ArticleBMJ open2017
Estimated generic prices of cancer medicines deemed cost-ineffective in England: a cost estimation analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug pricing models, no 'one-size-fits-all' approach: a systematic review and critical evaluation of pricing models in an evolving pharmaceutical landscape.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Pooled it
- What is the impact of intellectual property rules on access to medicines? A systematic review.Globalization and health · 2022Pooled it
- Balancing Innovation and Access: Insights from AIM's Fair Pricing Model and Its Current and Future Applications.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Estimating a Drug's Price After Loss of Exclusivity as a Function of Its Cost of Goods Sold.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Article
- A multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tool for purchasing off-patent oncology medicines in Egypt.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2022Article
- Pharmaceutical drug development: high drug prices and the hidden role of public funding.Biologia futura · 2021Review
- A MEA is a MEA is a MEA? Sequential decision making and the impact of different managed entry agreements at the manufacturer and payer level, using a case study for an oncology drug in England.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021Article
- Estimation of cost-based prices for injectable medicines in the WHO Essential Medicines List.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Bortezomib for the Treatment of Hematologic Malignancies: 15 Years Later.Drugs in R&D · 2019Review
- Expenditures on Oncology Drugs and Cancer Mortality-to-Incidence Ratio in Central and Eastern Europe.The oncologist · 2019Article
- Analysis of the Factors Influencing Enterprise and Government Participation in the Medicines Patent Pool Based on System Dynamics Model.Iranian journal of public health · 2018Article
- Estimated costs of production and potential prices for the WHO Essential Medicines List.BMJ global health · 2018Article
- Barriers for Access to New Medicines: Searching for the Balance Between Rising Costs and Limited Budgets.Frontiers in public health · 2018Review
- Adaptive Pathways: Possible Next Steps for Payers in Preparation for Their Potential Implementation.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017Review
- Reduced Weekly Subcutaneous Doses of Bortezomib in Combination with Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.Journal of research in pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to estimate lowest possible treatment costs for four novel cancer drugs, hypothesising that generic manufacturing could significantly reduce treatment costs.
settingThis research was carried out in a non-clinical research setting using secondary data.
participantsThere were no human participants in the study. Four drugs were selected for the study: bortezomib, dasatinib, everolimus and gefitinib. These medications were selected according to their clinical importance, novel pharmaceutical actions and the availability of generic price data. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Target costs for treatment were to be generated for each indication for each treatment. The primary outcome measure was the target cost according to a production cost calculation algorithm. The secondary outcome measure was the target cost as the lowest available generic price; this was necessary where export data were not available to generate an estimate from our cost calculation algorithm. Other outcomes included patent expiry dates and total eligible treatment populations.
resultsTarget prices were £411 per cycle for bortezomib, £9 per month for dasatinib, £852 per month for everolimus and £10 per month for gefitinib. Compared with current list prices in England, these target prices would represent reductions of 74-99.6%. Patent expiry dates were bortezomib 2014-22, dasatinib 2020-26, everolimus 2019-25 and gefitinib 2017. The total global eligible treatment population in 1 year is 769 736.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that affordable drug treatment costs are possible for novel cancer drugs, suggesting that new therapeutic options can be made available to patients and doctors worldwide. Assessing treatment cost estimations alongside cost-effectiveness evaluations is an important area of future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.