IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/econpa/v43y2024i2p112-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Therapeutic Substitution in Response to Patent Expiry? Statins in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Bates
  • Susan J. Méndez

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the effects of generic entry on the market share of different statins. We use administrative records from a representative sample of Australians between 2003 and 2014 and analyse over 21 million prescriptions to quantify the change in the total market share of each statin after experiencing generic entry for the first time. With detailed information on patients' benefits and prices, we also estimate potential savings from increasing the use of statins where generics became available. Our results indicate that despite the price decrease, the market share of the molecule experiencing generic entry does not significantly increase, and there is some evidence of substitution away from statins with generic availability. For the most commonly used molecules, this association is stronger in patients receiving higher government subsidies. We calculate potential savings of A\$17 million if patients had initiated treatment with the most prescribed off‐patent statin rather than a patent‐protected statin. Generic entry after patent expiry presents an opportunity for a significant reduction in pharmaceutical expenditure if these are preferred. This study highlights the importance of improving prescription systems that help doctors recommend lower cost, clinically appropriate alternatives and enhance the effectiveness of policies promoting generic substitution.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Bates & Susan J. Méndez, 2024. "Therapeutic Substitution in Response to Patent Expiry? Statins in Australia," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 43(2), pages 112-123, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:econpa:v:43:y:2024:i:2:p:112-123
    DOI: 10.1111/1759-3441.12407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-3441.12407
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1759-3441.12407?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. Darius Lakdawalla & Tomas Philipson, 2012. "Does Intellectual Property Restrict Output? An Analysis of Pharmaceutical Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(1), pages 151-187.
    2. Mariana Carrera & Dana P. Goldman & Geoffrey Joyce & Neeraj Sood, 2018. "Do Physicians Respond to the Costs and Cost-Sensitivity of Their Patients?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 113-152, February.
    3. Sotiris Vandoros, 2014. "Therapeutic Substitution Post‐Patent Expiry: The Cases Of Ace Inhibitors And Proton Pump Inhibitors," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(5), pages 621-630, May.
    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. Castanheira, Micael & Ornaghi, Carmine & Siotis, Georges, 2019. "The unexpected consequences of generic entry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    2. Takizawa, Osamu & Urushihara, Hisashi & Tanaka, Shiro & Kawakami, Koji, 2015. "Price difference as a predictor of the selection between brand name and generic statins in Japan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(5), pages 612-619.
    3. Serra-Sastre, Victoria & Bianchi, Simona & Mestre-Ferrandiz, Jorge & O’Neill, Phill, 2021. "Does NICE influence the adoption and uptake of generics in the UK?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113639, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Ben van Hout & Jolian McHardy & Aki Tsuchiya, 2015. "Patent Purchase as a Policy for Pharmaceuticals," Working Papers 2015007, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
    5. Wu, Bingxiao, 2019. "Physician agency in China: Evidence from a drug-percentage incentive scheme," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 72-89.
    6. 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.
    7. Mariana Carrera & Sofia Villas-Boas, 2023. "Generic Aversion and Observational Learning in the Over-the-Counter Drug Market," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 380-410, July.
    8. Brekke, Kurt R. & Dalen, Dag Morten & Straume, Odd Rune, 2022. "Paying for pharmaceuticals: uniform pricing versus two-part tariffs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    9. Gentilini, Arianna & Miraldo, Marisa, 2023. "The role of patient organisations in research and development: Evidence from rare diseases," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 338(C).
    10. Suppliet, Moritz, 2020. "Umbrella branding in pharmaceutical markets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    11. Huh, Jason & Reif, Julian, 2017. "Did Medicare Part D reduce mortality?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 17-37.
    12. Christian Posso & Jorge Tamayo & Arlen Guarin & Estefania Saravia, 2024. "Luck of the Draw: The Causal Effect of Physicians on Birth Outcomes," Borradores de Economia 1269, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    13. Daniel J. Hemel & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, 2023. "The Generic Drug Trilemma," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(1), pages 41-77.
    14. Georges Siotis & Carmine Ornaghi & Micael Castanheira, 2023. "Evolving market boundaries and competition policy enforcement in the pharmaceutical industry," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 313-348, April.
    15. Katharina Elisabeth Fischer & Tom Stargardt, 2016. "The diffusion of generics after patent expiry in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(8), pages 1027-1040, November.
    16. Rabideau, Brendan & Eisenberg, Matthew D. & Reid, Rachel & Sood, Neeraj, 2021. "Effects of employer-offered high-deductible plans on low-value spending in the privately insured population," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    17. Magno, Cielo & Guzman, Ricardo Rafael S., 2019. "Drug price sensitivity among physicians in a developing healthcare system: Evidence from the Philippine market for statins and beta blockers," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 268-279.
    18. Eric Helland & Seth A. Seabury, 2016. "Are Settlements in Patent Litigation Collusive? Evidence from Paragraph IV Challenges," NBER Working Papers 22194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Fiorentini, Gianluca & Bruni, Matteo Lippi & Mammi, Irene, 2022. "The same old medicine but cheaper: The impact of patent expiry on physicians’ prescribing behaviour," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 37-68.
    20. Ghosh, Ausmita & Simon, Kosali & Sommers, Benjamin D., 2019. "The Effect of Health Insurance on Prescription Drug Use Among Low-Income Adults:Evidence from Recent Medicaid Expansions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 64-80.

    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:bla:econpa:v:43:y:2024:i:2:p:112-123. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esausea.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.