Pricing dynamics of anti-seizure medications in the U.S.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pradeep Javarayee , Tengizi Mtchedlidze , Wanda Snell , Vibha Mahesha , Jennifer Meylor , Shamshad Shahrukh , Shannon Pollock , Jeetendra Sah , Yilu Dong , Hema Patel
{"title":"Pricing dynamics of anti-seizure medications in the U.S.","authors":"Pradeep Javarayee ,&nbsp;Tengizi Mtchedlidze ,&nbsp;Wanda Snell ,&nbsp;Vibha Mahesha ,&nbsp;Jennifer Meylor ,&nbsp;Shamshad Shahrukh ,&nbsp;Shannon Pollock ,&nbsp;Jeetendra Sah ,&nbsp;Yilu Dong ,&nbsp;Hema Patel","doi":"10.1016/j.seizure.2024.09.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The median cost of anti-seizure medications (ASM) in the United States (U.S.) nearly doubled per person between 2006 and 2021. This increase, combined with shifts in ASM usage and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on drug supply chains amid rising inflation, underscored the urgent need to scrutinize ASM pricing dynamics. This study aimed to analyze the complex dynamics of ASM pricing in the U.S. over the past decade (2013–2023); this included how the entry of generic ASMs influenced the pricing of brand-name counterparts and what impacted price variations across different ASM formulations (e.g., significant inflation, the COVID-19 pandemic).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study utilized National Average Drug Acquisition Cost (NADAC) data from November 2013 to July 2023. We adjusted ASM prices for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for Medicinal Drugs - Seasonally Adjusted (CPI-MDS). Statistical analyses included fixed effects regressions and multivariable regression analysis to evaluate the impact of inflation, the number of medication labelers, and the COVID-19 pandemic on ASM prices.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our study analyzed 23 ASMs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which encompassed 223 oral formulations:112 brand-name and 111 generics. From 2013–2016 to 2020–2023, accounting for standard deviations (SD), the average price of brand-name ASMs increased from $8.71 (SD 5.9) to $15.43 (SD 10.7), while generic ASMs saw a slight decrease from $1.39 (SD 1.8) to $1.26 (SD 1.6). Consequently, the price gap between brand-name and generic ASMs surged from 1452.39 % to 3399.26 %. The proportion of matched brand-name and generic ASMs with a price difference of 1000 %–9999 % increased from 32.88 % (2013–2016) to 41.43 % (2020–2023), while those exceeding 10,000 % rose from 16.44 % to 20 % in the same period. Generic immediate-release (IR) formulations were significantly less expensive than extended-release (ER) or delayed-release (DR) counterparts, with cost differences reaching up to 7751.20 %. The number of medication labelers was inversely related to generic ASM prices, which decreased by 5.45 % (<em>p</em> = 0.001) with each additional generic labeler, while brand-name ASM prices increased by 2.46 % (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) with each additional generic labeler. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a 24.4 % increase in brand-name ASM prices and a 23.1 % decrease in generic ASM prices.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The findings reveal an expanding price disparity between brand-name and generic oral ASMs. An inverse relationship was observed between the number of medication labelers and generic ASM prices, with additional labelers driving down generic prices. However, introducing more generic labelers led to a significant increase in brand-name ASM prices. Furthermore, following patent expirations, brand-name ASM prices rose—a trend explained by the \"generics paradox,\" where, contrary to expectations, brand prices do not decrease and may even increase when generics enter the market. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions in drug pricing policies to manage the rising costs associated with epilepsy treatment. To ensure equitable access to ASMs, stakeholders must understand and address the factors driving these pricing dynamics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49552,"journal":{"name":"Seizure-European Journal of Epilepsy","volume":"122 ","pages":"Pages 26-33"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seizure-European Journal of Epilepsy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1059131124002589","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The median cost of anti-seizure medications (ASM) in the United States (U.S.) nearly doubled per person between 2006 and 2021. This increase, combined with shifts in ASM usage and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on drug supply chains amid rising inflation, underscored the urgent need to scrutinize ASM pricing dynamics. This study aimed to analyze the complex dynamics of ASM pricing in the U.S. over the past decade (2013–2023); this included how the entry of generic ASMs influenced the pricing of brand-name counterparts and what impacted price variations across different ASM formulations (e.g., significant inflation, the COVID-19 pandemic).

Methods

This study utilized National Average Drug Acquisition Cost (NADAC) data from November 2013 to July 2023. We adjusted ASM prices for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for Medicinal Drugs - Seasonally Adjusted (CPI-MDS). Statistical analyses included fixed effects regressions and multivariable regression analysis to evaluate the impact of inflation, the number of medication labelers, and the COVID-19 pandemic on ASM prices.

