IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v31y2022i4p647-663.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biosimilar competition: Early learning

Author

Listed:
  • Richard G. Frank
  • Mahnum Shahzad
  • Aaron S. Kesselheim
  • William Feldman

Abstract

Biologics accounted for roughly $145 billion in spending in 2018. They are also the fastest growing segment of the pharmaceutical industry. The Biological Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) of 2010 created an abbreviated pathway for biosimilar products to promote price competition in the market for biological drugs. There was great anticipation that the BPCIA would lead to a moderation in drug prices driven by market competition. The observed levels of competition and the accompanying savings have not reached those expected levels. We investigate the early impacts of biosimilar competition on the use and pricing of biological products. We focus especially on the ways in which altered market structures stemming from the implementation of the BPCIA have affected the prices for biological products subject to biosimilar competition. We do so by studying seven products that have recently faced biosimilar competition. We estimate fixed effects and Instrumental Variables models to estimate the impact of market competition on prices. Our results indicate that in the range of one to three entrants each additional marketed product results in a reduction in weighted average market prices of between 5.4% and 7% points. These are the result of a combination of reductions in originator prices and shifting in demand to biosimilar products.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard G. Frank & Mahnum Shahzad & Aaron S. Kesselheim & William Feldman, 2022. "Biosimilar competition: Early learning," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 647-663, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:31:y:2022:i:4:p:647-663
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.4471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4471
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.4471?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Berry & Martin Gaynor & Fiona Scott Morton, 2019. "Do Increasing Markups Matter? Lessons from Empirical Industrial Organization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 44-68, Summer.
    2. Fiona M. Scott Morton & Ariel Dora Stern & Scott Stern, 2018. "The Impact of the Entry of Biosimilars: Evidence from Europe," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 53(1), pages 173-210, August.
    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. Ensar Yılmaz & Zeynep Kaplan, 2022. "Heterogeneity of market power: firm-level evidence," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 1207-1228, May.
    2. Lukáš Čechura & Tinoush Jamali Jaghdani, 2021. "Market Imperfections within the European Wheat Value Chain: The Case of France and the United Kingdom," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, August.
    3. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/6q707l4svn8k3bt630nhgdqgdu is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Giroldo, Renato & Hollenbeck, Brett, 2021. "Concentration, Retail Markups, and Countervailing Power: Evidence from Retail Lotteries," MPRA Paper 109039, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Kharroubi, Enisse & Spigt, Renée & Igan, Deniz & Takahashi, Koji & Zakrajsek, Egon, 2023. "Markups and the Asymmetric Pass-Through of Cost Push Shocks," CEPR Discussion Papers 18723, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Nicholas Bagley & Benjamin Berger & Amitabh Chandra & Craig Garthwaite & Ariel D. Stern, 2018. "The Orphan Drug Act at 35: Observations and an Outlook for the Twenty-First Century," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 97-137, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Claudio Luccioletti, 2022. "Labor Market Power Across Cities," Working Papers wp2022_2214, CEMFI.
    8. Tomás R. Martinez & Thiago Trafane Oliveira Santos, 2024. "Disentangling Brazilian TFP: the role of misallocation in recent economic cycles," Working Papers Series 609, Central Bank of Brazil, Research Department.
    9. Calligaris, Sara & Criscuolo, Chiara & Marcolin, Luca, 2024. "Mark-ups in the digital era," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126813, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Rodríguez del Valle, Adrián & Fernández-Vázquez, Esteban, 2024. "Analyzing market power of the agricultural industry in Asia," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 652-669.
    11. William Maloney & Pablo Garriga & Marcela Meléndez & Raúl Morales & Charl Jooste & James Sampi & Jorge Thompson Araujo & Ekaterina Vostroknutova, "undated". "Latin America and the Caribbean Economic Review, April 2024 - Competition: The Missing Ingredient for Growth? [Informe Económico América Latina y el Caribe, Abril 2024: Competencia: ¿el ingrediente," World Bank Publications - Reports 41230, The World Bank Group.
    12. Xiang Ding & Teresa C. Fort & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2019. "Structural Change Within Versus Across Firms: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 2019-9, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    13. R. Andrew Butters & Thomas N. Hubbard, 2023. "Industry Structure, Segmentation, and Quality Competition in the U.S. Hotel Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 491-537, June.
    14. Gábor Koltay & Szabolcs Lorincz & Tommaso Valletti, 2023. "Concentration and Competition: Evidence From Europe and Implications For Policy1," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 466-501.
    15. Simon Mongey & Jan De Loecker & Jan Eeckhout, 2021. "Quantifying Market Power and Business Dynamism in the Macroeconomy," Working Papers 1251, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Joel Stiebale & Florian Szücs, 2022. "Mergers and market power: evidence from rivals' responses in European markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(4), pages 678-702, December.
    17. Hui-Han Chen & Tatenda Yemeke & Sachiko Ozawa, 2024. "Reduction of biologic pricing following biosimilar introduction: Analysis across 57 countries and regions, 2012–19," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-15, June.
    18. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/6q707l4svn8k3bt630nhgdqgdu is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Javier D. Donna & Pedro Pereira, 2024. "Structural Presumptions for Non-horizontal Mergers in the 2023 Merger Guidelines: A Primer and a Path Forward," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 65(1), pages 303-345, August.
    20. Thomas Hasenzagl & Luis Perez, 2023. "The Micro-Aggregated Profit Share," Papers 2309.12945, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    21. Chiara Bellucci & Armando Rungi, 2024. "Procompetitive effects of vertical takeovers. Evidence from the European Union," Papers 2411.12412, arXiv.org, revised May 2025.
    22. Chrysovalantis Amountzias, 2024. "Income disparities and financial development: evidence from a panel firm-level analysis," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 175-206, January.

    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:wly:hlthec:v:31:y:2022:i:4:p:647-663. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.