IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002872.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition and price among brand-name drugs in the same class: A systematic review of the evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Ameet Sarpatwari
  • Jonathan DiBello
  • Marie Zakarian
  • Mehdi Najafzadeh
  • Aaron S Kesselheim

Abstract

Background: Some experts have proposed combating rising drug prices by promoting brand–brand competition, a situation that is supposed to arise when multiple US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved brand-name products in the same class are indicated for the same condition. However, numerous reports exist of price increases following the introduction of brand-name competition, suggesting that it may not be effective. We performed a systematic literature review of the peer-reviewed health policy and economics literature to better understand the interplay between new drug entry and intraclass drug prices. Methods and findings: We searched PubMed and EconLit for original studies on brand–brand competition in the US market published in English between January 1990 and April 2019. We performed a qualitative synthesis of each study’s data, recording its primary objective, methodology, and results. We found 10 empirical investigations, with 1 study each on antihypertensives, anti-infectives, central nervous system stimulants for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis, histamine-2 (H2) blockers, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors; 2 studies on cancer medications; and 2 studies on all marketed or new drugs. None of the studies reported that brand–brand competition lowers list prices of existing drugs within a class. The findings of 2 studies suggest that such competition may help restrain how new drug prices are set. Other studies found evidence that brand–brand competition was mediated by the relative quality of competing drugs and the extent to which they are marketed, with safer or more effective new drugs and greater marketing associated with higher intraclass list prices. Our investigation was limited by the studies’ use of list rather than net prices and the age of some of the data. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that policies to promote brand–brand competition in the US pharmaceutical market, such as accelerating approval of non-first-in-class drugs, will likely not result in lower drug list prices absent additional structural reforms. Ameet Sarpatwari and colleagues assess market competition among brand-name drugs with similar therapeutic effects.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Ameet Sarpatwari & Jonathan DiBello & Marie Zakarian & Mehdi Najafzadeh & Aaron S Kesselheim, 2019. "Competition and price among brand-name drugs in the same class: A systematic review of the evidence," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002872
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002872
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002872&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002872?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2021. "Are drug prices subject to creative destruction? Evidence from the US, 1997–2017," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(8), pages 1910-1932, August.
    2. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2022. "The effects of dynamic and static competition on prescription drug prices in Denmark, 1997–2017," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1155-1173, September.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pmed00:1002872. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    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.