IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/12340.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

"Me-Too" Innovation in Pharmaceutical Markets

In: Frontiers in Health Policy Research, volume 12

Author

Listed:
  • Anupam B. Jena
  • John E. Calfee
  • Edward C. Mansley
  • Tomas J. Philipson

Abstract

Critics of me-too innovation often argue that follow-on drugs offer little incremental clinical value over existing pioneer products, while at the same time increasing health care costs. We examine whether consumers view follow-on and pioneer drugs as close substitutes or distinct clinical therapies. For five major classes of drugs, we find that large reductions in the price of pioneer molecules after patent expiration-which would typically lead to decreased consumption of strong substitutes-have no effect on the trend in demand for follow-on drugs. Our findings are likely unaffected by health insurance, competitive pricing of me-toos, marketing, and switching costs.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Anupam B. Jena & John E. Calfee & Edward C. Mansley & Tomas J. Philipson, 2009. ""Me-Too" Innovation in Pharmaceutical Markets," NBER Chapters, in: Frontiers in Health Policy Research, volume 12, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:12340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. McKellar Michael R. & Frank Matthew & Huskamp Haiden & Chernew Michael E., 2012. "The Value of Patent Expiration," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 1-13, November.
    2. Hostenkamp, Gisela, 2013. "Do follow-on therapeutic substitutes induce price competition between hospital medicines? Evidence from the Danish hospital sector," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 68-77.
    3. John Rizzo & Richard Zeckhauser, 2009. "Generic script share and the price of brand-name drugs: the role of consumer choice," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 291-316, September.
    4. Michael D. Frakes & Melissa F. Wasserman, 2020. "Investing in Ex Ante Regulation: Evidence from Pharmaceutical Patent Examination," NBER Working Papers 27579, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Siotis, Georges & Ornaghi, Carmine & Castanheira, Micael, 2019. "Market Definition and Competition Policy Enforcement in the Pharmaceutical Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 14035, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Michael Mueller & Alexander Frenzel, 2015. "Competitive pricing within pharmaceutical classes: evidence on “follow-on” drugs in Germany 1993–2008," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(1), pages 73-82, January.
    7. Siotis, Georges & Castanheira, Micael & de Frutos, Maria-Angeles & Ornaghi, Carmine, 2017. "The Unexpected Consequences of Asymmetric Competition. An Application to Big Pharma," CEPR Discussion Papers 11813, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:nbr:nberch:12340. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.