The New York Times reports:
As complaints grow about exorbitant drug prices, pharmaceutical companies are coming under pressure to disclose the development costs and profits of those medicines and the rationale for charging what they do.
So-called pharmaceutical cost transparency bills have been introduced in at least six state legislatures in the last year, aiming to make drug companies justify their prices, which are often attributed to high research and development costs.
One of them is Massachusetts. Also,Vertex comes up for the price of its CF drug — see recent post .
Finally, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development takes a knock for its oft-cited development cost reports.
Pharmaceutical executives do not typically tie the price of any particular drug to its development cost. But they do say that their sales have to recoup their investment in research and development if the companies are to stay in business.
They often cite the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development at Tufts University, which last year said companies spent an average of $2.6 billion to bring a drug to market, up from an estimate of $800 million in 2003. That includes the cost of failures. And almost half the figure is opportunity cost, the amount a company might have earned if it had invested money elsewhere rather than spending it on drug development.
Critics are skeptical of that figure, saying that the Tufts center gets funding from the pharmaceutical industry and uses data supplied by the drug companies, but does not disclose which drugs are used as the basis of the estimates.
Here’s what Tufts has to say about that:
Our Approach to Research
The Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (Tufts CSDD) conducts its research by working closely with government regulatory authorities and with drug developers and manufacturers of all sizes in the U.S. and abroad. Data are collected from the people who create it — pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. They cooperate because they know Tufts CSDD will generate a comprehensive and objective picture of the drug development process, while strictly ensuring that individual company data are not disclosed. Adhering to stringent methods of quantitative analysis, Tufts CSDD validates its data and develops findings based on rigorous academic standards.
Worth noting here that not all their research is from ad industry POV. For example:
Dr. Joshua Cohen utilizes his background in health economics to examine public policy issues that concern prescription drug reimbursement and market access. His areas of research include pharmacy benefits management as it relates to the Medicare prescription drug benefit, formulary regulations established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, ethics and the distribution of pharmaceutical care resources, comparative effectiveness research, market access to biopharmaceuticals in the US and Europe, role of clinical and cost-effectiveness in clinical practice guideline development, drug development targeting neglected diseases, and decisions by drug regulatory agencies regarding prescription (Rx) to over-the-counter (OTC) switches.
- Patient access to newly approved oncology drugs in US and Europe
- Clinical, regulatory, and economic challenges facing pharmacogenomics
- Prescription-to-over-the-counter switches in US and Europe
- Trends in biosimilar market uptake