US physicians are "resistant" to the benefits of generic prescription medicines according to the New York Times. This view was expressed in a review of health professionals' reaction to a study which had indicated that "a generic drug costing only pennies a day lowered high blood pressure more effectively than did newer, far costlier drugs."
The NY Times noted that the findings were challenged by a combination of "pharmaceutical companies [initiating] heavy marketing campaigns and [paying] doctors to tout their costlier products," evidence that new agents not included in the comparative study rendered its conclusions dated and "some specialists found fault with the design or interpretation of the study." To cap it all, another research paper from a smaller Australian trial produced a different conclusion.
The case "sounds a caution" to US reformers who wish to deploy comparative effectiveness trials to determine the cost effectiveness of new medicines, the NY Times concludes. It also warns that with most medical journal editorials' coverage of the case indicates a degree of skepticism about the degree to which a copy drug can automatically be substituted for a branded version.
This article is accessible to registered users, to continue reading please register for free. A free trial will give you access to exclusive features, interviews, round-ups and commentary from the sharpest minds in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology space for a week. If you are already a registered user please login. If your trial has come to an end, you can subscribe here.
Login to your accountTry before you buy
7 day trial access
Become a subscriber
Or £77 per month
The Pharma Letter is an extremely useful and valuable Life Sciences service that brings together a daily update on performance people and products. It’s part of the key information for keeping me informed
Chairman, Sanofi Aventis UK
| Headless Content Management with Blaze