China's Drug Pricing Policies Dramatically Increased Access to GLP-1 Medications

China's national drug procurement and price negotiation policies significantly cut GLP-1 drug costs and increased their utilization by 212 defined daily doses per month in Shanghai.

Song, Jie et al.·BMJ open·2024·Moderate Evidencecohort
RPEP-09297CohortModerate Evidence2024RETHINKTHC RESEARCH DATABASErethinkthc.com/research

Quick Facts

Study Type
cohort
Evidence
Moderate Evidence
Sample
N=Citywide data (Shanghai, 2016-2022)
Participants
Shanghai diabetes drug market (procurement-level data)

What This Study Found

National price negotiation led to a significant increase of 212.28 defined daily doses (95% CI: 188.25-236.31, p<0.001) in novel hypoglycaemic drug consumption. Daily costs decreased significantly after policy implementation (p<0.001). Dulaglutide, liraglutide, semaglutide, and dapagliflozin showed significant increases in utilization post-policy (p<0.001).

Key Numbers

Study period: January 2016 to December 2022 in Shanghai. Multiple rounds of national drug procurement and price negotiation policies were analyzed.

How They Did This

Interrupted time series analysis with segmented regression using drug procurement data from the Shanghai Medical Procurement Agency covering all public and private hospitals in Shanghai, January 2016 to December 2022. Analyzed volume, expenditure, and daily cost changes for specific drugs relative to policy implementation dates.

Why This Research Matters

Drug pricing policy directly affects whether patients can access effective medications. This real-world evidence shows that government price negotiation can dramatically expand access to GLP-1 receptor agonists — drugs that have proven benefits for diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease — by making them affordable at scale.

The Bigger Picture

As GLP-1 receptor agonists demonstrate benefits beyond diabetes — including weight loss and cardiovascular protection — their high cost is a major barrier worldwide. China's approach of centralized price negotiation offers a model for how government policy can dramatically expand access to these medications, relevant to global discussions about drug pricing and access.

What This Study Doesn't Tell Us

Data is from Shanghai only, which is more developed than most Chinese cities — results may not generalize to rural or less economically developed regions. The study measures procurement volumes, not individual patient outcomes or adherence. It cannot distinguish whether increased utilization led to improved health outcomes. The study period ended in 2022 and doesn't capture the more recent semaglutide demand surge.

Questions This Raises

  • ?Did the increased utilization of GLP-1 drugs actually translate to improved diabetes outcomes at the population level in Shanghai?
  • ?How do China's price negotiation results compare to GLP-1 drug pricing in other countries like the US and Europe?

Trust & Context

Key Stat:
+212 daily doses/month Novel hypoglycaemic drug consumption increased by 212.28 defined daily doses per month after China's national price negotiation policy, a dramatic expansion of access
Evidence Grade:
Moderate evidence from a well-designed interrupted time series analysis using comprehensive citywide procurement data, though limited to one city and measuring utilization rather than clinical outcomes.
Study Age:
Published in 2024, analyzing data through December 2022. The GLP-1 market has changed significantly since then with surging global demand.
Original Title:
Analysing the effects of National Centralised Drug Procurement and Price Negotiation Policies on novel hypoglycaemic drug usage and costs in Shanghai, China: an interrupted time series analysis.
Published In:
BMJ open, 14(12), e088318 (2024)
Database ID:
RPEP-09297

Evidence Hierarchy

Meta-Analysis / Systematic Review
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cohort / Case-Control
Cross-Sectional / ObservationalSnapshot without intervening
This study
Case Report / Animal Study
What do these levels mean? →

Frequently Asked Questions

How did China manage to lower GLP-1 drug prices?

China uses two main approaches: the National Drug Price Negotiation Policy (NDPN), where the government directly negotiates prices with manufacturers for patent-protected drugs like GLP-1 agonists, and the National Centralised Drug Procurement Policy (NCDP), which uses competitive bidding for generic drugs. Both policies leverage China's massive market size to secure lower prices.

Did cheaper GLP-1 drugs in China mean more people used them?

Yes, dramatically. After price negotiations reduced costs, utilization of GLP-1 drugs like dulaglutide, liraglutide, and semaglutide increased significantly. Lower prices removed a major barrier for both patients and hospitals, leading to a substantial shift toward these newer, more effective diabetes medications.

Read More on RethinkPeptides

Cite This Study

RPEP-09297·https://rethinkpeptides.com/research/RPEP-09297

APA

Song, Jie; Guo, Wei; Jin, Chunlin; Xu, Yuan; Hu, Xiaojing; Zhang, Zheng; Lin, Hai. (2024). Analysing the effects of National Centralised Drug Procurement and Price Negotiation Policies on novel hypoglycaemic drug usage and costs in Shanghai, China: an interrupted time series analysis.. BMJ open, 14(12), e088318. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088318

MLA

Song, Jie, et al. "Analysing the effects of National Centralised Drug Procurement and Price Negotiation Policies on novel hypoglycaemic drug usage and costs in Shanghai, China: an interrupted time series analysis.." BMJ open, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088318

RethinkPeptides

RethinkPeptides Research Database. "Analysing the effects of National Centralised Drug Procureme..." RPEP-09297. Retrieved from https://rethinkpeptides.com/research/song-2024-analysing-the-effects-of

Access the Original Study

Study data sourced from PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

This study breakdown was produced by the RethinkPeptides research team. We analyze and report published research findings without making health recommendations. All interpretations are based solely on the published abstract and study data.