Close

500 Drugs Set To Witness A Price Hike In The US In Jan 2024

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

What Goes Into Synthetic Urine? The Chemistry Behind Replicating a Biological Fluid

Synthetic urine sounds simple until you look closely at...
- Advertisement -

In a recent development, drugmakers such as Pfizer, Sanofi, as well as Takeda Pharmaceutical went on to plan to raise costs in the US when it comes to more than 500 drugs in early January 2024, according to data analysed by healthcare research firm 3 Axis Advisors and as reported by Reuters.

Not including various doses and formulations, over 140 brands of drugs will have their prices increased in January 2024, according to what the data showed.

It is well to be noted that the anticipated price surge comes as the pharmaceutical sector gets all geared up for the Biden Administration to publish majorly discounted prices for 10 high-cost drugs in September last year and goes on to contend with higher inflation as well as manufacturing costs.

Interestingly, under President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act- IRA, the government’s Medicare health program can go on to negotiate prices directly when it comes to certain drugs starting in 2026.

It is worth noting that worries are also kind of increasing on the fresh disruption when it comes to supply chains from a prolonged Middle East conflict challenge because of which the shippers are either forced to halt or reroute traffic from the Red Sea, which by the way happens to be the world’s main East-West trade route.

Three companies, including the likes of GlaxoSmithKline, which in December last year said that it would slash prices on certain asthma, herpes, as well as anti-epileptic drugs for 2024, are also anticipated to lower the prices on a minimum of 15 drugs in January, as per the data.

As per the information on Reuters, these cuts come after many companies have already gone on to announce their price decreases when it comes to insulin earlier in 2023, in an endeavor so as to avoid penalties that could get imposed under 2021’s American Rescue Plan Act if they had gone on and kept the prices high.

As per the law, drug companies are needed to rebate the Medicaid program if price rises on medicines outpace inflation, and beginning January 2024, those rebates could very well be larger than the actual net cost when it comes to that drug.

As per Antonio Ciaccia, 3 Axis president, every major former blockbuster insulin is all set to get thrown under the tires when it comes to this policy.

Robyn Karnauskas, who happens to be a Truist analyst, said in a note that Eli Lilly went on to plan to lower the prices of its Humalog as well as Humulin insulins by 75.8% and 70%, respectively, on December 30 last year and to surge the price of its diabetes drug Mounjaro by 4.5% on Jan. 1. Apparently, these changes were not included in the data from 3 Axis.

The changes happen to be on list prices, which do not have rebates to pharmacy benefit managers along with other discounts.

10% or below

It is well to be noted that the drugmakers have mostly kept prices at 10% or below, which is an industry practice that happens to be followed by many big players as they came under fire for numerous price hikes spread across the middle of the last decade.

Even high rates when it comes to inflation have not inspired drugmakers to quicken their price increases on the products that are launched already.

As per Ciaccia, he had assumed in 2022 that due to inflation, teamed with concerns about the U.S. drug price negotiation plan within the IRA, one would see the proverbial pedal to the metal. However, the past five years have been all the same.

Notably, the median price rises have hovered at somewhere around 5% since 2019, as per the data from 46brooklyn, which happens to be a drug pricing non-profit that is related to 3 Axis.

It is well to be noted that for at least the second year in a row, Pfizer has gone on to announce the most January price rises, thereby accounting for more than a quarter of the drugs put together, with hikes planned. The New York-based drugmaker will go on to increase prices on 124 drugs and also put an additional rise on 22 drugs as far as its Hospira arm is concerned. Besides different doses and formulations, 30 and 6 branded drugs will go on to have their prices increased by Pfizer and Hospira, respectively.

Baxalta, which happens to be Takeda-owned, went on to announce the second-highest number of price rises, with 53 hikes planned so far, which was followed by UCB Pharma, a Belgian drugmaker, which looks to increase the prices of 40 unique drugs.

After different doses as well as formulations are discounted, 8 branded drugs from Baxalta and 6 branded UCB medicines will go on to have their prices increased this January.

Interestingly, Sanofi, which decided to cut 2024 prices when it comes to most of its prescribed insulin products earlier in 2023, notably will go on to raise prices as far as its typhoid fever, rabies, as well as yellow fever vaccines are concerned, each by 9% this month.

It is well to be noted that more drug prices are likely to be announced over the course of January, which, by the way, historically is going to be the biggest month when it comes to drugmakers, so as to raise prices.

Apparently, in 2023, drugmakers went on to raise prices on 1,425 drugs, down from 2022, wherein they had raised prices on 1,460 drugs, as per the data published by 46brooklyn.

Although the drugmakers have gone on to pare back their price rises for established drugs, prices when it comes to newly launched drugs have gone on to hit record levels.

In 2022, the cost of newly launched drugs topped $220,000 as compared to $180,000, which was witnessed in the first six months of 2021, thereby suggesting a more than 20% increase. This happens to be in line with a JAMA-published study when it comes to drug prices, which laid down that between 2008 and 2021, U.S. drug launch prices grew by 20% per year.

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

What Goes Into Synthetic Urine? The Chemistry Behind Replicating a Biological Fluid

Synthetic urine sounds simple until you look closely at...

Danaher Prepares to Introduce Advanced AI-Powered Laboratory

In a significant step for pharmaceutical research, Danaher has...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »