IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jrisku/v47y2013i1p1-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eliminating the U.S. drug lag: Implications for drug safety

Author

Listed:
  • Mary Olson

Abstract

An increase in new drugs first launched in the U.S. and shorter lags between first global drug launch and U.S. approval indicate that the U.S. drug lag has declined. This paper examines the impact of these changes on drug safety using adverse drug reaction data for FDA-approved drugs in 1990 to 2004. Results show two different effects. First, drugs having longer U.S. launch lags (more foreign market experience) have fewer post approval drug risks compared to drugs with shorter launch lags. This result implies that foreign market experience prior to U.S. entry provides information to help alleviate drug-related risks for U.S. patients. Second, drugs that are first launched in the U.S. have fewer serious drug reactions compared to those that were first launched abroad. This result is surprising, and may suggest that first U.S. drug launch signals information about unobserved application quality, which translates into lower post approval drug risks. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Mary Olson, 2013. "Eliminating the U.S. drug lag: Implications for drug safety," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 1-30, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jrisku:v:47:y:2013:i:1:p:1-30
    DOI: 10.1007/s11166-013-9169-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11166-013-9169-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11166-013-9169-5?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. Jean O. Lanjouw, 2005. "Patents, Price Controls and Access to New Drugs: How Policy Affects Global Market Entry," Working Papers 61, Center for Global Development.
    2. Tomas J. Philipson & Eric Sun, 2008. "Is the Food And Drug Administration Safe And Effective?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 85-102, Winter.
    3. Margaret Kyle Author-Email: mkyle@london.edu Author-Workplace-Name: London Business School, 2006. "The Role of Firm Characteristics in Pharmaceutical Product Launches," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 602-618, Autumn.
    4. Abraham, John & Davis, Courtney, 2005. "A comparative analysis of drug safety withdrawals in the UK and the US (1971-1992): Implications for current regulatory thinking and policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(5), pages 881-892, September.
    5. Guy David & Sara Markowitz & Seth Richards-Shubik, 2010. "The Effects of Pharmaceutical Marketing and Promotion on Adverse Drug Events and Regulation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 1-25, November.
    6. Olson, Mary K., 2008. "The risk we bear: The effects of review speed and industry user fees on new drug safety," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 175-200, March.
    7. Philipson, Tomas & Berndt, Ernst R. & Gottschalk, Adrian H.B. & Sun, Eric, 2008. "Cost-benefit analysis of the FDA: The case of the prescription drug user fee acts," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1306-1325, June.
    8. Margaret K. Kyle, 2006. "The role of firm characteristics in pharmaceutical product launches," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 602-618, September.
    9. Henry Grabowski & Y. Richard Wang, 2008. "Do Faster Food and Drug Administration Drug Reviews Adversely Affect Patient Safety? An Analysis of the 1992 Prescription Drug User Fee Act," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 377-406, May.
    10. Olson, Mary K., 2004. "Are novel drugs more risky for patients than less novel drugs?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1135-1158, November.
    11. Peltzman, Sam, 1973. "An Evaluation of Consumer Protection Legislation: The 1962 Drug Amendments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(5), pages 1049-1091, Sept.-Oct.
    12. Margaret K. Kyle, 2007. "Pharmaceutical Price Controls and Entry Strategies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 88-99, February.
    13. Grabowski, Henry G & Vernon, John M & Thomas, Lacy Glenn, 1978. "Estimating the Effects of Regulation on Innovation: An International Comparative Analysis of the Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 133-163, April.
    14. Mary K. Olson, 1997. "Firm Characteristics and the Speed of FDA Approval," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(1), pages 377-401, June.
    15. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. W. Kip Viscusi & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2015. "Regulating Ambiguous Risks: The Less than Rational Regulation of Pharmaceuticals," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S2), pages 387-422.
    2. Anna Chorniy & James Bailey & Abdulkadir Civan & Michael Maloney, 2021. "Regulatory review time and pharmaceutical research and development," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 113-128, January.

    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. Patricia M. Danzon & Eric L. Keuffel, 2014. "Regulation of the Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 407-484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Raymond J. March, 2021. "The FDA and the COVID‐19: A political economy perspective," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(4), pages 1210-1228, April.
    3. Anna Chorniy & James Bailey & Abdulkadir Civan & Michael Maloney, 2021. "Regulatory review time and pharmaceutical research and development," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 113-128, January.
    4. Nebibe Varol & Joan Costa-i-Font & Alistair McGuire, 2011. "Explaining Early Adoption on New Medicines: Regulation, Innovation and Scale," CESifo Working Paper Series 3459, CESifo.
    5. Matthew Grennan & Robert J. Town, 2020. "Regulating Innovation with Uncertain Quality: Information, Risk, and Access in Medical Devices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(1), pages 120-161, January.
    6. Boakye, Derrick & Sarpong, David & Mordi, Chima, 2022. "Regulatory review of new product innovation: Conceptual clarity and future research directions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Ilke Onur & Magnus Söderberg, 2020. "The impact of regulatory review time on incremental and radical innovation: evidence from the high-risk medical device market," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 134-158, April.
    8. Verniers, Isabel & Stremersch, Stefan & Croux, Christophe, 2011. "The global entry of new pharmaceuticals: A joint investigation of launch window and price," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 295-308.
    9. Simone Ghislandi & Michael Kuhn, 2016. "Asymmetric information in the regulation of the access to markets," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp219, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
    10. Pamina Koenig & Megan Macgarvie, 2009. "Regulatory policy and the location of bio-pharmaceutical FDI in Europe," Working Papers halshs-00566800, HAL.
    11. Philipson, Tomas & Berndt, Ernst R. & Gottschalk, Adrian H.B. & Sun, Eric, 2008. "Cost-benefit analysis of the FDA: The case of the prescription drug user fee acts," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1306-1325, June.
    12. Patricia M. Danzon & Andrew J. Epstein, 2012. "Effects of Regulation on Drug Launch and Pricing in Interdependent Markets," Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, in: The Economics of Medical Technology, pages 35-71, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    13. Joan Costa-Font & Alistair McGuire & Nebibe Varol, 2015. "Regulation effects on the adoption of new medicines," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1101-1121, November.
    14. Henry Grabowski & Y. Richard Wang, 2008. "Do Faster Food and Drug Administration Drug Reviews Adversely Affect Patient Safety? An Analysis of the 1992 Prescription Drug User Fee Act," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(2), pages 377-406, May.
    15. Tomas J. Philipson & Eric Sun, 2008. "Is the Food And Drug Administration Safe And Effective?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 85-102, Winter.
    16. Margaret Kyle & Yi Qian, 2014. "Intellectual Property Rights and Access to Innovation: Evidence from TRIPS," NBER Working Papers 20799, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Ernst R. Berndt & Joseph P. Newhouse, 2010. "Pricing and Reimbursement in U.S. Pharmaceutical Markets," NBER Working Papers 16297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Chorniy, Anna & Bailey, James & Maloney, Michael & Civan, Abdulkadir, 2019. "Regulatory Review Time and Pharmaceutical R&D," Working Papers 06923, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    19. Tomas J. Philipson & George Zanjani, 2013. "Economic Analysis of Risk and Uncertainty induced by Health Shocks: A Review and Extension," NBER Working Papers 19005, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Fabio Pammolli & Armando Rungi, 2016. "Access to Medicines and European Market Integration," Working Papers 01/2016, IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, revised Jan 2016.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Drug safety; Drug approval; Drug lag; I18; L51;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:jrisku:v:47:y:2013:i:1:p:1-30. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.