| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 1371 | 回復(fù): 17 | ||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿足指定條件的回帖,點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話題的所有回帖 | ||
[交流]
開發(fā)一種新藥的驚人花費(fèi)(The truly staggering cost of inventing new drugs)
|
||
|
原文鏈接:http://bioluminor.biomart.cn/news/2770272.htm During the Super Bowl, a representative of the pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly posted the on the company’s corporate blog that the average cost of bringing a new drug to market is $1.3 billion, a price that would buy 371 Super Bowl ads, 16 million official NFL footballs, two pro football stadiums, pay of almost all NFL football players, and every seat in every NFL stadium for six weeks in a row. This is, of course, ludicrous. The average drug developed by a major pharmaceutical company costs at least $4 billion, and it can be as much as $11 billion. The drug industry has been tossing around the $1 billion number for years. It is based largely on a study (supported by drug companies) by Joseph DiMasi of Tufts University. It’s a nice number for the pharmaceutical industry, because it seems to justify the idea that medicines should be pricey (and increasingly, they can be very pricey, costing tens of thousands of dollars per patient per year) without making it seem that inventing new medicines is so expensive an endeavor as to be ultimately futile. But as Bernard Munos of the InnoThink Center for Research In Biomedical Innovation has noted, just adjusting that estimate for current failure rates results in an estimate of $4 billion in research dollars spent for every drug that is approved. But Munos showed me another figure, where he divided each drug company’s R&D budget by the average number of drugs approved. This was far more dramatic. The range of money spent is stunning. AstraZeneca has spent $12 billion in research money for every new drug approved, as much as the top-selling medicine ever generated in annual sales; Amgen spent just $3.7 billion. At $12 billion per drug, inventing medicines is a pretty unsustainable business. At $3.7 billion, you might just be able to make money (a new medicine can probably keep generating revenue for ten years; invent one a year at that rate and you’ll do well). There are lots of expenses here. A single clinical trial can cost $100 million at the high end, and the combined cost of manufacturing and clinical testing for some drugs has added up to $1 billion. But the main expense is failure. AstraZeneca does badly by this measure because it has had so few new drugs hit the market. Eli Lilly spent roughly the same amount on R&D, but got twice as many new medicines approved over that 15 year period, and so spent just $4.5 billion per drug. Wanting to make this even more rigorous, Forbes (that would be Scott DeCarlo and me) took Munos’ count of drug approvals for the major pharmas and combined it with their research and development spending as reported in annual earnings filings going back fifteen years, pulled from a Thomson Reuters database using FactSet. We adjusted all the figures for inflation. Using both drug approvals and research budgets since 1997 keeps the estimates being skewed by short-term periods when R&D budgets or drug approvals changed dramatically. The range of money spent is stunning. AstraZeneca has spent $12 billion in research money for every new drug approved, as much as the top-selling medicine ever generated in annual sales; Amgen spent just $3.7 billion. At $12 billion per drug, inventing medicines is a pretty unsustainable business. At $3.7 billion, you might just be able to make money (a new medicine can probably keep generating revenue for ten years; invent one a year at that rate and you’ll do well). There are lots of expenses here. A single clinical trial can cost $100 million at the high end, and the combined cost of manufacturing and clinical testing for some drugs has added up to $1 billion. But the main expense is failure. AstraZeneca does badly by this measure because it has had so few new drugs hit the market. Eli Lilly spent roughly the same amount on R&D, but got twice as many new medicines approved over that 15 year period, and so spent just $4.5 billion per drug. |
» 搶金幣啦!回帖就可以得到:
+2/96
+1/93
+1/84
+1/82
+1/80
+1/79
+2/42
+1/40
+1/39
+2/38
+1/35
+1/29
+1/23
+1/18
+1/7
+1/6
+1/5
+1/2
+1/2
+1/1
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
百度網(wǎng)盤 |
360云盤 |
千易網(wǎng)盤 |
華為網(wǎng)盤
在新窗口頁面中打開自己喜歡的網(wǎng)盤網(wǎng)站,將文件上傳后,然后將下載鏈接復(fù)制到帖子內(nèi)容中就可以了。 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 一志愿武理材料工程348求調(diào)劑 +5 |  ̄^ ̄゜汗 2026-03-19 | 7/350 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 環(huán)境學(xué)碩288求調(diào)劑 +6 | 皮皮皮123456 2026-03-22 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿 西北大學(xué) ,070300化學(xué)學(xué)碩,總分287,雙非一本,求調(diào)劑。 +3 | 晨昏線與星海 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 0856材料專碩353求調(diào)劑 +4 | NIFFFfff 2026-03-20 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] 286分人工智能專業(yè)請求調(diào)劑愿意跨考! +4 | lemonzzn 2026-03-17 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 280求調(diào)劑 +11 | 咕嚕曉曉 2026-03-18 | 12/600 |
|
|
[考研] 333求調(diào)劑 +5 | 87639 2026-03-21 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南大,0703化學(xué),分?jǐn)?shù)336,求調(diào)劑 +3 | 收到VS 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 297求調(diào)劑 +3 | 喜歡還是不甘心 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工(0856)304求 B區(qū) 調(diào)劑 +3 | 邱gl 2026-03-21 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 316求調(diào)劑 +6 | 梁茜雯 2026-03-19 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 一志愿華中科技大學(xué),080502,354分求調(diào)劑 +5 | 守候夕陽CF 2026-03-18 | 5/250 |
|
|
[考研]
|
.6lL 2026-03-18 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考研] 274求調(diào)劑 +10 | S.H1 2026-03-18 | 10/500 |
|
|
[考研] 290求調(diào)劑 +7 | ^O^乜 2026-03-19 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 353求調(diào)劑 +3 | 拉鉤不許變 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|
[考研] 材料工程專碩調(diào)劑 +5 | 204818@lcx 2026-03-17 | 6/300 |
|
|
[考研] 344求調(diào)劑 +6 | knight344 2026-03-16 | 7/350 |
|
|
[考研] 301求調(diào)劑 +4 | A_JiXing 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|
|
[考研] [導(dǎo)師推薦]西南科技大學(xué)國防/材料導(dǎo)師推薦 +3 | 尖角小荷 2026-03-16 | 6/300 |
|