ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2025
Estimating a Drug's Price After Loss of Exclusivity as a Function of Its Cost of Goods Sold.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Horizon Scanning of Multiple Sclerosis Expenditure in Italy (2025-2029): Updated Insights from the Oracle Model.Neurology and therapy · 2026Article
- Bridging the divide between health economics and outcomes research and biomedical investment: reflections from a health economist working in venture capital.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Review
- Action Plan to Better Approximate Reality in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
- Rethinking the unmet need for novel antibiotics.The Journal of antibiotics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe majority of cost-effectiveness analyses of pharmaceuticals do not incorporate future price changes that are expected once generic competition enters the market. A common rationale for not doing so is the uncertainty around what postloss of exclusivity price to model. The objective of this study is to assess if a drug's price postloss of exclusivity can be estimated on the basis of its cost of goods sold (COGS).
methodsFirst, stakeholders were engaged to understand pricing practices for generic drugs. Then peer-reviewed literature, gray literature, and manufacturer financial statements were reviewed to estimate the typical manufacturer profit margin over COGS. Using pricing data from the Mark Cuban CostPlus Drug Company (MCCPDC), estimates of COGS were calculated by drug form. Finally, a COGS-based approach to estimating a drug's price postloss of exclusivity was tested.
resultsCOGS were estimated for 2168 unique National Drug Codes (NDCs) reported in the MCCPDC price list by removing the typical manufacturer profit margin (50%) from the manufacturer prices (net of any markup or fees from the MCCPDC). A tablet/capsule, the most common form in the price list, had a median COGS of $0.10 per tablet/capsule. Estimating a drug's price postloss of exclusivity as the median COGS for that drug form times two (to reflect a 50% profit margin), produces estimates of postloss of exclusivity prices that account for drug-specific attributes.
conclusionsThis study provides an evidence-based approach to estimate a drug's price postloss of exclusivity as a function of its COGS for incorporation into cost-effectiveness analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39602059What 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.