There is a vigorous debate brewing on the "internets and blogs" at present resulting from differing viewpoints on the cost of new drug development. This was spurred by a recent article published in the London School of Economics Journal called Biosocieties. It puts drug development costs at $43 M for the median drug project. This is pitted against PhRMA's published estimate of $1.32 billion. So which is it?
Which estimate -- $43 million?
Or $1.32 billion -- passes the smell test?
What's $977 M amongst friends anyway?
It's this type of extreme position by both groups that seems to me to cloud the issue. I don't know that I find either figure that credible when you get right down to it -- but on balance would opt for PhRMAs to be closer to the ballpark -- but still be way out in the extremes of the parking lot not in the stadium itself. On the other hand, the Biosocieties author's might still be sitting home in the drive way warming up the car and listening to game on the radio.
See Fierce Biotech, Slate and In the Pipeline for lengthier (and more enlightening discourse on the issue).
Posted by Bruce Lehr March 7th 2011.
This is very unknown for me. Thanks for sharing this new information.
Posted by: cosmetic surgery marketing | 03/09/2011 at 10:09 PM
Derek wades in for round two of his rebuttal on the cost of drug development In the Pipeline
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/03/08/that_43_million_rd_figure.php
Posted by: bigredbruce | 03/08/2011 at 10:28 AM