ASSESSING DISTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL AND PRIVATE VALUE CREATION BY DRUGS REGULATING PROGRAMMED CELL DEATH-1IN CANCER TREATMENT...
Author(s)
Paula Chaves da Silva, PhD1, Caitlin Sieminski, Undergraduate Student1, Olivier Wouters, PhD2, Fred Ledley, MD1;
1Bentley University, Center for Integration of Science and Industry, Waltham, MA, USA, 2Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
1Bentley University, Center for Integration of Science and Industry, Waltham, MA, USA, 2Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
OBJECTIVES: From 2014 to 2022, the FDA approved seven cancer drugs targeting the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway. These products were enabled by public/NIH-funded basic and applied research and industry investment in development and commercialization. This study assessed the societal and private economic value generated by these drugs, which is the basis for the returns on these investments.
METHODS: Total health value from US sales was calculated as the number of person/years of treatment (IQVIA/MIDAS) times the mean quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with each product (Tufts/CEA registry) and the published US willingness-to-pay ($104,000/QALY). Net health value was total health value minus gross spending (MIDAS). Company financial data and product-specific net revenue were from SEC filings or Compustat. A polynomial allocation model was used to estimate fractional product-level expenses. Social value was defined as net health value, R&D spending, jobs created, and social payments. Private value was defined as cumulative earnings and inter-firm network payments, as well as changes in stock price.
RESULTS: From 2014 to 2022, 1.7M US person/years treated generated 1.1M QALYs and $117.3B in total health value, with a gross spending of $117.6B. Pembrolizumab generated a positive net health value ($14.3B), as did cemiplimab ($.86B) and dostarlimab ($.03B). Negative net health value was generated by nivolumab (-$5.1B), atezolivumab (-$4.4B), avelumab (-$.064B), and durvalumab (-$5.9B). Five products from companies with available financial data generated a total social value of $38.4B (-$1.1B net health value, $11.7B R&D, $24.2B jobs, $3.7B social payments) and private value of $128.9B ($15.0B cumulative earnings, $56.8B network payments, $57.1B stock appreciation).
CONCLUSIONS: PD-1 drugs created substantial social and private value, with evident variation by drug indication and lifecycle. These findings provide a basis for assessing the return on both public and private investments and evidence-based policy regarding drug pricing and innovation.
METHODS: Total health value from US sales was calculated as the number of person/years of treatment (IQVIA/MIDAS) times the mean quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with each product (Tufts/CEA registry) and the published US willingness-to-pay ($104,000/QALY). Net health value was total health value minus gross spending (MIDAS). Company financial data and product-specific net revenue were from SEC filings or Compustat. A polynomial allocation model was used to estimate fractional product-level expenses. Social value was defined as net health value, R&D spending, jobs created, and social payments. Private value was defined as cumulative earnings and inter-firm network payments, as well as changes in stock price.
RESULTS: From 2014 to 2022, 1.7M US person/years treated generated 1.1M QALYs and $117.3B in total health value, with a gross spending of $117.6B. Pembrolizumab generated a positive net health value ($14.3B), as did cemiplimab ($.86B) and dostarlimab ($.03B). Negative net health value was generated by nivolumab (-$5.1B), atezolivumab (-$4.4B), avelumab (-$.064B), and durvalumab (-$5.9B). Five products from companies with available financial data generated a total social value of $38.4B (-$1.1B net health value, $11.7B R&D, $24.2B jobs, $3.7B social payments) and private value of $128.9B ($15.0B cumulative earnings, $56.8B network payments, $57.1B stock appreciation).
CONCLUSIONS: PD-1 drugs created substantial social and private value, with evident variation by drug indication and lifecycle. These findings provide a basis for assessing the return on both public and private investments and evidence-based policy regarding drug pricing and innovation.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
EE372
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Novel & Social Elements of Value, Value of Information
Disease
SDC: Oncology, STA: Biologics & Biosimilars