[Toxoplasmosis of poikilothermal vertebrates; unity or plurality of Toxoplasma species].

F. Coutelen,J. Biguet,Doby Jm,S. Deblock

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Escalating costs of innovative medicines: perspective and proposals

Antonio Vallano,Caridad Pontes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1449707

2024-09-24

Abstract:Public healthcare systems are challenged by the soaring costs of medications that require increasing resources, often at the expense of other investments. The increasing pharmaceutical budget poses a threat to the allocation of funds for essential preventive and primary healthcare services while also raising concerns about equitable access, particularly in models where patients bear part of the costs out of their own pockets. Proposals on how to ensure ongoing and long-term accessibility, efficiency, and financial stability are required. The escalating costs of medicines may be explained in part by the mismatch between the traditional value-based pricing and reimbursement frameworks and the type of clinical development of targeted therapies and precision medicine in clinical practice. New appraisal methods and managed access strategies should be adapted to therapies targeting small populations and addressing increased uncertainty. Fair pricing strategies, transparent healthcare investments based on problems and outcomes, regulatory reforms, international cooperation, and critically examining the drug acquisition model are potential solutions. Transitioning from an industry-driven pricing approach to a health-driven payment model can help align the cost of treatments with actual health outcomes, establishing a foundation for a healthcare system that addresses immediate challenges and fosters long-term well-being. Acknowledging the lack of a universally applicable solution, the practical implementation of interventions requires a reframing of the pricing and access system and adaption to the targeted therapeutic approaches. Balancing innovation with financial sustainability necessitates a collaborative, adaptive, and transparent approach, as well as transitioning toward health-driven payment models, moving the focus from the cost of medications to the well-being of populations worldwide.
Drug pricing models, no 'one-size-fits-all' approach: a systematic review and critical evaluation of pricing models in an evolving pharmaceutical landscape

Evert A. Manders,Sibren van den Berg,Saco J. de Visser,Carla E. M. Hollak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-024-01731-w

2024-11-05

The European Journal of Health Economics

Abstract:Access to new medicines is crucial for patients but increasingly sparks discussion due to high prices. Simultaneously, the growing emphasis on specialized products and uncertainty surrounding the long-term effectiveness of new drug classes brought to the market underscore the need for innovative pricing approaches. A systematic literature review of pharmaceutical pricing models, accompanied by a critical appraisal, was conducted to offer insights contributing to novel approaches balancing sustainable pharmaceutical innovation with affordability and accessibility for patients. Six different pricing models are identified: value based pricing, basic cost-based pricing, and four more comprehensive pricing models incorporating numerous elements: the cancer-drug-pricing model, AIM model, (Nuijtens) discounted cash flow, and the real-option rate of return method. Although there are many similarities among the models, each has unique assumptions for implementation. For instance, all models except for the standard incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and basic cost-based pricing consider the number of eligible patients and the remaining patent period. Only the AIM model and the Nuijtens discounted cash flow model use lump sums. Both the latter and the real-option rate of return method explicitly include the cost of capital as a major cost-based component. Recognizing the diverse applications of each model highlights the need for more differential and dynamic pricing tailored to the characteristics and therapeutic areas of each drug. Additionally, the study underscores the importance of cost transparency in achieving this goal. Consequently, these findings can help stakeholders develop sustainable and affordable drug pricing mechanisms that address the complexities of the ever-changing pharmaceutical landscape.

health policy & services,economics
The increasing costs of medicines and their implications for patients, physicians and the health system

Narcyz Ghinea

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.16370

2024-04-06

Internal Medicine Journal

Abstract:Most new medicines entering the market are high‐cost speciality drugs. These drugs can cost tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per course of treatment and in some cases millions of dollars per dose. Approximately half of all spending on medicines is projected to target only 2–3% of patients, raising important questions about resource allocation. While there is no doubt that breakthrough innovations have transformed clinical care in some disciplines, it is also true that cost is becoming one of the primary barriers to treatment access and that many new medicines do not provide value commensurate with their prices. This article examines pricing trends, the reasons for high prices and their implications for access and clinical practice.

medicine, general & internal
Question-based drug development and the value of novel treatments

Saco J de Visser,Adam F Cohen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2422459