Results

Our study analyzed 23 ASMs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which encompassed 223 oral formulations:112 brand-name and 111 generics. From 2013–2016 to 2020–2023, accounting for standard deviations (SD), the average price of brand-name ASMs increased from $8.71 (SD 5.9) to $15.43 (SD 10.7), while generic ASMs saw a slight decrease from $1.39 (SD 1.8) to $1.26 (SD 1.6). Consequently, the price gap between brand-name and generic ASMs surged from 1452.39 % to 3399.26 %. The proportion of matched brand-name and generic ASMs with a price difference of 1000 %–9999 % increased from 32.88 % (2013–2016) to 41.43 % (2020–2023), while those exceeding 10,000 % rose from 16.44 % to 20 % in the same period. Generic immediate-release (IR) formulations were significantly less expensive than extended-release (ER) or delayed-release (DR) counterparts, with cost differences reaching up to 7751.20 %. The number of medication labelers was inversely related to generic ASM prices, which decreased by 5.45 % (p = 0.001) with each additional generic labeler, while brand-name ASM prices increased by 2.46 % (p < 0.001) with each additional generic labeler. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a 24.4 % increase in brand-name ASM prices and a 23.1 % decrease in generic ASM prices.

Conclusions

The findings reveal an expanding price disparity between brand-name and generic oral ASMs. An inverse relationship was observed between the number of medication labelers and generic ASM prices, with additional labelers driving down generic prices. However, introducing more generic labelers led to a significant increase in brand-name ASM prices. Furthermore, following patent expirations, brand-name ASM prices rose—a trend explained by the "generics paradox," where, contrary to expectations, brand prices do not decrease and may even increase when generics enter the market. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions in drug pricing policies to manage the rising costs associated with epilepsy treatment. To ensure equitable access to ASMs, stakeholders must understand and address the factors driving these pricing dynamics.

美国抗癫痫药物的定价动态
背景2006年至2021年间,美国抗癫痫药物(ASM)的人均费用中位数几乎翻了一番。这一增长,再加上抗癫痫药物使用的变化以及 COVID-19 大流行对药物供应链的影响,凸显了仔细研究抗癫痫药物定价动态的迫切需要。本研究旨在分析过去十年(2013-2023 年)美国 ASM 定价的复杂动态,包括仿制药 ASM 的进入如何影响品牌药的定价,以及影响不同 ASM 制剂价格变化的因素(如严重通胀、COVID-19 大流行)。我们使用经季节性调整的医疗药品消费价格指数(CPI-MDS)对 ASM 价格进行了通货膨胀调整。统计分析包括固定效应回归和多变量回归分析,以评估通货膨胀、药品标签数量和 COVID-19 大流行对 ASM 价格的影响。结果我们的研究分析了美国食品药品管理局 (FDA) 批准的 23 种 ASM,其中包括 223 种口服制剂:112 种品牌药和 111 种仿制药。从2013-2016年到2020-2023年,考虑到标准差(SD),品牌ASM的平均价格从8.71美元(SD 5.9)上升到15.43美元(SD 10.7),而仿制药ASM的平均价格略有下降,从1.39美元(SD 1.8)下降到1.26美元(SD 1.6)。因此,品牌和非专利自动售货机之间的价格差距从 1452.39% 猛增至 3399.26%。价格差距在 1000 %-9999 % 之间的匹配品牌和仿制药 ASM 的比例从 32.88 %(2013-2016 年)上升至 41.43 %(2020-2023 年),而同期价格差距超过 10 000 % 的 ASM 的比例从 16.44 % 上升至 20 %。非专利速释(IR)制剂的价格明显低于缓释(ER)或缓释(DR)制剂,成本差异高达 7751.20%。药物贴标签者的数量与非专利自动售药价格成反比,每增加一个非专利贴标签者,自动售药价格就会下降 5.45 %(p = 0.001),而每增加一个非专利贴标签者,品牌自动售药价格就会上升 2.46 %(p < 0.001)。COVID-19大流行导致品牌ASM价格上涨24.4%,非专利ASM价格下降23.1%。观察发现,药品贴标机数量与非专利ASM价格之间存在反比关系,贴标机数量增加会使非专利药价格下降。然而,引入更多的仿制药贴标签者会导致品牌 ASM 价格大幅上涨。此外,在专利到期后,品牌自动售卖机的价格上涨--这种趋势可以用 "仿制药悖论 "来解释,即与预期相反,当仿制药进入市场时,品牌药的价格不仅不会下降,甚至还有可能上涨。这些发现突出表明,有必要对药品定价政策进行有针对性的干预,以控制与癫痫治疗相关的成本上升。为确保公平地获得 ASMs,利益相关者必须了解并解决驱动这些定价动态的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Seizure-European Journal of Epilepsy
Seizure-European Journal of Epilepsy 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
231
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: Seizure - European Journal of Epilepsy is an international journal owned by Epilepsy Action (the largest member led epilepsy organisation in the UK). It provides a forum for papers on all topics related to epilepsy and seizure disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信