IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v123y2019i12p1251-1258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How will recent trade agreements that extend market protections for brand-name prescription pharmaceuticals impact expenditures and generic access in Canada?

Author

Listed:
  • Beall, Reed F.
  • Hardcastle, Lorian
  • Clement, Fiona
  • Hollis, Aidan

Abstract

Canada recently entered into two multinational trade agreements (i.e., the Canada, United States, and Mexico Trade Agreement; and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union). The resulting federal policy changes will prolong periods of market protection afforded to eligible brand-name prescription drugs by extending competition-blocking patent and data exclusivity terms. While previous studies have analysed these two policy changes in isolation, it remains unknown what the total combined impact will be in a typical year. Our objective was to design an analytic approach that can assess more than one change to a country’s market protections and then to apply this methodology to the Canadian context. We find that the collective impact of these policy changes will be to extend the regulatory protection period for new drugs from an average of 10.0 years to 11.1 years. Depending upon the model’s assumptions and all contingencies considered, an 11% increase equated to an average of $410 million annually (with a minimum estimate of $40 million and a maximum of $1.4 billion). Despite this uncertainty reflected in the range of possible financial impacts, we conclude that such methodological approaches could be useful for rapidly evaluating potential policy changes prior to adoption, which may further assist in budget planning to mitigate increased cost to the downstream health authorities most impacted by these trade concessions.

Suggested Citation

  • Beall, Reed F. & Hardcastle, Lorian & Clement, Fiona & Hollis, Aidan, 2019. "How will recent trade agreements that extend market protections for brand-name prescription pharmaceuticals impact expenditures and generic access in Canada?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(12), pages 1251-1258.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:123:y:2019:i:12:p:1251-1258
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.09.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851019302258
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.09.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hemphill, C. Scott & Sampat, Bhaven N., 2012. "Evergreening, patent challenges, and effective market life in pharmaceuticals," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 327-339.
    2. C. Scott Hemphill & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2011. "When Do Generics Challenge Drug Patents?," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 613-649, December.
    3. Paul Grootendorst & Minsup Shim & Adam Falconi & Tyler Robinson & Ethar Ismail & Joel Lexchin, 2015. "Intellectual Property Protection And Drug Plan Coverage: Evidence From Ontario," Working Papers 150005, Canadian Centre for Health Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    2. Durvasula, Maya & Hemphill, C. Scott & Ouellette, Lisa Larrimore & Sampat, Bhaven & Williams, Heidi L., 2023. "The NBER Orange Book Dataset: A user’s guide," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    3. Bhaven N. Sampat, 2015. "Intellectual property rights and pharmaceuticals: The case of antibiotics," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 26, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    4. Matthew J. Higgins & Mathias J. Kronlund & Ji Min Park & Joshua Pollet, 2020. "The Role of Assets In Place: Loss of Market Exclusivity and Investment," NBER Working Papers 27588, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Amy Kapczynski & Chan Park & Bhaven Sampat, 2012. "Polymorphs and Prodrugs and Salts (Oh My!): An Empirical Analysis of “Secondary” Pharmaceutical Patents," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Lee Branstetter & Chirantan Chatterjee & Matthew J. Higgins, 2014. "Generic Competition and the Incentives for Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Innovation," NBER Working Papers 20532, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Wagner, Stefan & Sternitzke, Christian & Walter, Sascha, 2022. "Mapping Markush," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    8. Javad Moradpour & Aidan Hollis, 2021. "The economic theory of cost‐effectiveness thresholds in health: Domestic and international implications," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1139-1151, May.
    9. Hazel V. J. Moir, 2016. "Exploring Evergreening: Insights from Two Medicines," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 49(4), pages 413-431, December.
    10. Lucy Xiaolu Wang, 2023. "A cost-benefit analysis of the medicines patent pool," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 43(3), pages 1298-1319.
    11. Böhm, Sebastian & Grossmann, Volker & Strulik, Holger, 2021. "R&D-driven medical progress, health care costs, and the future of human longevity," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 18(C).
    12. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    13. Fabian Gaessler & Stefan Wagner, 2022. "Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(3), pages 571-586, May.
    14. Farasat A. S. Bokhari & Franco Mariuzzo & Anna Rita Bennato, 2021. "Innovation and growth in the UK pharmaceuticals: the case of product and marketing introductions," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 603-634, June.
    15. Chatterjee, Chirantan & Kubo, Kensuke & Pingali, Viswanath, 2015. "The consumer welfare implications of governmental policies and firm strategy in markets for medicines," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 255-273.
    16. Wang, Lucy Xiaolu, 2022. "Global drug diffusion and innovation with the medicines patent pool," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    17. Ding, Yucheng & Zhao, Xin, 2019. "Pay-for-delay patent settlement, generic entry and welfare," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    18. Sanzenbacher, Geoffrey T. & Wettstein, Gal, 2020. "Drug insurance and the strategic behavior of drug manufacturers: Evergreening and generic entry after Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    19. Henry Grabowski & Carlos Brain & Anna Taub & Rahul Guha, 2017. "Pharmaceutical Patent Challenges: Company Strategies and Litigation Outcomes," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 3(1), pages 33-59, Winter.
    20. Margaret K. Kyle, 2019. "The Alignment of Innovation Policy and Social Welfare: Evidence from Pharmaceuticals," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 95-123, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:123:y:2019:i:12:p:1251-1258. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.