IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cbscwp/199.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the Safety and Efficacy of the FDA: The Case of the Prescription Drug User Fee Acts

Author

Listed:
  • Philipson, Tomas J.
  • Berndt, Ernst R.
  • Gottschalk, Adrian H. B.
  • Strobeck, Matthew W.

Abstract

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is estimated to regulate markets accounting for about 20% of consumer spending in the US. Despite FDA's importance, and strict adherence to evidence-based evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the products it regulates, there exists no generally agreed upon evidence-based methodology to evaluate the agency's own safety and efficacy record. This paper proposes a general methodology to evaluate FDA policies, in general, and the central speed-safety tradeoff it faces, in particular. We apply this methodology to estimate the welfare effects of a major piece of legislation affecting this tradeoff, the Prescription Drug User Fee Acts (PDUFA). These Acts mandated FDA performance goals in reviewing and acting on drug applications within specified time periods, in return for levying fees on drug manufacturers' submissions. Our methodology uses data on the US sales of drugs as well as the FDA review and withdrawal times for those drugs to estimate measures of the private and social surplus associated with the agency in general, and the change of the speed-safety tradeoff induced by PDUFA, in particular. We find that PDUFA raised the private surplus of producers, and thus innovative returns, by about $11 to $13 billion. Dependent on the market power assumed of producers while having patent protection, we find that PDUFA raised consumer welfare between $5 to$19 billion; thus the combined social surplus was raised between $18 to $31 billions. Converting these economic gains into equivalent health benefits, we find that the more rapid access of drugs on the market enabled by PDUFA saved the equivalent of 180 to 310 thousand life-years. Additionally, we estimate an upper bound on the adverse effects of PDUFA based on drugs submitted during PDUFA I/II and subsequently withdrawn for safety reasons, and find that an extreme upper bound of about 56 thousand life-years were lost. This estimate is an extreme upper bound as it assumes all withdrawals since the inception PDUFA were due to PDUFA and that there were no patients benefiting from the drugs withdrawn. We discuss how our general methodology could be used to perform a quantitative and evidence-based evaluation of the desirability of other FDA policies in the future, particularly those affecting the speed-safety tradeoff.

Suggested Citation

  • Philipson, Tomas J. & Berndt, Ernst R. & Gottschalk, Adrian H. B. & Strobeck, Matthew W., 2005. "Assessing the Safety and Efficacy of the FDA: The Case of the Prescription Drug User Fee Acts," Working Papers 199, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cbscwp:199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel B. Klein, 2008. "Colleagues, Where Is the Market Failure? Economists on the FDA," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 5(3), pages 316-348, September.
    2. Allan Begosh & John Goldsmith & Ed Hass & Randall W. Lutter & Clark Nardinelli & John A. Vernon, 2006. "Black Box Warnings and Drug Safety: Examining the Determinants and Timing of FDA Warning Labels," NBER Working Papers 12803, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Vernon, John A. & Golec, Joseph H. & Lutter, Randall & Nardinelli, Clark, 2009. "An exploratory study of FDA new drug review times, prescription drug user fee acts, and R&D spending," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 1260-1274, November.
    4. Olson, Mary K., 2008. "The risk we bear: The effects of review speed and industry user fees on new drug safety," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 175-200, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • H0 - Public Economics - - General

    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:zbw:cbscwp:199. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsuchus.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.