ArticleBMJ open2019
Influence of government price regulation and deregulation on the price of antineoplastic medications in China: a controlled interrupted time series study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Policy options for controlling rising hospital prices and their outcomes: a framework-based analysis.Health economics review · 2026Review
- Impact of six rounds of national drug price negotiation on availability, cost, use, and prices of targeted drugs in China.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Pakistan's first medicine price deregulation policy: assessing its impact on prices, affordability, and availability of oral anti-diabetic medicines in private pharmacies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- How the National Health Insurance Coverage policy changed the use of lenvatinib for adult patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort analysis with real world big data.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Article
- The impact of government reimbursement negotiation on targeted anticancer medicines use and cost in China: A cohort study based on national health insurance data.Journal of global health · 2023Article
- Article
- How National Health Insurance Coverage Policy Affected the Use of Trastuzumab and Rituximab in China: A Bicentric Retrospective Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Article
- Article
- Influence of Government Price Regulation on the Price, Volume and Spending of Antibiotics in China: A Controlled Interrupted Time Series Study.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- Trends in accessibility of negotiated targeted anti-cancer medicines in Nanjing, China: An interrupted time series analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The impact of national centralized drug procurement on health expenditures for lung cancer inpatients: A difference-in-differences analysis in a large tertiary hospital in China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The impacts of government reimbursement negotiation on targeted anticancer medication price, volume and spending in China.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Health Care Utilization and Costs of Patients With Prostate Cancer in China Based on National Health Insurance Database From 2015 to 2017.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn October 2012, the Chinese government established maximum retail prices for specific products, including 30 antineoplastic medications. Three years later, in June 2015, the government abolished price regulation for most medications, including all antineoplastic medications. This study examined the impacts of regulation and subsequent deregulation of prices of antineoplastic medications in China.
methodsUsing hospital procurement data and an interrupted time series with comparison series design, we examined the impacts of the policy changes on relative purchase prices (Laspeyres price index) and volumes of and spending on 52 antineoplastic medications in 699 hospitals. We identified three policy periods: prior to the initial price regulation (October 2011 to September 2012); during price regulation (October 2012 to June 2015); and after price deregulation (July 2015 to June 2016).
resultsDuring government price regulation, compared with price-unregulated cancer medications (n=22, mostly newer targeted products), the relative price of price-regulated medications (n=30, mostly chemotherapeutic products) decreased significantly (β=-0.081, p<0.001). After the government price deregulation, no significant price change occurred. Neither government price regulation nor deregulation had a significant impact on average volumes of or average spending on all antineoplastic medications immediately after the policy changes or in the longer term (p>0.05).
conclusionCompared with unregulated antineoplastics, the prices of regulated antineoplastic medications decreased after setting price caps and did not increase after deregulation. To control the rapid growth of oncology medication expenditures, more effective measures than price regulation through price caps for traditional chemotherapy are needed.
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.