensure the affordability of medicines. Methods. The collection and processing of data was performed according to methodology developed by Health Action International and World Health Organization (WHO/HAI). We studied the availability and prices of 30 medicines in public and private pharmacies in Kazan in 2011 and 2015 and analyzed the procurement prices of the same medicines in inpatient hospitals. Recording and analysis were performed using standardized MS Excel WHO/HAI Workbook. Medicine prices were compared with international reference prices and were expressed as median price ratio. Results. The analysis showed a decrease in medicine prices in 2015 compared to 2011. In public and private sectors median price ratio of the originator brands reduced by about 3 times, and of the lowest price generics reduced by 1.5 times. A decrease in procurement prices by more than 2 times for generics and more than 6 times for the original brands was also revealed in 2015 in comparison with 2011. Conclusion. State initiatives to regulate drug prices contributed to the price reduction by 1.5-3 times in 2015 compared to 2011; changes in the procedures for the medicines procurement at the legislative level resulted in reduction of procurement prices by more than 2 times for generic drugs in 2015 compared to 2011.


2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (8) ◽  
pp. 483-483
Author(s):  
Kate Traynor
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. e538-e542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Savage ◽  
Sarah Mahmoud ◽  
Yogin Patel ◽  
Hagop Kantarjian

Purpose: The cost of cancer drugs forms a rising proportion of health care budgets worldwide. A number of studies have examined international comparisons of initial cost, but there is little work on postlicensing price increases. To examine this, we compared cancer drug prices at initial sale and subsequent price inflation in the United States and United Kingdom and also reviewed relevant price control mechanisms. Methods: The 10 top-selling cancer drugs were selected, and their prices at initial launch and in 2015 were compared. Standard nondiscounted prices were obtained from the relevant annual copies of the RED BOOK and the British National Formulary. Results: At initial marketing, prices were on average 42% higher in the United States than in the United Kingdom. After licensing in the United States, all 10 drugs had price rises averaging an overall annual 8.8% (range, 1.4% to 24.1%) increase. In comparison, in the United Kingdom, six drugs had unchanged prices, two had decreased prices, and two had modest price increases. The overall annual increase in the United Kingdom was 0.24%. Conclusion: Cancer drug prices are rising substantially, both at their initial marketing price and, in the United States, at postlicensing prices. In the United Kingdom, the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme, an agreement between the government and the pharmaceutical industry, controls health care costs while allowing a return on investment and funds for research. The increasing costs of cancer drugs are approaching the limits of sustainability, and a similar government-industry agreement may allow stability for both health care provision and the pharmaceutical industry in the United States.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Mansfield

Objective To assess the degree to which reimbursement prices in Australia and England differ for a range of generic drugs, and to analyse the supply- and demand-side factors that may contribute to these differences. Methods Australian and English reimbursement prices were compared for a range of generic drugs using pricing information obtained from government websites. Next, a literature review was conducted to identify supply- and demand-side factors that could affect generic prices in Australia and England. Various search topics were identified addressing potential supply-side (e.g. market approval, intellectual property protection of patented drugs, generic pricing policy, market size, generic supply chain and discounting practices) and demand-side (consumers, prescribers and pharmacists) factors. Related terms were searched in academic databases, official government websites, national statistical databases and internet search engines. Results Analysis of drug reimbursement prices for 15 generic molecules (representing 45 different drug presentations) demonstrated that Australian prices were on average over 7-fold higher than in England. Significant supply-side differences included aspects of pricing policy, the relative size of the generics markets and the use of clawback policies. Major differences in demand-side policies related to generic prescribing, pharmacist substitution and consumer incentives. Conclusions Despite recent reforms, the Australian Government continues to pay higher prices than its English counterpart for many generic medications. The results suggest that particular policy areas may benefit from review in Australia, including the length of the price-setting process, the frequency of subsequent price adjustments, the extent of price competition between originators and generics, medical professionals’ knowledge about generic medicines and incentives for generic prescribing. What is known about the topic? Prices of generic drugs have been the subject of much scrutiny over recent years. From 2005 to 2010 the Australian Government responded to observations that Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prices for many generics were higher than in numerous comparable countries by instituting several reforms aimed at reducing the prices of generics. Despite this, several studies have demonstrated that prices for generic statins (one class of cholesterol-lowering drug) are higher in Australia compared with England and many other developed countries, and prices of numerous other generics remain higher than in the USA and New Zealand. Recently there has been increasing interest in why these differences exist. What does this paper add? By including a much larger range of commonly used and costly generic drugs, this paper builds significantly on the limited previous investigations of generic drug prices in Australia and England. Additionally, this is the first comprehensive investigation of multiple supply- and, in particular, demand-side factors that may explain any price differences between these countries. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners may contribute to the higher prices of generic medications in Australia compared with England through relatively low rates of generic prescribing. There are also significant implications for health policy makers, as this paper demonstrates that if Australia achieved the same prices as England for many generic drugs there could be substantial savings for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.


2016 ◽  
Vol 188 (13) ◽  
pp. E306-E306
Author(s):  
donalee Moulton
Keyword(s):  

Cancer ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 121 (19) ◽  
pp. 3372-3379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jagpreet Chhatwal ◽  
Michael Mathisen ◽  
Hagop Kantarjian

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document