2024-10-29

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research

Abstract:KEYWORDS: High drug pricing is an important issue at the intersection of healthcare, economics, and ethics. The increasing cost of pharmaceuticals, advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), and more personalized treatment options jeopardizes the accessibility and affordability of interventions that are sometimes lifesaving globally. Increased drug pricing is increasingly leading to unaffordable treatments even in affluent societies. The prospect for the near future, with treatment prices per patient soaring and negative reimbursement decisions solely based on failed pricing negotiations is negative. This polarizes the discussion between different stakeholders including patients, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies, patient advocacy groups, payers (insurers and governments), (bio)ethicists, shareholders, academia, and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and international bodies. Unfortunately, these discussions are often emotional. We discuss a method to rationalize the debate by explicitly incorporating uncertainties in value estimations throughout the drugs lifecycle.

pharmacology & pharmacy,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Why are our medicines so expensive? Spoiler: Not for the reasons you are being told...

Els Torreele

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2024.2308006

2024-02-02

European Journal of General Practice

Abstract:Often described as a natural economic trend, the prices that pharmaceutical companies charge for new medicines have skyrocketed in recent years. Companies claim these prices are justified because of the 'value' new treatments represent or that they reflect the high costs and risks associated with the research and development process. They also claim that the revenues generated through these high prices are required to pay for continued innovation. This paper argues that high prices are not inevitable but the result of a societal and political choice to rely on a for-profit business model for medical innovation, selling medicines at the highest price possible. Instead of focusing on therapeutic advances, it prioritises profit maximisation to benefit shareholders and investors over improving people's health outcomes or equitable access. As a result, people and health systems worldwide struggle to pay for the increasingly expensive health products, with growing inequities in access to even life-saving medicines while the biopharmaceutical industry and its financiers are the most lucrative business sectors. As the extreme COVID-19 vaccine inequities once again highlighted, we urgently need to reform the social contract between governments, the biopharmaceutical industry, and the public and restore its original health purpose. Policymakers must redesign policies and financing of the pharmaceutical research and development ecosystem such that public and private sectors work together towards the shared objective of responding to public health and patients' needs, rather than maximising financial return because medicines should not be a luxury.

medicine, general & internal,primary health care
Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices

David J. Stewart,John-Peter Bradford,Sandeep Sehdev,Tim Ramsay,Vishal Navani,Nigel S. B. Rawson,Di Maria Jiang,Joanna Gotfrit,Paul Wheatley-Price,Geoffrey Liu,Alan Kaplan,Silvana Spadafora,Shaun G. Goodman,Rebecca A. C. Auer,Gerald Batist

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31050184

2024-04-29

Current Oncology

Abstract:Countries face challenges in paying for new drugs. High prices are driven in part by exploding drug development costs, which, in turn, are driven by essential but excessive regulation. Burdensome regulation also delays drug development, and this can translate into thousands of life-years lost. We need system-wide reform that will enable less expensive, faster drug development. The speed with which COVID-19 vaccines and AIDS therapies were developed indicates this is possible if governments prioritize it. Countries also differ in how they value drugs, and generally, those willing to pay more have better, faster access. Canada is used as an example to illustrate how "incremental cost-effectiveness ratios" (ICERs) based on measures such as gains in "quality-adjusted life-years" (QALYs) may be used to determine a drug's value but are often problematic, imprecise assessments. Generally, ICER/QALY estimates inadequately consider the impact of patient crossover or long post-progression survival, therapy benefits in distinct subpopulations, positive impacts of the therapy on other healthcare or societal costs, how much governments willingly might pay for other things, etc. Furthermore, a QALY value should be higher for a lethal or uncommon disease than for a common, nonlethal disease. Compared to international comparators, Canada is particularly ineffective in initiating public funding for essential new medications. Addressing these disparities demands urgent reform.

oncology
Pricing, profits and pharmacoeconomics--for whose benefit?

