US pharmaceutical innovation in an international context.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Author(s): Keyhani S;Keyhani S; Wang S; Hebert P; Carpenter D; Anderson G
  • Source:
    American journal of public health [Am J Public Health] 2010 Jun; Vol. 100 (6), pp. 1075-80. Date of Electronic Publication: 2010 Apr 19.
  • Publication Type:
    Comparative Study; Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: American Public Health Association Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 1254074 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1541-0048 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00900036 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Am J Public Health Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Washington, DC : American Public Health Association
      Original Publication: New York [etc.]
    • Subject Terms:
    • Abstract:
      Objectives: We explored whether the United States, which does not regulate pharmaceutical prices, is responsible for the development of a disproportionate share of the new molecular entities (NMEs; a drug that does not contain an active moiety previously approved by the Food and Drug Administration) produced worldwide.
      Methods: We collected data on NMEs approved between 1992 and 2004 and assigned each NME to an inventor country. We examined the relation between the proportion of total NMEs developed in each country and the proportion of total prescription drug spending and gross domestic product (GDP) of each country represented.
      Results: The United States accounted for 42% of prescription drug spending and 40% of the total GDP among innovator countries and was responsible for the development of 43.7% of the NMEs. The United Kingdom, Switzerland, and a few other countries innovated proportionally more than their contribution to GDP or prescription drug spending, whereas Japan, South Korea, and a few other countries innovated less.
      Conclusions: Higher prescription drug spending in the United States does not disproportionately privilege domestic innovation, and many countries with drug price regulation were significant contributors to pharmaceutical innovation.
    • References:
      JAMA. 2005 Oct 26;294(16):2075-82. (PMID: 16249422)
      Arch Intern Med. 2006 Sep 25;166(17):1829-35. (PMID: 17000938)
      Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 May-Jun;23(3):10-25. (PMID: 15160799)
      Front Health Policy Res. 2004;7:1-54. (PMID: 15612334)
      BMJ. 2003 Oct 11;327(7419):830. (PMID: 14551076)
      Lancet. 2002 Nov 16;360(9345):1590-5. (PMID: 12443614)
      Health Econ. 2005 Jan;14(1):1-16. (PMID: 15386673)
      BMJ. 1996 Jul 6;313(7048):33-5. (PMID: 8664771)
      Isr Med Assoc J. 2005 May;7(5):286-91. (PMID: 15909459)
      Health Aff (Millwood). 2003 May-Jun;22(3):31-41. (PMID: 12757269)
      Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jul-Dec;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-396-404. (PMID: 15451953)
      Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19;(2):CD005979. (PMID: 16625648)
      BMJ. 2005 Oct 22;331(7522):958-60. (PMID: 16239695)
      N Engl J Med. 2004 Feb 19;350(8):826-33. (PMID: 14973209)
      Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(2):89-103. (PMID: 12515571)
    • Accession Number:
      0 (Drugs, Investigational)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20100421 Date Completed: 20100524 Latest Revision: 20211020
    • Publication Date:
      20240104
    • Accession Number:
      PMC2866602
    • Accession Number:
      10.2105/AJPH.2009.178491
    • Accession Number:
      20403883