A Case of Excessive, Opportunistic Price Increase of a Generic Oncology Drug
Patel, P. H.; Patel, B. B.; Desai, U. R.
Show abstract
BackgroundOff-patent, generic drugs are expected to be widely accessible owing competitive pricing and minimal R&D costs. Sudden, excessive, unexplainable, and sustained price increases detrimentally impact the health and welfare of patients and their families. Overlooking such cases encourages repeat behavior that may be legislatively challenging to overcome, thereby impeding the principle of democratization of medicines propagated by the expiration of patent protection. FindingsWe analyzed Medicare Part B quarterly payment data over 2020 to 2025 and observed a sudden, steep and sustained increase of over 5000% in the price of floxuridine injection, with the most noticeable spike between October 2022 and January 2023. Comparable increases in magnitude were also corroborated in state Medicaid programs. Plausible explanations, including raw material shortage, regulatory changes, formulation changes, and change in patent status, did not support the steep price hike. Market exit of manufacturer(s) to the point of exclusivity appears to be the only reasonable explanation for the price hike. ConclusionsWe conclude that although legally permissible, the opportunistic excessive pricing of floxuridine originates from market consolidation and supplier exclusivity. This case reflects a broader concern that generic drugs may be subject to morally questionable pricing. As floxuridine becomes more widely available through ongoing clinical trials, concerns about its affordability and financial toxicity will be difficult to ignore. Floxuridine serves as a cautionary tale of how niche-market generics can evade public scrutiny while imposing unnecessary costs on our healthcare system.
Matching journals
The top 14 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Trial Evidence Supporting FDA Approval of Novel Therapeutic Agents Over Three Decades, 1995-2017: Cross-Sectional Analysis 90%
- Effectiveness of casirivimab and imdevimab, and sotrovimab during Delta variant surge: a prospective cohort study and comparative effectiveness randomized trial 89%
- Characterizing Potential Conflicts of Interest Among UpToDate and DynaMed Content Contributors 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Standardization of drug names in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System: The DiAna dictionary 90%
- Sales of over-the-counter products containing codeine in 31 countries, 2013-2019: a retrospective observational study 90%
- Large-scale empirical identification of candidate comparators for pharmacoepidemiological studies 89%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Effect of common maintenance drugs on the risk and severity of COVID-19 in elderly patients 90%
- Repurposing Therapeutics for COVID-19: Rapid Prediction of Commercially available drugs through Machine Learning and Docking 89%
- Changes in dispensing of medicines proposed for re-purposing in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Subcutaneous REGEN-COV Antibody Combination in Early Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial 86%
- Protection afforded by the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines in fully vaccinated cohorts with and without prior infection 83%
- High Variability in Nicotine Analog Contents, Misleading Labeling, and Artificial Sweetener in New E-Cigarette Products Marketed as “FDA-Exempt” 83%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.