Perspectives of patients and consumers on the use of generic medicines

INTRODUCTION Access to medicines constitutes a public health challenge worldwide. Promoting utilization of generic medicines is one of the strategies that has been proposed to optimize pharmaceutical spending and thus allow greater coverage. However, its use is not yet widespread enough. This study seeks to explore the perspectives and acceptability to the use of generic medicines from patients and consumers. METHODS We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a evidence synthesis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS We identified four systematic reviews that together include 47 primary studies, of which one corresponds to a randomized trial. A low rate of patients or consumers has a negative perception regarding generic medicines, including dimensions such as risk, quality, safety, risk of adverse effects, among others.

Canadian Trends and Projections in Prescription Drug Purchases: 2001–2023

Limited data are available to understand costs and trends over time in the Canadian pharmaceutical market across all sectors. To fill this gap, a retrospective time series analysis of annual prescription drug purchases in Canada between 2001 and 2020 was conducted using data from the IQVIA Canadian Drugstore and Hospital Purchases Audit. Spending has grown over the past 2 decades at a steady pace, with annual average growth of 5.3% and 7.1% in the retail and hospital sectors, respectively. Total prescription purchases in 2020 were approximately $32.7 billion, 4.3% higher than in 2019 (3.8% growth in retail, 6.9% in hospital). New approvals of specialty and oncology drugs and generic formulations of the top 25 drugs may influence drug purchases in 2021 to 2023. Overall drug purchases in Canada are projected to continue growing. The forecast for the outpatient sector is continued moderate levels of growth in drug spending (3% to 4%), with higher rates of growth (7% to 8%) in the hospital setting. Action should be taken to curb sustained growth in pharmaceutical spending in Canada. Otherwise, these costs may be shifted to other budgets, private industry, and/or patients.

The Impact of Covid-19 containment on community pharmaceutical spending in Andalusia - Spain

Background: In the field of health, the year 2020 will be remembered for testing (stressing) all health institutions and their forms of management (centralised and decentralised). The everyday activity of primary and hospital care was significantly altered by the introduction of telephone consultations, which reduce the number of visits to health centres or hospitals and are still relevant today in the face of successive waves of the pandemic. Objective: To analyse whether population confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on the dispensing of medications in community pharmacies and the associated spending during the period March-July 2020 in Andalusia (Spain). Methods: A time series analysis applying econometric model analysis techniques to confirm or rule out whether the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on the dispensing of medications by community pharmacies and the associated expenditures. The variables used were the number of medication containers dispensed by community pharmacies (charged to the public funds of the Spanish National Health System) and the expenditure on prescription drugs, both in relation to the population. The analysis was performed within the region of Andalusia, which has 8,464,441 inhabitants. Results: The data obtained from the time series confirmed that there were no significant differences during the studied period between the number of medication containers actually dispensed and the number that would have been expected to be dispensed according to the trend in this variable for the sample period. The expenditure results followed the same pattern. Conclusions: The health crisis produced by the COVID-19 lockdown had no impact on medication consumption in Andalusia.

Budget Impact Analysis of Biosimilar Products in Spain in the Period 2009–2019

Since the first biosimilar medicine, Omnitrope® (active substance somatropin) was approved in 2006, 53 biosimilars have been authorized in Spain. We estimate the budget impact of biosimilars in Spain from the perspective of the National Health System (NHS) over the period between 2009 and 2019. Drug acquisition costs considering commercial discounts at public procurement procedures (hospital tenders) and uptake data for both originator and biosimilar as actual units consumed by the NHS were the two variables considered. Two scenarios were compared: a scenario where no biosimilars are available and the biosimilar scenario where biosimilars are effectively marketed. All molecules exposed to biosimilar competition during this period were included in the analysis. The robustness of the model was tested by conducting multiple sensitivity analyses. From the payer perspective, it is estimated that the savings produced by the adoption of biosimilars would reach EUR 2306 million over 11 years corresponding to the cumulative savings from all biosimilars. Three molecules (infliximab, somatropin and epoetin) account for 60% of the savings. This study provides the first estimation of the financial impact of biosimilars in Spain, considering both the effect of discounts that manufacturers give to hospitals and the growing market share of biosimilars. We estimate that in our last year of data, 2019, the savings derived from the use of biosimilars relative total pharmaceutical spending in Spain is 3.92%. Although more research is needed, our evidence supports the case that biosimilars represent a great opportunity to the sustainability of the NHS through rationalizing pharmaceutical spending and that the full potential of biosimilar-savings has not been achieved yet, as there is a high variability in biosimilar uptake across autonomous regions.

