Indian Regulators Hoping To Curb Price of Cancer Drugs in India
The National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) in India is seeking advice from the industry on how it can best reduce the price of expensive oncology medications for Indian patients. This move for a dialogue comes in response to the industry backlash the regulator suffered earlier this summer after more aggressive moves to lower prices, DNA reports.
Last July, The Times of India (TI) reported that in an interpretation of a guidance which would allow the NPPA to cap the prices on drugs classified as “crucial,” the regulator fixed the price of 50 cardiovascular and anti-diabetes medications.
In September, the NPPA rescinded the guideline. TI reported this decision complied with a government “direction” and was most likely the result of industry legal reaction.
While price control is still a common goal of the industry and the NPPA, right now the regulator is proceeding with caution.
According to DNA, Mumbai’s Tata Memorial Centre, a leading oncology hospital in India, has recommended that the NPPA should seek to reduce the price on Trastuzumab, Erlotinib, Irinotecan, Lenalidomide, Cepecitabine, Bendamustine, Rituximab, Temozolomide, Zoledronic acid, Megestrol acetate, and Letrozole.
These drugs were singled out based on their ability to influence patient survival rates and the availability of alternate treatments.
DNA quoted an expert who confirms, “While the move is welcome, the industry may not be very happy with such recommendations. Because of this, some expensive drugs may come under price control, affecting the companies’ margins and profitability.”
To what extent these companies would be affected, however, is a subject for further study and debate.
Ranjit Kapadia, SVP of pharma at Centrum Broking, told DNA, “The consumers will definitely be benefited if oncology drugs are brought under price control. But what would be the impact on the pharma companies is difficult to estimate at the moment. It will vary from one company to another, depending on the percentage of oncology drug portfolio of a particular company and how many units are sold in a year.”
Kapadia went on to say that the industry was free to offer objections if they felt the regulations caused an undue burden.