J R Adams,S Ali,C L Bennett

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1517/14656566.2.3.377

Abstract:In today's troubled healthcare climate, it is not uncommon to run across headlines like: 'Health insurance premiums increasing by 10 percent to 30 percent across the country.' This particular New York Times article went on to explain that this premium price hike, the third consecutive double digit increase in 3 years, is driven largely by escalating pharmaceutical costs. The pharmaceutical industry has largely been vilified in the media and in the recent presidential debates, for fueling healthcare inflation and setting what many perceive to be 'unfair' prices in light of the profit margins on their life-saving products. A report released by the Congressional Research Service found that after tax, profits for the pharmaceutical industry averaged 17% of sales, compared with 5% for all other industries. The White House has added its voice to the popular discontent with notices such as this one reported in the New York Times: 'There is a rising tide politically in this country of strong antagonism against the pharmaceutical industry on the dimension of prices. (Without expanded access to insurance) price controls are an inevitable outcome.' Although the prospect of price control remains dubious in America's entrenched laissez-faire economy, David Kessler, former head of the FDA and the Dean of the Yale School of Medicine, described the situation as a 'powder keg,' stating 'the current system is simply not sustainable'. Although there does not appear to be an immediate solution to this escalating crisis, this editorial will examine pharmaceutical pricing, industry profits and the role of pharmacoeconomic analyses amidst the chaos.
Prices of new medicines: International analysis and policy options

Sabine Vogler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2022.09.009

Abstract:Equitable and sustainable access to medicines is a global challenge, including for high-income countries. Over the last two decades, launch prices of new medicines have considerably increased, making some medicines unaffordable for many countries. This article is based on a presentation held by the author at the IQWiG Autumn Symposium in November 2021. The medicine price situation in European countries and beyond is presented informed by international evidence. Medicine prices vary across countries, and for some therapeutic groups (e.g., cancer drugs) medicines are largely unaffordable and/or unsustainable for most countries. Selected policy options to improve affordability, which are commonly applied and considered as potential solutions, are discussed. The article stresses the importance of price regulation, and of transparency of prices and further components across the pharmaceutical value chain. Many governments opted for concluding managed-entry agreements (e.g., pay-for-performance) with confidential discounts to make new medicines with high price tags affordable and/or to manage uncertainty about their performance. However, this policy is linked to limitations, particularly due to its secrecy of discounts. Patent expiry of biological medicines can contribute to affordable access; however, it is important to strategically exploit the biosimilar potential by implementing a mix of appropriate policies to foster competition and enhance the uptake of biosimilar medicines.
Upstream solutions for price-gouging on critical generic medicines

Adam R Houston,Reed F Beall,Amir Attaran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40545-016-0064-8

2016-05-02

Abstract:Exorbitant price increases for critical off-patent medicines have received considerable media attention in recent months, leading to an investigation by the U.S. Senate. However, much of this attention has focused upon the companies that initiated the price increases, all of whom had recently acquired the drugs in question. Overlooked are upstream interventions with the originators of these drugs to prevent generics trolling in the first place. Using the particular example of Eli Lilly and Company's efforts to divest itself of cycloserine, a flawed process that paved the way for the recent price hike by Rodelis Therapeutics, this article highlights the responsibilities of drug originators, and safeguards to ensure similar rights transfers do not affect ongoing affordable access.
Pharmaceutical pricing in Europe: time to take the right direction

Livio Garattini,Bruno Finazzi,Pier Mannuccio Mannucci

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-022-02960-8

Abstract:A price stems from the intersection between supply and demand curves in any common market. However, there are special markets where consumers do not pay for goods directly, and prescription drugs are a well-known example in healthcare. Drugs are mainly funded by public expenditure in well-established welfare systems like those of the Western European countries. However, the present era of austerity in public funding has made financial resources scarce in most European nations. Currently, the leading tendency for pharmaceutical pricing in Europe is direct negotiation with pharma companies. However, these negotiations are administratively burdensome, with costs not necessarily offsetting savings. Moreover, since any trade negotiation implies some degree of confidentiality to be effective these strategies are scantily transparent. When prices are set for many products through unavoidably arbitrary decisions, the final consequence is an irrational allocation of financial resources. Here, we raise a proposal to restore a reasonable balance between public equity objectives of health authorities and private profit incentives of the pharma industry in Europe, switching from pricing to budgeting. The underlying rationale of our proposal is to stop setting arbitrary prices in a context of market failure.
Strategies to Help Patients Navigate High Prescription Drug Costs

