IBJNews

Growth in drug spending to slow as generics rise

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The annual growth rate in spending on drugs may be cut in half over the next five years as people opt for less expensive generic medicines over brand-name treatments, a health-care research group said Wednesday, highlighting the challenge pharmaceutical firms like Eli Lilly and Co. are facing.

While global expenditures for medicines will still reach almost $1.1 trillion by 2015, the annual compounded growth rate may be reduced to as little as 3 percent through 2015, compared with 6.2 percent over the last five years, according to the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics in Parsippany, N.J. Still, emerging markets will double their purchases to as much as $315 billion, the institute said in a report.

Expiring patents on branded medicines will yield $98 billion in net savings to government health plans and commercial insurers during the next five years, with the U.S. providing the biggest increase in spending for generic alternatives, the institute said. Market share for branded drugs will drop to 53 percent from 64 percent last year, according to the report.

“This patent dividend may actually be coming as a surprise to payers and not yet fully worked into their own estimates,” Murray Aiken, the institute’s executive director, said in a conference call Tuesday. “It’s a reasonably significant slowdown.”

The 2008 global financial recession and recent government actions to control drug prices in nations such as China, Italy and Japan also are reasons for the slowing growth rate, Aiken said. Rebates and discounts offered by drugmakers aren’t reflected in IMS audits and may add as much as $75 billion by 2015, the report said.

While the pharmaceutical industry’s research and development spending has increased, “everyone is focused on trying to raise the productivity of the R&D investment and that continues to be a struggle,” Aiken said.

Last year, U.S. regulators approved 21 medicines for sale, the fewest since 2007. Indianapolis-based Lilly and industry peers Pfizer Inc., Merck & Co. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. all failed in 2010 to gain approval for new drugs.

Already this year, Lilly and German drugmaker Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH were cleared to sell the drug linagliptin to help improve blood sugar control in people with Type 2 diabetes, New York-based Bristol-Myers won U.S. marketing approval for its skin cancer treatment Yervoy, and New Jersey-based Merck gained approval for the first hepatitis C medication, Victrelis, in more than a decade.

“This comes back to ‘innovation wins out’ and if you have the innovative products, the global market is only getting larger,” Aiken said. “If not, you’re competing against an ever-more aggressive set of generic producers.”

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. With Pence running the ship good luck with a new government building on the site. He does everything on the cheap except unnecessary roads line a new beltway( like we need that). Things like state of the art office buildings and light rail will never be seen as an asset to these types. They don't get that these are the things that help a city prosper.

  2. Does the $100,000,000,000 include salaries for members of Congress?

  3. "But that doesn't change how the piece plays to most of the people who will see it." If it stands out so little during the day as you seem to suggest maybe most of the people who actually see it will be those present when it is dark enough to experience its full effects.

  4. That's the mentality of most retail marketers. In this case Leo was asked to build the brand. HHG then had a bad sales quarter and rather than stay the course, now want to go back to the schlock that Zimmerman provides (at a considerable cut in price.) And while HHG salesmen are, by far, the pushiest salesmen I have ever experienced, I believe they are NOT paid on commission. But that doesn't mean they aren't trained to be aggressive.

  5. The reason HHG's sales team hits you from the moment you walk through the door is the same reason car salesmen do the same thing: Commission. HHG's folks are paid by commission they and need to hit sales targets or get cut, while BB does not. The sales figures are aggressive, so turnover rate is high. Electronics are the largest commission earners along with non-needed warranties, service plans etc, known in the industry as 'cheese'. The wholesale base price is listed on the cryptic price tag in the string of numbers near the bar code. Know how to decipher it and you get things at cost, with little to no commission to the sales persons. Whether or not this is fair, is more of a moral question than a financial one.

ADVERTISEMENT