In 2023, five of the ten drugs contributing most to increased U.S. medical spending had price hikes unsupported by new clinical evidence, leading to an additional $815 million in costs, according to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER).
Drugs Identified with Unsupported Price Increases:
- Biktarvy (Gilead Sciences): An HIV treatment that contributed significantly to the increased spending due to its price hike.
- Darzalex (Johnson & Johnson): A cancer drug with a 7.6% list price increase, adding approximately $190 million to U.S. spending.
- Entresto (Novartis): A heart medication included in the list of drugs with unsupported price increases.
- Cabometyx (Exelixis): A cancer therapy identified for its price hike without new supporting evidence.
- Xeljanz (Pfizer): A rheumatoid arthritis drug that also contributed to the additional costs.
ICER’s Vice President of Research, Foluso Agboola, noted that these price increases are “far above the rate of inflation for many of the costliest drugs.”
Drugs with Supported Price Increases:
Conversely, some drugs had price increases justified by new clinical evidence demonstrating additional benefits or reduced harm. For instance, Merck’s cancer treatment Keytruda had a 4.1% list price increase supported by clinical evidence.
Comparison to Previous Year:
In 2022, eight of the top ten high-expenditure drugs had substantial price increases, resulting in $1.27 billion in extra costs.
Methodology:
ICER’s analysis involved reviewing the top 250 drugs by 2023 sales revenue, assessing price increases relative to the medical consumer price index, and evaluating new clinical evidence to determine the justification for price hikes.
Industry Response:
The pharmaceutical industry has criticized ICER’s findings, arguing that the reports are “consistently flawed” and may lead to policies that limit patient access to necessary treatments.
In summary, ICER’s 2023 report highlights significant additional costs to the U.S. healthcare system due to unsupported drug price increases, underscoring the ongoing debate over pharmaceutical pricing practices and their justification.
