19 December 2003
Pharmaceutical companies must undergo a radical change in the way they choose, research and develop new drugs and treatments, the King's Fund said this week.
The think-tank said Whitehall must use the health service's bargaining power to ensure the industry does not concentrate on drugs for chronic illnesses but also develops more treatments that improve the population's health.
Although the industry's strategy had produced higher profits, more jobs and increased tax revenues, it had neglected major groups such as children, women and older people.
In a report, Getting the right medicine, the Fund said the focus on medicinal drugs was caused partly by the failure of governments to clarify its health objectives. This was compounded by the fact that patients had little say in determining research priorities.
The Fund called for more explicit public-private partnerships between drugs companies and government with a greater role for patients in prioritising research and development. Report author Anthony Harrison said this could lead to more research into areas such as low-risk drugs, self-administered treatments, non-invasive interventions and measures that avoided the need for treatment altogether.
This will interest ministers as, if Labour win a third term, they will advocate an increased emphasis on the prevention of illness.
Harrison said: 'For too long, the pharmaceutical industry has been in the driving seat, with government acting as a passive purchaser of drugs. While this partnership has undoubtedly been an economic success, the interests of patients and the public clearly do not always coincide with what will be most profitable for the pharmaceutical industry.'
Dr Trevor Jones, director general of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, denied that companies ignored key sections of the population.
He added: 'It would be quite wrong to suggest that our research endeavour should be determined by the government. In 70 years of centrally-directed medical research, the Soviet Union produced only one significant medicine.'
PFdec2003
