Rachel E Sachs, Shelley A Jazowski, Kyle A Gavulic, Julie M Donohue, Stacie B Dusetzina
{"title":"Medicaid and Accelerated Approval: Spending on Drugs with and without Proven Clinical Benefits.","authors":"Rachel E Sachs, Shelley A Jazowski, Kyle A Gavulic, Julie M Donohue, Stacie B Dusetzina","doi":"10.1215/03616878-10041107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many state Medicaid officials are concerned about rising prescription drug spending, particularly drugs approved through the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) accelerated approval pathway. The authors examined how much of Medicaid programs' accelerated approval spending is attributable to products that have demonstrated clinical benefits versus those that have not. Their findings provide support for states' concerns that pharmaceutical companies often fail to complete their required postapproval confirmatory studies within the FDA's requested timeline. But the findings also highlight one issue that policy stakeholders have not yet devoted substantial attention to: the use of surrogate endpoints involved in the postapproval confirmatory studies for most of the products in this study's sample. The granularity of the study's results enabled an analysis of the impact of different policy recommendations on both the accelerated approval pathway and Medicaid programs. These findings inform the current policy debate, suggesting that policy stakeholders might focus attention on products converting their approval on the basis of surrogate outcomes rather than on clinical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":"47 6","pages":"673-690"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9789165/pdf/nihms-1826620.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10041107","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Many state Medicaid officials are concerned about rising prescription drug spending, particularly drugs approved through the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) accelerated approval pathway. The authors examined how much of Medicaid programs' accelerated approval spending is attributable to products that have demonstrated clinical benefits versus those that have not. Their findings provide support for states' concerns that pharmaceutical companies often fail to complete their required postapproval confirmatory studies within the FDA's requested timeline. But the findings also highlight one issue that policy stakeholders have not yet devoted substantial attention to: the use of surrogate endpoints involved in the postapproval confirmatory studies for most of the products in this study's sample. The granularity of the study's results enabled an analysis of the impact of different policy recommendations on both the accelerated approval pathway and Medicaid programs. These findings inform the current policy debate, suggesting that policy stakeholders might focus attention on products converting their approval on the basis of surrogate outcomes rather than on clinical outcomes.
许多州的医疗补助计划官员都对处方药支出的增加感到担忧,尤其是通过食品及药物管理局(FDA)加速审批途径批准的药物。作者研究了在医疗补助计划的加速审批支出中,有多少可归因于已证明具有临床疗效的产品,而有多少可归因于未证明具有临床疗效的产品。他们的研究结果支持了各州的担忧,即制药公司往往不能在 FDA 要求的时限内完成所需的审批后确认研究。但研究结果也凸显了一个政策利益相关者尚未给予实质性关注的问题:本研究样本中大多数产品的批准后确认性研究中涉及的替代终点的使用。研究结果的粒度使得我们能够分析不同政策建议对加速审批途径和医疗补助计划的影响。这些研究结果为当前的政策辩论提供了参考,表明政策利益相关者可能会将注意力集中在根据替代结果而非临床结果获得批准的产品上。
期刊介绍:
A leading journal in its field, and the primary source of communication across the many disciplines it serves, the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy and analyzes the relations between government and health—past, present, and future.