Dataset Information

Prices, Costs, and Affordability of New Medicines for Hepatitis C in 30 Countries: An Economic Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

New hepatitis C virus (HCV) medicines have markedly improved treatment efficacy and regimen tolerability. However, their high prices have limited access, prompting wide debate about fair and affordable prices. This study systematically compared the price and affordability of sofosbuvir and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir across 30 countries to assess affordability to health systems and patients.

Methods and findings

Published 2015 ex-factory prices for a 12-wk course of treatment were provided by the Pharma Price Information (PPI) service of the Austrian public health institute Gesundheit Österreich GmbH or were obtained from national government or drug reimbursement authorities and recent press releases, where necessary. Prices in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries and select low- and middle-income countries were converted to US dollars using period average exchange rates and were adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP). We analysed prices compared to national economic performance and estimated market size and the cost of these drugs in terms of countries' annual total pharmaceutical expenditure (TPE) and in terms of the duration of time an individual would need to work to pay for treatment out of pocket. Patient affordability was calculated using 2014 OECD average annual wages, supplemented with International Labour Organization median wage data where necessary. All data were compiled between 17 July 2015 and 25 January 2016. For the base case analysis, we assumed a 23% rebate/discount on the published price in all countries, except for countries with special pricing arrangements or generic licensing agreements. The median nominal ex-factory price of a 12-wk course of sofosbuvir across 26 OECD countries was US$42,017, ranging from US$37,729 in Japan to US$64,680 in the US. Central and Eastern European countries had higher PPP-adjusted prices than other countries: prices of sofosbuvir in Poland and Turkey (PPP$101,063 and PPP$70,331) and of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in Poland (PPP$118,754) were at least 1.09 and 1.63 times higher, respectively than in the US (PPP$64,680 and PPP$72,765). Based on PPP-adjusted TPE and without the cost of ribavirin and other treatment costs, treating the entire HCV viraemic population with these regimens at the PPP-adjusted prices with a 23% price reduction would amount to at least one-tenth of current TPE across the countries included in this study, ranging from 10.5% of TPE in the Netherlands to 190.5% of TPE in Poland. In 12 countries, the price of a course of sofosbuvir without other costs was equivalent to 1 y or more of the average annual wage of individuals, ranging from 0.21 y in Egypt to 5.28 y in Turkey. This analysis relies on the accuracy of price information and infection prevalence estimates. It does not include the costs of diagnostic testing, supplementary treatments, treatment for patients with reinfection or cirrhosis, or associated health service costs.

Conclusions

Current prices of these medicines are variable and unaffordable globally. These prices threaten the sustainability of health systems in many countries and prevent large-scale provision of treatment. Stakeholders should implement a fairer pricing framework to deliver lower prices that take account of affordability. Without lower prices, countries are unlikely to be able to increase investment to minimise the burden of hepatitis C.

SUBMITTER: Iyengar S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4886962 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAccess to affordable and good quality medicines is a key to meeting Sustainable Development Goal No. 3 by the year 2030. Prices, availability and affordability of essential medicines have been studied in many developing countries, but no such information has been published about Rwanda yet. This study aimed at providing data on prices, availability and affordability of medicines in different health facilities of Rwanda.MethodsA survey was carried out on availability, prices and affordability of 18 medicines in Kigali City and five districts of Rwanda. 44 health facilities were surveyed, including public and faith-based hospitals, public and faith-based health centers and private pharmacies. The standardized methodology developed by WHO and Health Action International (HAI) was used to collect and analyze the data.FindingsPrices for generic medicines in public and faith-based health facilities were remarkably low, with median price ratios (MPRs) of 1.0 in comparison to the international procurement prices published by Management Sciences for Health. In private pharmacies, prices were twice as high (MPR = 1.99 for generics). Availability of medicines fell short of the of 80% target set by WHO, but was better than reported from many other developing countries. Availability of medicines was highest in the private sector (71.3%) and slightly lower in the faith-based (62.8%) and public (59.6%) sectors. The government procurement agency was found to work efficiently, achieving prices 30% below the international procurement price given in the International Medical Product Price Guide. Affordability of medicines was better in the public and faith-based sectors than in the private sector.ConclusionIn Rwanda, medicines are affordable but poorly available in both the public and the faith-based sectors. Further improvements of the availability of medicines in the public and the faith-based health facilities represent the most important key to increase accessibility and affordability of medicines in Rwanda.

Project description:BackgroundHaiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and faces numerous challenges, including inadequate medication access for its residents. The objective of this study was to determine the availability, prices, and affordability of essential medicines in Haiti and compare these findings to other countries.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional nationwide survey in 2011 of availability and consumer prices of 60 essential medicines in Haiti using a standardized methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International. The survey was conducted in 163 medicine outlets in four health care sectors (public, retail, nonprofit and mixed sectors). Medicine prices were expressed as ratios relative to the International Reference Price. Affordability was calculated by comparing the costs of treatment for common conditions with the salary of the lowest paid government worker and was compared to available data from four Latin American countries.ResultsFor generic medicines, the availability in public, retail, nonprofit and mixed sectors was 20%, 37%, 24% and 23% of medications, respectively. Most of the available medicines were priced higher than the International Reference Price. The lowest paid government worker would need 2.5 days' wages to treat an adult respiratory infection with generic medicines from the public sector. For treatment of common conditions with originator brands (OB) purchased from a retail pharmacy, costs were between 1.4 (anaerobic bacterial infection) and 13.7 (hyperlipidemia) days' wages, respectively. Treatment of pediatric bacterial infections with the OB of ceftriaxone from a retail pharmacy would cost 24.6 days' wages. Prices in Bolivia, Colombia, Mexico and Nicaragua were frequently lower for comparable medications.ConclusionsThe availability of essential medicines was low and prices varied widely across all four sectors. Over 75% of Haitians live on less than US$ 2.00 /day; therefore, most medication regimens are largely unaffordable. Inclusion of essential medications on the national formulary and working with organizations responsible for importing medications into Haiti, particularly drug donation agencies, are important first steps to increasing medication access.