Hussain S Lalani,Catherine S Hwang,Aaron S Kesselheim,Benjamin N Rome

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.17275

IF: 11.816

2024-10-21

JAMA

Abstract:Importance: In the US, many patients struggle to afford prescription drugs, leading to adverse health outcomes. To improve cost-related medication nonadherence, prescribers and clinical staff must understand how to assist patients in overcoming high prescription drug costs. Observations: We reviewed the benefits and limitations of 7 strategies to help patients afford prescription drugs: co-payment cards, patient assistance programs, pharmacy coupons, direct-to-consumer pharmacies, public assistance programs, international online pharmacies, and real-time prescription benefit tools. We created an algorithm to help clinicians identify appropriate strategies based on a patient's health insurance and the type of drug (brand-name vs generic). For example, co-payment cards can lower out-of-pocket costs for privately insured patients taking brand-name prescription drugs. For uninsured individuals or those with public insurance like Medicare Part D who meet financial eligibility criteria, patient assistance or public assistance programs may be available. All patients, regardless of health insurance, can forgo insurance and purchase drugs directly using pharmacy coupons or direct-to-consumer pharmacies, which sometimes offer lower prices for generic drugs compared to insurance. For insured patients, such purchases do not count toward insurance deductibles or annual out-of-pocket maximums. Online international pharmacies provide a last resort for patients in need of brand-name drugs who lack affordable domestic options. Increasingly, prescribers can use real-time prescription drug benefit tools to estimate patient out-of-pocket costs and identify alternative lower-cost treatments for insured patients, but these tools can be inaccurate or incomplete. Conclusions and relevance: The current patchwork of strategies to help patients manage high prescription drug costs highlights the structural and policy challenges within the US prescription drug market that impede affordable access for some patients. While these strategies provide tangible solutions for clinicians to help patients access medically appropriate but costly medications, they do not address the root causes of high drug prices.
Value-Based Pricing for Patent-Protected Medicines Over the Product Life Cycle: Pricing Anomalies in the "Age of Cures" and Their Implications for Dynamic Efficiency

Louis P Garrison Jr,Boshen Jiao,Omar Dabbous

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.09.010

Abstract:Objectives: Conventional cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) for the value-based pricing of new medicines largely ignores the implications of limited market exclusivity (ie, patent-protection periods plus any exclusivity granted by regulators). This paper explores the implications of this methodological shortcoming, which produces several pricing anomalies with potentially unintended effects on research and development (R&D) incentives. Methods: We illustrate these implications by comparing 4 stylized examples of increasing complexity, from short-term cures for acute conditions to long-term cures for rare, health-catastrophic conditions. Results: (1) Conventional-CEA will project a different result than an adjusted CEA that considers generic or biosimilar entry; (2) free and flexible pricing of long-term treatments (eg, statins for hypercholesterolemia) or repeated-dose cures (eg, insulin for type 1 diabetes) for chronic conditions will likely result in predictable price increases at the end of the exclusivity period that may be perceived as unjustified or unsupported; and (3) one-time administration "cures" (eg, gene therapy for spinal muscular atrophy) have the potential to allocate a large share of the social surplus to the manufacturer over the product lifetime, which may or may not be dynamically efficient per se, but may also inadvertently disadvantage the development of valuable long-term treatments or repeated-dose cures for chronic conditions. Conclusions: We highlight the need for additional research on long-term solutions to these issues that would aim to promote dynamically efficient global R&D. More work is needed on the following: (1) relationships between social surplus allocation and the amount and composition of global R&D, as we may be as likely to be encouraging excessive R&D in some areas as to be undersupplying it in others; and (2) relating the size of the surplus reward to R&D cost and, thus, the return on investment.
Generic Drugs in the United States: Policies to Address Pricing and Competition

Ravi Gupta,Nilay D. Shah,Joseph S. Ross

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1314

2019-01-10

Abstract:The cost of prescription drugs in the United States continues to be a source of concern for patients, caregivers, and policymakers. Drug prices typically decline rapidly once generic drugs receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and enter the market, but the past decade has witnessed rising costs and shortages of generic drugs. We describe the strategies used by brand-name manufacturers to undermine generic competition and the reasons underlying the price increases of off-patent drugs, some of which continue to lack any competition from generic versions, and others that have increased in price despite having generic versions. We discuss the FDA's role in addressing drug prices and promoting competition, including recent agency policies to modify its process of reviewing generic drug applications and to prioritize applications for off-patent drugs with few competitors. We also examine proposed policy solutions and research areas that could help address the price increases of off-patent drugs.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Effects of innovation and insurance coverage on price elasticity of demand for prescription drugs: some empirical lessons in pharmacoeconomics

