IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v14y2013i1p41-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of new (orphan) drug approvals on premature mortality from rare diseases in the United States and France, 1999–2007

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Lichtenberg

Abstract

This paper investigates the impact of the introduction of new orphan drugs on premature mortality from rare diseases using longitudinal, disease-level data obtained from a number of major databases. The analysis is performed using data from two countries: the United States (during the period 1999–2006) and France (during the period 2000–2007). For both countries, we estimate models using two alternative definitions of premature mortality, several alternative criteria for inclusion in the set of rare diseases, and several values of the potential lag between new drug approvals and premature mortality reduction. Both the United States and French estimates indicate that, overall, premature mortality from rare diseases is unrelated to the cumulative number of drugs approved 0–2 years earlier but is significantly inversely related to the cumulative number of drugs approved 3–4 years earlier. This delay is not surprising, since most patients probably do not have access to a drug until several years after it has been launched. Although the estimates for the two countries are qualitatively similar, the estimated magnitudes of the US coefficients are about four times as large as the magnitudes of the French coefficients. This may be partly due to greater errors in measuring dates of drug introduction in France. Also, access to new drugs may be more restricted in France than it is in the United States. Our estimates indicate that, in the United States, potential years of life lost to rare diseases before age 65 (PYLL65) declined at an average annual rate of 3.3% and that, in the absence of lagged new drug approvals, PYLL65 would have increased at a rate of 0.9%. Since the US population aged 0–64 was increasing at the rate of 1.0% per year, this means that PYLL65 per person under 65 would have remained approximately constant. The reduction in the US growth rate of PYLL65 attributable to lagged new drug approvals was 4.2%. In France, PYLL65 declined at an average annual rate of 1.8%. The estimates imply that, in the absence of lagged new drug approvals, it would have declined at a rate of 0.6%. The reduction in the French growth rate of PYLL65 attributable to lagged new drug approvals was 1.1%. Earlier access to orphan drugs could result in earlier reductions in premature mortality from rare diseases. Copyright Springer-Verlag (outside the USA) 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Lichtenberg, 2013. "The impact of new (orphan) drug approvals on premature mortality from rare diseases in the United States and France, 1999–2007," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 41-56, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:14:y:2013:i:1:p:41-56
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-011-0349-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10198-011-0349-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-011-0349-4?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. Frank Lichtenberg, 2009. "The effect of new cancer drug approvals on the life expectancy of American cancer patients, 1978-2004," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 407-428.
    2. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2009. "Have newer cardiovascular drugs reduced hospitalization? Evidence from longitudinal country‐level data on 20 OECD countries, 1995–2003," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 519-534, May.
    3. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2005. "Pharmaceutical Knowledge-Capital Accumulation and Longevity," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Capital in the New Economy, pages 237-274, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2015. "Pharmaceutical Innovation, Longevity, and Medical Expenditure in Greece, 1995-2010," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 277-299, July.
    2. Ana Beatriz D′Avó Luís & Mikyung Kelly Seo, 2021. "Has the development of cancer biomarkers to guide treatment improved health outcomes?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 789-810, July.
    3. Simona Gamba & Laura Magazzini & Paolo Pertile, 2019. "R&D and market size: who benefits from orphan drug regulation?," Working Papers 09/2019, University of Verona, Department of Economics.

    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. Nishimura, Junichi & Nagaoka, Sadao & Yoneyama-Hirozane, Mariko, 2022. "The impact of science-intensive drugs on longevity and cure rate: Evidence from new prescription drugs launched in Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2014. "Has Medical Innovation Reduced Cancer Mortality?," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 60(1), pages 135-177.
    3. Katharina E. Blankart & Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2020. "Are patients more adherent to newer drugs?," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 605-618, December.
    4. Lichtenberg Frank R., 2010. "Are Increasing 5-Year Survival Rates Evidence of Success Against Cancer? A Reexamination Using Data from the U.S. and Australia," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Gautier Duflos, 2008. "Pharmaceutical innovation and the longevity of Australians: A first look," Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, in: Beyond Health Insurance: Public Policy to Improve Health, pages 95-117, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    6. Adriana Lleras-Muney & Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2002. "The Effect of Education on Medical Technology Adoption: Are the More Educated More Likely to Use New Drugs," NBER Working Papers 9185, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2015. "Pharmaceutical Innovation, Longevity, and Medical Expenditure in Greece, 1995-2010," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 277-299, July.
    8. Frank Lichtenberg, 2011. "The quality of medical care, behavioral risk factors, and longevity growth," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-34, March.
    9. Lichtenberg, Frank R., 2014. "The impact of pharmaceutical innovation on longevity and medical expenditure in France, 2000–2009," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 107-127.
    10. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Billie Pettersson, 2014. "The impact of pharmaceutical innovation on longevity and medical expenditure in Sweden, 1997-2010: evidence from longitudinal, disease-level data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 239-273, April.
    11. Frank Lichtenberg, 2015. "The impact of pharmaceutical innovation on premature cancer mortality in Canada, 2000–2011," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 339-359, September.
    12. Lichtenberg Frank R., 2018. "The Impact of New Drug Launches on Hospitalization in 2015 for 67 Medical Conditions in 15 OECD Countries: A Two-Way Fixed-Effects Analysis," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(2), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2007. "Importation And Innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(6), pages 403-417.
    14. David H. Howard & Peter B. Bach & Ernst R. Berndt & Rena M. Conti, 2015. "Pricing in the Market for Anticancer Drugs," NBER Working Papers 20867, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Lichtenberg Frank R., 2017. "The Impact of Pharmaceutical Innovation on Cancer Mortality in Belgium, 2004–2012," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(1), pages 1-28, June.
    16. 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.
    17. de Meijer, Claudine & O’Donnell, Owen & Koopmanschap, Marc & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2013. "Health expenditure growth: Looking beyond the average through decomposition of the full distribution," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 88-105.
    18. Frank Lichtenberg, 2010. "The Contribution of Pharmaceutical Innovation to Longevity Growth in Germany and France," CESifo Working Paper Series 3095, CESifo.
    19. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2017. "The Impact of Pharmaceutical Innovation on Premature Mortality, Hospital Separations, and Cancer Survival in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(302), pages 353-378, September.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Orphan drugs; Orphan diseases; Rare diseases; Mortality; Innovation; I1; J1; L65; O3;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:spr:eujhec:v:14:y:2013:i:1:p:41-56. 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.