How the United Kingdom Controls Pharmaceutical Prices and Spending: Learning From Its Experience

To control costs and improve access, nations can adopt strategies employed in the United Kingdom to control pharmaceutical prices and spending. Current policy evolved from a system created in 1957 that allowed manufacturers to set launch prices, capped manufacturers’ rates of return, and later cut list prices. These policies did not effectively control spending and had limited effects on purchase prices. The United Kingdom currently controls pharmaceutical spending in 4 ways. (a) Since 1999, it has typically paid no more than is cost-effective. (b) Since 2017, for medicines that will have a significant budget impact, National Health Service England seeks discounts from cost-effective prices or seeks to limit access for 2 years to patients with the greatest need. (c) Since 2014, statutes and a voluntary scheme have required branded manufacturers to pay the government rebates to recoup the difference between the global pharmaceutical budget and actual spending. (d) For hospitals, generics and some patented drugs are procured through competitive bidding; community pharmacies are reimbursed through a system that provides an incentive to beat average generic market prices. These policies controlled the growth of spending, with the largest effects following budget controls in 2014. Changes since 2008 have reduced savings, first by paying more than is cost-effective for cancer drugs and then by applying higher cost-effectiveness thresholds for some drugs used to treat cancer and certain other drugs.

Common Pharmaceutical Price and Cost Controls in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany: Lessons for the United States

To identify pharmaceutical spending-control options for the United States, we analyzed the policies of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, which encourage drugmakers to undertake innovations that improve health while controlling spending. Their main strategies today include: using legislation to set default rules that increase the insurer's bargaining position, employing health technology assessment that measures cost-effectiveness or comparative effectiveness and caps the purchase or reimbursement price, setting a single maximum price for similar drugs (reference group pricing), capping prices near prices in other European countries (external reference pricing), prohibiting price increases, contracting to obtain discounts as sales volume rises, procuring drugs through competitive bids, and requiring manufacturers to pay rebates when spending exceeds a global budget. Each strategy addresses a distinct cause of high spending and supports overall goals. Most recent US reform proposals recommend incremental changes that would not address the major sources of high and increasing pharmaceutical prices. However, some US reform proposals resemble certain European strategies and could bring more significant change. US policymakers should consider adopting each of the strategies employed in these countries.

Public spending on orphan medicines: a review of the literature

Background and objective Little is known about how much public payers spend on orphan medicines. This study aimed at identifying information on orphan medicine expenditure incurred by public payers that was published in literature globally and at possibly synthesising their shares as portion of the total pharmaceutical expenditure. Methods A literature review was undertaken using Medline, the Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases and Google Scholar. Titles and abstracts were screened, and full texts of potentially qualifying studies were reviewed for inclusion. Included articles were analysed, and bibliometric parameters as well as public expenditure data on orphan medicines were retrieved. Results Six hundred forty three articles excluding duplicates were identified. After screening of the abstracts and a review of the full texts, 13 articles qualified for in-depth analysis. The 13 selected articles on orphan pharmaceutical expenditure were published between 2010 and 2018. Survey periods varied between 1 year and 12 years. One publication included 22 countries but the majority of the studies were related to a single country. Expenditure data was available in five of the 13 articles, and eight articles used ‘expenditure proxies’ such as sales data. Spending data had been sourced from public institutions (4 studies), private providers (5 studies) and a combination of both (3 studies, no information on data source in 1 study). In all included studies, secondary data were analysed. Reported expenditure shares for orphan medicines in relation to total pharmaceutical spend was frequently below 3%. Countries with higher shares included the USA, Canada, the Netherlands and Bulgaria—the latter reporting spending on orphan medicines as high as 9%. Conclusions A low number of studies that informed about pharmaceutical spending on orphan medicines was published, thereof only a few explicitly analysed expenditure data of public payers. A conclusive synthesis of public spending on orphan medicines is a challenge given to the diversity in methodologies to measure expenditure. There is a need for further research to survey primary data of public spending for orphan medicines, based on a sound methodology to measure these data and to compare them internationally.