Generic Anticancer Drugs of the Jan Aushadhi Scheme in India and Their Branded Counterparts: The First Cost Comparison Study.

Introduction:  In India, the costs of cancer drugs are exorbitant and cause significant financial toxicity to the affected patient and their family members. Considering this, Jan Aushadhi pharmacy stores were established across the country by the government of India with the objective of providing cheap generic medicines to patients. The objective of this study was to perform a cost comparison study of generic chemotherapeutic drugs provided through Jan Aushadhi pharmacies versus their branded counterparts. This will help patients and physicians get first-hand information on the cost variation between generic and branded anticancer drugs in India.
Materials and Methods:  The cost of Jan Aushadhi generic drugs and the cost of the most expensive and cheapest marketed branded drugs for the same molecule and dose were ascertained and presented in both Indian Rupees (INR) and US Dollars (as of July 2021). Finally, the difference in costs in INR, cost ratio, and cost variance were calculated, comparing the price of the Jan Aushadhi generic drugs with the most expensive and the cheapest branded drug in the same category.
Results: Compared to branded drugs, all the Jan Ausadhi generic drugs were cheaper, except one (methotrexate). The highest cost difference was observed for docetaxel, while the least was observed for methotrexate tablets (2.5 mg). The highest cost ratio (22.24) and cost variance (3327.56) were observed for doxorubicin injection (50 mg).
Conclusion:  The current study compares the cost difference between the marketed branded and Jan Aushadhi generic anticancer drugs for the first time. Replacing the costly branded anticancer drugs with Jan Aushadhi generic drugs can result in substantial cost savings. The information obtained from this cost difference analysis will be helpful for the healthcare fraternity, patients, policymakers, and society at large.
Competing Interests: The study was not supported by any government or private agency and was a part of Dr. Thomas George's project in Health Economics.
(Copyright © 2021, George et al.)