Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Brand Loyalty, Generic Entry and Price Competition in Pharmaceuticals in the Quarter Century After the 1984 Waxman-Hatch Legislation

Contents:

Author Info

  • Ernst R. Berndt
  • Murray L. Aitken
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    The landmark Waxman-Hatch Act of 1984 represented a “grand compromise” legislation that sought to balance incentives for innovation by establishing finite periods of market exclusivity yet simultaneously providing access to lower cost generics expeditiously following patent expiration. Here we examine trends in the first quarter century since passage of the legislation, building on earlier work by Grabowski and Vernon [1992,1996] and Cook [1998]. The generic share of retail prescriptions in the U.S. has grown from 18.6% in 1984 to 74.5% in 2009, with a notable acceleration in recent years. This increase reflects increases in both the share of the total market potentially accessible by generics, and the generic efficiency rate – the latter frequently approaching 100%. Whereas in 1994, the generic price index fell from 100 to 80 in the 12 months following initial generic entry and by 24 months to 65, in 2009 the comparable generic price indexes are 68 and 27, respectively. Recent studies sponsored by the American Association of Retired Persons focus only on brand prices and ignore substitution to lower priced options following loss of patent protection. For the prescription drugs most commonly used by beneficiaries in Medicare Part D, the average price per prescription declined by 21.3% from 2006 to 2009, rather than increasing by 25-28% as reported by the AARP. Finally, we quantify changes over time in the average daily cost of pharmaceutical treatment in nine major therapy areas, encompassing the entire set of molecules within each therapy class, not simply the molecule whose patent has expired. Across all nine therapeutic areas, at 24 months post-generic entry, the weighted mean reduction in pharmaceutical treatment cost per patient is 35.1%.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16431.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 16431.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: Oct 2010
    Date of revision:
    Publication status: published as Berndt, Ernst R. and Murray L. Aitken, “Brand Loyalty, Generic Entry and Price Competition in Pharmaceuticals in the Quarter Century after the 1984 Waxman - Hatch Legislation”, International Journal of the Economics of Business 18(2):177 - 201, July 2011.
    Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:16431

    Note: HC IO PR
    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
    Phone: 617-868-3900
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.nber.org
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords:

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Berndt, Ernst R. & Cutler, David M. & Frank, Richard G. & Griliches, Zvi & Newhouse, Joseph P. & Triplett, Jack E., 2000. "Medical care prices and output," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 119-180 Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Abby Alpert & Mark Duggan & Judith K. Hellerstein, 2013. "Perverse Reverse Price Competition: Average Wholesale Prices and Medicaid Pharmaceutical Spending," NBER Working Papers 19367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Lee G. Branstetter & Chirantan Chatterjee & Matthew Higgins, 2011. "Regulation and Welfare: Evidence from Paragraph IV Generic Entry in the Pharmaceutical Industry," NBER Working Papers 17188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. repec:ind:iispdp:11-02 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Patricia M. Danzon & Michael F. Furukawa, 2011. "Cross-National Evidence on Generic Pharmaceuticals: Pharmacy vs. Physician-Driven Markets," NBER Working Papers 17226, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:16431. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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