Roger Lee Mendoza

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2020.1772797

Abstract:Aim: Prescription drug prices in the United States are considered rather extreme. Americans spend over $460 billion on drugs annually, or almost 17 percent of total national healthcare spending. How innovation incentives and insurance coverage drive pricing, diffusion, and utilization of drugs, under conditions of risk and competition, are multi-dimensional issues in medical economics that remain under-explored in the current empirical literature. We seek to address these issues in reviewing relevant studies presented at the 2020 AEA-ASSA annual convention. Approach: Drawn from the 2020 convention panel sessions devoted to health economics, empirical evidence was thematically analyzed for charted new research terrains and trajectories. Their theoretical and practical implications on efficiency, effectiveness, and value in drug production and consumption were then identified. Findings: With certain qualifications, evidence confirms price inelasticity of prescription drugs and medical treatments, along with substitution effects from high or continuously rising prices. While health insurance induces ex ante moral hazard, albeit on a larger scale than previously considered, losing dependent coverage can incentivize price-substitution to risky and illegal drugs, including those sold on the black market. At the firm level, drug patenting and exclusivity rights suggest that innovation incentives increase new or novel clinical trials and generic utilization to a considerable extent. But innovation can produce strong, offsetting effects. It can distort competition and cause (at times sharp) price increases from product-hopping, (compensatory) list pricing, industry mergers and acquisitions, and capture of positive spillovers by competitors, rather than by focal developers, in follow-on innovations. In fine, there remains room for opportunism among firms, particularly market incumbents, and many loopholes are unplugged by U.S. healthcare reform. These make drug utilization costly to the insured, and risky to those who are - or become - uninsured or underinsured for various reasons. Conclusions: The fundamental disconnect between innovation cost and drug pricing demands public attention and policy intervention, which have proved largely elusive to date. Gaming the system in the name of scientific invention and discovery to reap additional benefits, at the expense of consumer health and income, brings to question the offsetting benefits of firm innovation. It also raises separate issues of fairness and equity. Innovation needs to be considered from the perspective of value lines and beyond conventional marketing incentives to drug utilization, with or without insurance coverage. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses figure prominently under a value-based system of resource allocation, insurance, medical prescription, purchasing, and reimbursement.
Cheaper is not always better: Drug shortages in the United States and a value-based solution to alleviate them

Inmaculada Hernandez,Sean D Sullivan,Ryan N Hansen,A Mark Fendrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2024.30.7.719

Abstract:Drug shortages threaten patients' access to medications and are associated with adverse health outcomes and increased costs. Drug shortages disproportionately occur among generic drugs of limited profitability, most notably drugs administered by injection. In this perspective, we discuss how reimbursement and purchasing practices that were meant to create an efficient marketplace for generics have generated strong price pressure that threatens profitability in certain markets. We further explain how, faced with limited profitability, manufacturers lack incentives to invest in resilient supply chains, and in some cases, engage in cost-containment strategies or decide to exit the market, ultimately contributing to shortages. We propose the development and implementation of value-based reimbursement to provide needed incentives for drug purchasers and manufacturers to establish a more reliable supply chain as part of the policy solution to reduce the number and extent of drug shortages. This reimbursement model would necessitate the development of a rating system that measures supply chain resilience and maturity for each generic product. This rating would then be applied as a value-based modifier to reimbursement rates for generic products. The proposed model would result in higher reimbursement rates for generic products from more dependable supply chains, generating incentives for manufacturers to invest in supply chain resiliency. We propose the application of this reimbursement system originally in Medicare given Congressional interest on reforming Medicare payment to prevent drug shortages.
Do Market Components Account for Higher US Prescription Prices?

