IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i5p2857-d761733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Drug Lag and Associated Factors for Approved Drugs in Korea Compared with the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Inhye Cho

    (Department of Pharmaceutical Medicine and Regulatory Sciences, Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Medicine and Pharmacy, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea)

  • Euna Han

    (Department of Pharmacy, Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Yonsei University, Incheon 21983, Korea)

Abstract

(1) Background: Drug lag, the delay between the first global regulatory approval and approval by the national health authorities in other countries, impacts the accessibility of drugs. Although the Korean pharmaceutical market has grown significantly, most of its innovative drugs for public health depend on imports from foreign pharmaceutical markets. (2) Methods: We extracted data from the official websites of the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and the US Food and Drug Administration. Information on new molecule entity drugs, approved as imported drugs by MFDS from 2000 to 2019, was extracted. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models on drug approval were estimated. (3) Results: In total, 424 drugs were analyzed. Orphan drugs designated by MFDS were less likely to receive approval (HR = 0.731, 95% CI: 0.572–0.934). The drugs with Korean MAHs were less likely to obtain drug approval than those with MAHs of subsidiaries of multinational pharmaceutical companies (HR = 0.524, 95% CI: 0.371–0.738). In the analyses for non-orphan drugs ( n = 37), oncology drugs that need local clinical study (HR = 0.247, 95% CI: 0.093–0.657) and drugs that need more patients in a local clinical study (HR = 0.993, 95% CI: 0.988–0.999) were less likely to receive approval, with longer drug lag. The higher number of clinical studies in Korea was associated with a shorter drug lag (HR = 2.133, 95% CI: 1.196–3.805). (4) Conclusions: Our findings imply that Korean pharmaceutical companies should augment their research capabilities for new drug development. Furthermore, consideration of orphan drugs used in rare diseases is needed for drug approval to ensure the availability of these drugs in the market without approval delays.

Suggested Citation

  • Inhye Cho & Euna Han, 2022. "Drug Lag and Associated Factors for Approved Drugs in Korea Compared with the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:5:p:2857-:d:761733
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/2857/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/2857/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scherer, F.M., 2000. "The pharmaceutical industry," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 25, pages 1297-1336, Elsevier.
    2. Keyhani, S. & Wang, S. & Hebert, P. & Carpenter, D. & Anderson, G., 2010. "US pharmaceutical innovation in an international context," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(6), pages 1075-1080.
    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. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    2. Fabian Gaessler & Stefan Wagner, 2022. "Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(3), pages 571-586, May.
    3. Antonio Cabrales, 2003. "Pharmaceutical generics, vertical product differentiation and public policy," Economics Working Papers 662, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    4. Yin, Nina, 2023. "Pharmaceuticals, incremental innovation and market exclusivity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. Brekke, Kurt R. & Holmas, Tor Helge & Straume, Odd Rune, 2011. "Reference pricing, competition, and pharmaceutical expenditures: Theory and evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 624-638.
    6. Pedro Pita Barros, 2011. "The simple economics of risk‐sharing agreements between the NHS and the pharmaceutical industry," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 461-470, April.
    7. Christine de Mazières & Valérie Paris, 2004. "La régulation de l’industrie pharmaceutique," Revue d'Économie Financière, Programme National Persée, vol. 76(3), pages 241-265.
    8. Bentur, Netta & Gross, Revital & Brammli-Greenberg, Shuli, 2004. "Satisfaction with and access to community care of the chronically ill in Israel's health system," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 129-136, February.
    9. Christian Garavaglia & Franco Malerba & Luigi Orsenigo & Michele Pezzoni, 2013. "Technological Regimes and Demand Structure in the Evolution of the Pharmaceutical Industry," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Esben Sloth Andersen (ed.), Long Term Economic Development, edition 127, pages 61-94, Springer.
    10. Antonio Cabrales & Sergi Jiménez‐Martín, 2013. "The Determinants Of Pricing In Pharmaceuticals: Are Us Prices Really So High?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(11), pages 1377-1397, November.
    11. Kyle, Margaret K. & Ridley, David B. & Zhang, Su, 2017. "Strategic interaction among governments in the provision of a global public good," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 185-199.
    12. Brekke, Kurt R. & Kuhn, Michael, 2006. "Direct to consumer advertising in pharmaceutical markets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 102-130, January.
    13. John Yfantopoulos, 2008. "Pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement reforms in Greece," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(1), pages 87-97, February.
    14. Ito, Yuki & Hara, Konan & Kobayashi, Yasuki, 2020. "The effect of inertia on brand-name versus generic drug choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 364-379.
    15. Kurt R. Brekke & Odd Rune Straume, 2008. "Pharmaceutical Patents: Incentives for R&D or Marketing?," CESifo Working Paper Series 2433, CESifo.
    16. Martin Gaynor & Kate Ho & Robert J. Town, 2015. "The Industrial Organization of Health-Care Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 235-284, June.
    17. Gloria Allione & Raffaello Bronzini & Claire Giordano, 2020. "Recent export developments in the pharmaceutical sector in Italy and in the Lazio region," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 566, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    18. Boone, Jan, 2013. "Does the market choose optimal health insurance coverage?," CEPR Discussion Papers 9420, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Desmet, Klaus & Kujal, Praveen & Lobo, Felix, 2004. "Implementing R&D policies: an analysis of Spain's pharmaceutical research program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1493-1507, December.
    20. David Cutler, 2006. "The Economics of Health System Payment," De Economist, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 1-18, March.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:5:p:2857-:d:761733. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.