Currently Viewing:
The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Value Assessment Frameworks Should Represent a Spectrum of Patient Preferences
September 08, 2017
Dr Patricia Danzon: Learning From European Health Systems
August 30, 2017
Dr Ilene Hollin: One-Size-Fits-All to Value Doesn't Work
August 23, 2017
Dr Patricia Danzon Highlights European Examples of Restraining Drug Prices
August 16, 2017
Dr Ilene Hollin Outlines Differing Definitions of Value
August 09, 2017
Dr Patricia Danzon: Cost Effective Doesn't Mean Affordable
August 03, 2017
Dr Michael Sherman on Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Agreements
July 28, 2017
Dr David Cutler Assesses the Political Odds of Drug Pricing Reform
July 25, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson on Using Health Technology Assessment to Guide Decision Making
July 23, 2017
Currently Reading
Dr Gail Wilensky: Increased Competition a Better Drug Pricing Solution Than Cost Controls
July 16, 2017
Dr David Cutler: Trump Administration's Attention Not on Value-Based Purchasing
July 09, 2017
Dr Gail Wilensky on the Likelihood of Continuing Value-Based Reimbursement Demonstrations
July 06, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson: Patient Perspectives Guide ICER Value Framework Development
July 04, 2017
Dr Scott Ramsey Addresses the Need for Differential Pricing Structures for Drugs
July 02, 2017
Dr Gail Wilensky Raises Questions About Medicaid's Matching Grant Structure
June 25, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson Explains How ICER Price Benchmarks Align Cost With Patient Benefits
June 22, 2017
Dr David Cutler Discusses Opportunities for Bipartisan ACA Reform
June 20, 2017
Dr Scott Ramsey on Challenges of Determining Cost Effectiveness of Novel Cancer Treatments
June 19, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson's Outlook on the Ongoing Updates to ICER's Value Framework
June 18, 2017

Dr Gail Wilensky: Increased Competition a Better Drug Pricing Solution Than Cost Controls

Both political parties want to lower the price of drugs, but differ in how they think it should be done. Gail Wilensky, PhD, of Project HOPE, explained her opinion that spurring more competition would be a more successful approach than directly implementing price controls.


Both political parties want to lower the price of drugs, but differ in how they think it should be done. Gail Wilensky, PhD, of Project HOPE, explained her opinion that spurring more competition would be a more successful approach than directly implementing price controls.

Transcript (slightly modified)

Drug pricing is the one area that Republicans and Democrats seem to agree that something needs to be done. Do you believe there will be bipartisan legislation addressing drug costs? What might that look like?

It’s not obvious to me that the drug pricing, at the end of the day, will be any easier. Democrats usually mean at the end of the day they want to control directly price increases or pricing on drugs; most Republicans don’t. Even though it sometimes sounds like the White House might, the Republican congress isn’t likely to do so.

It may be possible to get legislation that has more transparency about drug pricing, that also provides more support for expedited review by the FDA, but we may need to wait to see how much the 21st Century Cures Act, which also attempts to do that, works and if there are other areas that are needed.

So, they are both interested in the issue of putting downward pricing on drugs. I like the strategies that make competition more likely to occur and therefore expedited review or other ways to try to up the competition. I’m one of the limited number of people who actually had an opportunity to see what it’s like to implement price controls in healthcare, running Medicare and Medicaid. I’m not impressed that we would do ourselves a favor if we introduce that into the drug pricing world.

 
Copyright AJMC 2006-2017 Clinical Care Targeted Communications Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
x
Welcome the the new and improved AJMC.com, the premier managed market network. Tell us about yourself so that we can serve you better.
Sign Up
×

Sign In

Not a member? Sign up now!