M J Monaghan,M S Monaghan,Maura J Monaghan,Michael S Monaghan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/106002809603001219

IF: 3.4628

1996-12-01

Annals of Pharmacotherapy

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Although only 7–8% of US healthcare expenditures are spent on prescription drug products, the pharmaceutical industry's profitability and high cost of prescriptions to consumers make prescription drugs a visible target for reform. When compared with other products, it appears as if unfair pricing tactics are used. The pharmaceutical industry cites costs of research and development and a short patent life as justifiable grounds for high prices, but the reason why US drug prices appear to be so high has yet to be answered. OBJECTIVE: To examine identified components of the pharmaceutical industry that allow US prescription drugs to appear to be highly priced and to review the apparent factors that affect pricing policies for pharmaceuticals. DATA SOURCES: The literature was reviewed to identify current research regarding the pharmaceutical market. Sources included MEDLINE, Econolit, Business Periodical Index, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and the F-D-C Pink Sheet. SUMMARY: Key factors account for the fact that US prescription drug prices are higher and that price discrimination occurs in the pharmaceutical industry within the US and among other countries. These factors include the unique market structure of the pharmaceutical industry, asymmetry of information, research and development costs, numerous channels of distribution and the differences among them, and government laws and regulations of prescription drugs. Pricing policies of pharmaceutical companies are based on manufacturing, promotion, and distribution costs; drug characteristics; and economic goals of the parent company.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Orphan drugs' clinical uncertainty and prices: Addressing allocative and technical inefficiencies in orphan drug reimbursement

Hans-Georg Eichler,Michael Kossmeier,Markus Zeitlinger,Brigitte Schwarzer-Daum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1074512

2023-01-26

Abstract:Legislations incentivising orphan drug development and scientific advances have made orphan drugs pharma's high-end favourite for the past two decades. Currently, around 50% of new marketing authorizations are for orphan drugs. For third-party healthcare payers ("payers") the rise of orphan drugs presents new challenges, including a high degree of uncertainty around clinical benefits and harms, a moderate effect size (for many orphan drugs), and a high price tag. The association of high clinical uncertainty and moderate effect sizes is not surprising in small target populations but in combination with high prices creates the risk of allocative and technical inefficiencies for payers. We here discuss and illustrate these risks. A combination of policies is needed for mitigation of allocative inefficiency: while there may be a rationale for higher prices for orphan than non-orphan drugs, a focus of pricing and reimbursement negotiations should include considerations of product profitability and of the consequences of orphan drug costs on the distribution inequality of medication costs for individual insured persons, coupled to knowledge generation from reimbursement contracts covering high-price orphan drugs that would benefit the wider patient community. Performance-based managed entry agreements could help to de-risk the economic consequences of clinical uncertainty and to mitigate technical inefficiency.
Clinical predictors for high-grade bladder cancer before first-time transurethral resection of the bladder tumor: a retrospective cohort study.

K. Wakai,T. Utsumi,R. Oka,T. Endo,M. Yano,Shuichi Kamijima,N. Kamiya,N. Hiruta,Hiroyoshi Suzuki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/JJCO/HYW111

IF: 2.925

2016-10-01

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:The aim of this study was to identify the clinical predictors related to the risk of high-grade bladder cancer before first-time transurethral resection of the bladder tumor (TUR-Bt) and to externally validate the accuracy of Shapur's nomogram predicting the risk of high-grade bladder cancer in Japanese patients. As a result, episode of gross hematuria (odds ratio: 2.68, P = 0.02), larger tumor size (odds ratio: 1.89, P < 0.01) and positive urinary cytology (odds ratio: 8.34, P < 0.01) were found to be significant predictors for high-grade bladder cancer. Furthermore, the nomogram showed a high predictive accuracy in our Japanese population (area under the curve: 0.79). Clinicians will be able to predict high-grade bladder cancer using the common factors in Shapur's study and ours, such as tumor size and urinary cytology, and gross hematuria as the additional factor first identified here to decide priorities for the treatment of patients diagnosed with bladder cancer.
Structure of the DPS-like protein from Sulfolobus solfataricus reveals a bacterioferritin-like dimetal binding site within a DPS-like dodecameric assembly.

