IBJNews

Growth in drug spending to slow as generics rise

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

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. RKW's comments read like a modern "Chicken Little". As a Raintree resident for many years, "Yes, I'm ready for this." Matter of fact, I welcome The Farm because it's a development that compliments our town, brings new and desirable shopping & dining closer (specialty grocer, upscale shops, micro brew pub, etc), offers upscale condos for empty nesters who want to stay in Zionsville, is being planned and constructed by local, well-reputed firms and, of course, provides desirable non property tax benefits. We all knew the Pittman's were going to develop their property sooner than later. That one of the Pittman's will continue to live on the property helps assure The Farm will be everything promised. This also sets a standard for other developers as to the quality of future developments - which should keep an ugly Walmart at bay for decades. As we've no meglomaniac mayor, I seriously doubt Zionsville would ever aspire to over-priced statues or subsidized retail rents. And we already have a very nice public theater, the Zionsville Performing Arts Center, that meets our cultural needs quite nicely.

  2. Do we add (or subtract) these from the bounty we recieve from RTWFL, Daylight Savings Time, corporate tax giveaways, and the crack job IEDC is doing?? Or is Mike going to blame these on Mitch?

  3. Who makes Tater Tots? They would be a good sponsor, because $3 Million for the alleged "Greatest Spectacle In Racing" is taters. Tiny, tiny taters. But at least they are making up something of the losses accumulated over the years in this dying sport. Buttock in seat is certainly not doing it, nor eyeball on TV, as evidenced by the lack of both.

  4. We loved lakehouse and think the Arbor Village would be a great location. It is less than 2 miles from over 1000 rooftops in the 225,000 to over 1 million range. Many people could use the great fishers trail system to bike or walk there. Just an idea Scotty -- but maybe something closer to 3 Wiseman would good. The only microbrew in area is Ram (boring)

  5. True, it's an ESPN production, but ESPN is just another name for ABC Sports, or what used to be ABC Sports since ABC Sports no longer exists as a name. ESPN=ABC Sports= ESPN. ESPN is, according to Forbes "the world's most valuable media property" worth $40 billion. Despite that, they fired 400 people this week.

ADVERTISEMENT