Cost-benefit analysis of the FDA: The case of the prescription drug user fee acts

被引:18
|
作者
Philipson, Tomas [1 ,2 ]
Berndt, Ernst R. [3 ]
Gottschalk, Adrian H. B. [4 ]
Sun, Eric [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Irving B Harris Sch Publ Policy Studies, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[2] Milken Inst, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA
[3] MIT, Sloan Sch Management, Cambridge, MA 02142 USA
[4] BiogenIdec, San Diego, CA 92122 USA
[5] RAND Corp, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA
关键词
FDA; regulation; prescription drugs; safety;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.09.010
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is estimated to regulate markets accounting for about 20% of consumer spending in the U.S. Despite the FDA's 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 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 U.S. 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 changes in 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 $7 to $11 billion. Depending on assumptions about the market power of producers during patent protection, we find that PDUFA raised consumer welfare between $7 and $20 billion; thus the combined social surplus was raised by $14 to $31 billion. 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 140,000 to 310,000 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we estimate an upper bound on the adverse effects of PDUFA based on drugs submitted during PDUFA I/II and subsequently withdrawn for safety reasons, and find that an extreme upper bound of about 56,000 life years were lost. This estimate is an extreme upper bound as it assumes all withdrawals since the inception of PDUFA were due to PDUFA and that there were no patients who benefitted from the withdrawn drugs. 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 of the agency. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1306 / 1325
页数:20
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [31] Which strategy for implementing cost-benefit analysis of system infrastructures and market design in the European power systems?
    Nekrasov, Andre
    Pierre, Jasmina
    2019 16TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE EUROPEAN ENERGY MARKET (EEM), 2019,
  • [32] Cost-benefit analysis of tranexamic acid and blood transfusion in elective lumbar spine surgery for degenerative pathologies
    Ehresman, Jeff
    Pennington, Zach
    Schilling, Andrew
    Medikonda, Ravi
    Huq, Sakibul
    Merkel, Kevin R.
    Ahmed, A. Karim
    Cottrill, Ethan
    Lubelski, Daniel
    Westbroek, Erick M.
    Farrokh, Salia
    Frank, Steven M.
    Sciubba, Daniel M.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2020, 33 (02) : 177 - 185
  • [33] Cost-Benefit Analysis of Indirect Antiglobulin Screening in Rh(D)-Negative Women at 28 Weeks of Gestation
    Abbey, Rebecca
    Dunsmoor-Su, Rebecca
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2014, 123 (05): : 938 - 945
  • [34] FDA’s Benefit–Risk Framework for Human Drugs and Biologics: Role in Benefit–Risk Assessment and Analysis of Use for Drug Approvals
    Leila Lackey
    Graham Thompson
    Sara Eggers
    Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 2021, 55 : 170 - 179
  • [35] Percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent: Systematic review and cost-benefit analysis
    Poder, Thomas G.
    Erraji, Jihane
    Coulibaly, Lucien P.
    Koffi, Kouame
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (05):
  • [36] Cost-Benefit and Cost-Utility Analysis of Amphotericin B Supplementation of Corneal Storage Media With Endothelial Keratoplasty-Prepared Tissue
    Chiang, Trent Tsun-Kang
    Shtein, Roni M.
    McCoy, Kristen
    Hurlbert, Susan
    Grossman, Gregory H.
    CORNEA, 2020, 39 (04) : 422 - 430
  • [37] Efficiency of a Neurosurgical Operating Room According to Nursing Characteristics in a University Hospital: From Operating Times to a Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Bartoli, Andrea
    Pinget, Christophe
    OPERATIVE NEUROSURGERY, 2024, 27 (04) : 407 - 414
  • [38] FDA's Benefit-Risk Framework for Human Drugs and Biologics: Role in Benefit-Risk Assessment and Analysis of Use for Drug Approvals
    Lackey, Leila
    Thompson, Graham
    Eggers, Sara
    THERAPEUTIC INNOVATION & REGULATORY SCIENCE, 2021, 55 (01) : 170 - 179
  • [39] Preliminary outcomes and cost-benefit analysis of a community hospital emergency department screening and referral program for patients aged 75 or more
    Warburton, Rebecca N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE QUALITY ASSURANCE, 2005, 18 (06) : 474 - +
  • [40] Social cost-benefit assessment as a post-optimal analysis for hydrogen supply chain design and deployment: Application to Occitania (France)
    Robles, Jesus Ochoa
    Azzaro-Pantel, Catherine
    Garcia, Guillem Martinez
    Lasserre, Alberto Aguilar
    SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION, 2020, 24 : 105 - 120