G. Gauss,P. Bénas,B. Wiedenheft,M. Young,Trevor,Douglas,C. Lawrence

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/BI060782U

IF: 3.321

2006-09-12

Biochemistry

Abstract:The superfamily of ferritin-like proteins has recently expanded to include a phylogenetically distinct class of proteins termed DPS-like (DPSL) proteins. Despite their distinct genetic signatures, members of this subclass share considerable similarity to previously recognized DPS proteins. Like DPS, these proteins are expressed in response to oxidative stress, form dodecameric cage-like particles, preferentially utilize H(2)O(2) in the controlled oxidation of Fe(2+), and possess a short N-terminal extension implicated in stabilizing cellular DNA. Given these extensive similarities, the functional properties responsible for the preservation of the DPSL signature in the genomes of diverse prokaryotes have been unclear. Here, we describe the crystal structure of a DPSL protein from the thermoacidophilic archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus. Although the overall fold of the polypeptide chain and the oligomeric state of this protein are indistinguishable from those of authentic DPS proteins, several important differences are observed. First, rather than a ferroxidase site at the subunit interface, as is observed in all other DPS proteins, the ferroxidase site in SsDPSL is buried within the four-helix bundle, similar to bacterioferritin. Second, the structure reveals a channel leading from the exterior surface of SsDPSL to the bacterioferritin-like dimetal binding site, possibly allowing divalent cations and/or H(2)O(2) to access the active site. Third, a pair of cysteine residues unique to DPSL proteins is found adjacent to the dimetal binding site juxtaposed between the exterior surface of the protein and the active site channel. The cysteine residues in this thioferritin motif may play a redox active role, possibly serving to recycle iron at the ferroxidase center.
A bibliometric analysis and typology of drug pricing policies across the globe

Abdrahmane Berthe,Islam Eljilany,Amit Kulkarni,Vakaramoko Diaby

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000040112

IF: 1.6

2024-10-30

Medicine

Abstract:Drug pricing is a critical issue in healthcare, as it determines the cost of drugs for patients, payers, and healthcare systems. [ 1 ] Drug prices can significantly impact patient access to care, healthcare costs, and the overall sustainability of healthcare systems. [ 2 , 3 ] Drug pricing frameworks are the policies, regulations, and systems used to determine drug prices. [ 4 ] These policies can vary widely across different countries and regions and take many forms, such as cost-plus pricing, reference pricing, external reference pricing, negotiated pricing, value-based pricing, price controls, and others. [ 5 , 6 ] The importance of drug pricing policies lies in ensuring that drugs are priced relatively to patients and healthcare systems. This includes ensuring that drugs are priced in a way that reflects their relative value to patients and the healthcare system, that drugs are affordable and accessible to patients, and that drugs are priced in a way that is sustainable for healthcare systems. [ 7 , 8 ]

medicine, general & internal

[Toxoplasmosis of poikilothermal vertebrates; unity or plurality of Toxoplasma species].

Escalating costs of innovative medicines: perspective and proposals

Drug pricing models, no 'one-size-fits-all' approach: a systematic review and critical evaluation of pricing models in an evolving pharmaceutical landscape

The increasing costs of medicines and their implications for patients, physicians and the health system

Question-based drug development and the value of novel treatments

Why are our medicines so expensive? Spoiler: Not for the reasons you are being told...

Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices

Pricing, profits and pharmacoeconomics--for whose benefit?

Prices of new medicines: International analysis and policy options

Upstream solutions for price-gouging on critical generic medicines

Pharmaceutical pricing in Europe: time to take the right direction

Strategies to Help Patients Navigate High Prescription Drug Costs

Value-Based Pricing for Patent-Protected Medicines Over the Product Life Cycle: Pricing Anomalies in the "Age of Cures" and Their Implications for Dynamic Efficiency

Generic Drugs in the United States: Policies to Address Pricing and Competition

Effects of innovation and insurance coverage on price elasticity of demand for prescription drugs: some empirical lessons in pharmacoeconomics

Cheaper is not always better: Drug shortages in the United States and a value-based solution to alleviate them

Do Market Components Account for Higher US Prescription Prices?

Orphan drugs' clinical uncertainty and prices: Addressing allocative and technical inefficiencies in orphan drug reimbursement

Clinical predictors for high-grade bladder cancer before first-time transurethral resection of the bladder tumor: a retrospective cohort study.

Structure of the DPS-like protein from Sulfolobus solfataricus reveals a bacterioferritin-like dimetal binding site within a DPS-like dodecameric assembly.

A bibliometric analysis and typology of drug pricing policies across the globe