Project description:BackgroundFree access to essential medicines is a fundamental right. Governments should provide accessible and affordable medicines to people. The purpose of this study was to evaluate medicines' prices, availability and affordability in Jordan.MethodData was collected from 30 public sectors and 30 private sectors in 6 regions in Jordan. At each institution, the availability and prices data of 50 originator brand (OB) medicines and lowest-price generic (LPG) equivalent medicines were collected. Medicines' prices were compared with international reference prices (IRPs) to obtain a median price ratio (MPR). Availability of medicines was determined on the day of data collection. Affordability was calculated with regards to the daily income of the lowest-paid unskilled government employee.ResultAvailability of medicines in public and private sectors was 72% and 76% for LPGs, respectively. Median MPRs of procurement prices for OBs and LPGs in the public sector were 1.1 and 5.5 times the IRPs, respectively. Private sector OB medicines were priced 4.8 times higher than IRPs, whereas LPGs were 3.8 times higher. OBs cost 14% more than LPGs in private sector. The median MPRs of patient prices for LPGs in the public sector were lower than in the private sector (1.1 versus 7.6). Generally, medicines' prices are affordable in public sector that the lowest paid unskilled government employee need less than a 1 day income to purchase the LPGs. While in private sector, the medicine prices are not affordable. For example, the treatment of hypertension either by LPGs or OBs needs more than 1 day income by lowest paid unskilled government employee.ConclusionThis study showed good availability of LPGs in the public sector. In private sector, it showed good availability of LPGs and OBs with higher patient prices. The procurement prices in the public sector were reasonable in comparison to IRPs. Policy evaluation efforts must be directed to cut medicines prices and to improve affordability in private sector.

Project description:IntroductionThe Malawian government recently introduced cost-covering consultation fees for self-referral patients in tertiary public hospitals. Previously, patients received medicines free of charge in government-owned health facilities, but must pay elsewhere. Before the government implements a payment policy in other areas of health care, it is important to investigate the prices, affordability and availability of essential medicines in Malawi.MethodsData on availability and prices of 50 essential medicines were collected in 44 health facilities in two major cities and two districts. These included 12 public facilities, 11 facilities of the Christian Health Association of Malawi (CHAM), nine retail pharmacies, eight wholesalers and four private clinics/hospitals. Price, availability and affordability were assessed based on the methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International, which compares local prices to international reference prices.Results and discussionThe overall availability of medicines was 48.5% in public facilities, 71.1% in retail pharmacies, 62.9% in CHAM facilities and 57.5% in private clinics. The availability of essential medicines varied from 0% for ethosuximide to 100% for amoxicillin and cotrimoxazole tablets. Antibiotic formulations for adults were widely available, in contrast to the low availability of pediatric formulations. Several medicines for non-communicable diseases like sodium valproate, phenytoin, paraldehyde, captopril and simvastatin showed poor availability and affordability. The overall median price ratio compared to the international reference price was 1.11 for wholesalers, 2.54 in CHAM facilities, 2.70 in retail pharmacies, and 4.01 in private clinics, which is low compared to other countries. But nevertheless, for 18 out of 32 medicines assessed, the cost of one course exceeded the statutory minimum daily wage, making them unaffordable to a majority of the population. Therefore, continued provision of free public health care is still of critical importance for the foreseeable future until other financing mechanisms have been explored.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To measure the prices and availability of selected medicines in Shaanxi Province after the implementation of new healthcare reform in 2009. METHODS:Data on the prices and availability of 47 medicines were collected from 50 public and 36 private sector medicine outlets in six regions of Shaanxi Province, Western China using a standardized methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International from September to October 2010. Medicine prices were compared with international reference prices to obtain a median price ratio. Affordability was measured as the number of days' wages required for the lowest-paid unskilled government worker to purchase standard treatments for common conditions. FINDINGS:The mean availabilities of originator brands and lowest-priced generics were 8.9% and 26.5% in the public sector, and 18.1% and 43.6% in the private sector, respectively. The public sector procured generics and originator brands at median price ratios of 0.75 and 8.49, respectively, while patients paid 0.97 and 10.16. Final patient prices for lowest-priced generics and originator brands in the private sector were about 1.53 and 8.36 times their international retail prices, respectively. Public sector vendors applied high markups of 30.4% to generics, and 19.6% to originator brands. In the private sector, originator brands cost 390.7% more, on average, than their generic equivalents. Generic medicines were priced 17.3% higher in the private sector than the public sector. The lowest-paid government worker would need 0.1 day's wages to purchase captopril for lowest-priced generics from private sector, while 6.6 days' wages for losartan. For originator brands, the costs rise to 1.2 days' wages for salbutamol inhaler and 15.6 days' wages for omeprazole. CONCLUSIONS:The prices, availability and affordability of medicines in China should be improved to ensure equitable access to basic medical treatments, especially for the poor. This requires multi-faceted interventions, as well as the review and refocusing of policies, regulations and educational interventions.