New Marketplace
Drug Pricing Is Not a Fair Fight (03:37)

Brand-name prescription drugs are so expensive in the United States in part because of the market exclusivities that government provides to pharmaceutical manufacturers, both for patents and to keep generics off the market, says Harvard Medical School Professor Aaron Kesselheim. At the same time, various rules prevent payers from negotiating with the brand-name pharma companies that set the price. “We have a very inefficient system set up that doesn’t contribute to price lowering,” says Kesselheim. He asks Harvard Pilgrim Health Care CMO Michael Sherman how, as a payer, he finds this negotiating environment, and which rules he finds most problematic in moving toward value-based pricing.

“I tend to be very pro free markets, but this is a scenario that needs a little bit more regulation because the types of regulations that exist are those that are protectionist,” replies Sherman. “We have an environment where essentially a pharma company can come out with a drug, they can set a price, certain classes are protected — we have to cover them — there are other state mandates and requirements that require us to cover drugs by law, and we don’t have the ability to purchase perhaps in other countries where they are less expensive.”

He also acknowledges safety concerns and the inability to operate entirely online. “That’s a perfect storm, to have a challenge in managing cost,” he says.

In cases of competition, payers can engage in discussions on branded drugs and price access and look to outcomes-based agreements, says Sherman. Harvard Pilgrim has had companies go at risk for some outcomes, ranging from a small amount of risk to the entire cost of the drug.

Physicians who write the prescriptions care about price, and that has helped drive demand. But the problem is for drugs with no competition. “We and employers have been reluctant to say no,” says Sherman. “I believe if we did say no we’d get the drugs for less because the question ‘would they sell them for less?’ has been answered in other countries all over the world.”

Sherman explains that if he goes to a pharma company that has a high-cost drug that works in some people but not others, and suggests it’s worth less to the latter, “they show me the door.”

“Without the ability to say no, and without some constraints on the pharma companies, it’s not a fair fight,” he says.

From the NEJM Catalyst event Navigating Payment Reform for Providers, Payers, and Pharma, held at Harvard Business School, November 2, 2017.

More From New Marketplace

Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP)

Medicare’s Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program was established by the ACA to combat excessive and costly readmissions. Learn about HRRP penalties, criticisms, and strategies to reduce readmissions.

Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Specialty Care Partnerships

How to Engage Specialists in Accountable Care Organizations

Should an ACO insource or outsource specialty care? Here’s a framework to help leadership decide.

Illustrative Examples of Health Policies, Possible Goals, and Relevant Evidence Base

Evidence-Based Health Policy

Having a clear framework for characterizing what is, and isn’t, evidence-based health policy is a prerequisite for a rational approach to making policy choices.

U.S. and Canadian Prices of Some Generic Drugs with U.S. Prices That Recently Increased by 1000% or More

The Price of Crossing the Border for Medications

The health and safety risks faced by the many Americans who cannot afford medications necessitate consideration of alternative strategies to provide less expensive medications.

Economic Investment and the Journey to Health Care Value — Part III: Health Care Purchasers

Early successes suggest that value-based purchasing programs can both transform employer-based health care and have a powerful and lasting impact on the economic strength of U.S. businesses.

Single-Payer Health Care Is the Favored Outcome of Future Payment Reform

Survey Snapshot: Deep Frustration with the Current Payment System

Many NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members are frustrated with the pace of value-based payments and expect single-payer health care to gain traction — though maybe not soon enough.

Value-Based Payment Models Payer-Provider Contracts Value-Based Arrangements

Economic Investment and the Journey to Health Care Value — Part II: Health Care Payers

Payers’ broad scale of investment in value-based arrangements makes a compelling case for the importance of sustained efforts to identify effective value-based payment models.

Four Principles for Navigating Payment Reform

The changes needed in health care are happening way too slowly. Health care stakeholders must insist on value in what they pay.

Economic Investment and the Journey to Health Care Value — Part I: Health Care Providers

Early evidence suggests that value-based payment and care delivery can transform our health care system, but providers must increase the momentum for this positive change.

Shift Toward Value-Based Payments in the Industry and at Organizations Is Accelerating

New Marketplace Survey: What’s Next for Payment Reform?

As health care reform struggles to gain traction legislatively, health care professionals report that payment reforms continue to move forward at a moderate pace, and indeed are essential to achieving the Triple Aim.


A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »


Value Based Care

222 Articles

New Marketplace Buzz Survey: Who’s to…

This survey of NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members shows strong opinions about the impact of…

New Marketplace Buzz Survey: Who’s to…

This survey of NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members shows strong opinions about the impact of…

Platforming Health Care to Transform Care…

Health care leaders need to focus less on ownership and control of the delivery process,…

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now