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.”



Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. "This was a very localized, Indiana issue," he said. As in, Indiana failed to expand Medicaid to cover its poor citizens resulting in the loss of essential medical services, including this EMS company. Well done, Indiana GOP. Here are the real death panels: GOP state governments who refuse to expand Medicaid for political reasons.

  2. In the "one for all, all for none" socialist doctrine the sick die...this plus obama"care" equates to caucasian genocide plus pushed flight to cities thus further eroding the conservative base and the continualed spiral toward complete liberal/progressive/marxist America.

  3. There is a simple reason why WISH is not reporting on this story. LIN has others stations in different markets that are affiliated with CBS. Reporting about CBS blindsiding WISH/LIN due to CBS's greed and bullying tatics would risk any future negoations LIN will have with CBS in other markets.

  4. My best always! Dave Wilson

  5. How did Columbus, Ohio pull off a car share service without a single dollar of public subsidies? They must not have a mayor who is on the take like Indianapolis. Daimler Benz offers Columbus residents their Smart Cars on a market-driven basis: "This has some neat features. Cars don’t have to be picked up and dropped off at fixed points. You find one with your smart phone based on GPS, and drop it off anywhere in the service area you can find a spot – even at a meter. These cars aren’t required to feed the meter so you get free on street parking while using them. I was told this system was put in place on a market basis without subsidies – and that the vendor actually pays the city for the use of the meters." http://www.urbanophile.com/2014/05/26/checking-in-on-columbus/