Formulation and defined daily dose | 2010 | 2012 | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Me-dian price | Lowest API cost quoted to WHO | Total production cost | Profit or loss at API cost | Me-dian price | Lowest API cost quoted to WHO | Total production cost | Profit or loss at API cost | |||||||
quoted to WHO | 20% | 40% | 60% | quoted to WHO | 20% | 40% | 60% | |||||||
less | less | less | less | less | less | |||||||||
1) Scenario “Indian manufacturers” | ||||||||||||||
Three drug combination tablets | ||||||||||||||
[lamivudine 150 mg + stavudine 30 mg + nevirapine 200 mg], b.i.d | 63 | 37 | 78 | −15 | −2 | 11 | 25 | 57 | 39 | 81 | −28 | −10 | 4 | 18 |
[lamivudine 150 mg + zidovudine 300 mg + nevirapine 200 mg] b.i.d. | 131 | 87 | 166 | −4 | −4 | 27 | 58 | 119 | 90 | 171 | −53 | −21 | 11 | 43 |
[lamivudine 300 mg + tenofovir 300 mg + efavirenz 600 mg] q.d. | 192 | 126 | 230 | −38 | 7 | 52 | 97 | 162 | 102 | 187 | −25 | 11 | 47 | 84 |
[emtricitabine 200 mg + tenofovir 300 mg + efavirenz 600 mg] q.d. | 242 | 136 | 243 | −1 | 47 | 94 | 142 | 186 | 126 | 224 | −38 | 6 | 50 | 93 |
Two drug combination tablets | ||||||||||||||
[lamivudine 150 mg + stavudine 30 mg] b.i.d. | 39 | 24 | 54 | −15 | −7 | 2 | 10 | 36 | 24 | 55 | −19 | −10 | −1 | 7 |
[lamivudine 150 mg + zidovudine 300 mg] b.i.d. | 101 | 73 | 142 | −41 | −23 | 3 | 30 | 94 | 75 | 145 | −51 | −25 | 2 | 29 |
[lamivudine 300 mg + tenofovir 300 mg] q.d. | 109 | 71 | 133 | −24 | 2 | 27 | 52 | 65 | 58 | 109 | −44 | −23 | −3 | 18 |
[emtricitabine 200 mg + tenofovir 300 mg ] q.d. | 143 | 78 | 145 | −2 | 26 | 54 | 82 | 87 | 73 | 136 | −49 | −23 | 3 | 29 |
[lopinavir 200 mg + ritonavir 50 mg], 4 tablets/day | 433 | 405 | 745 | −313 | −169 | −24 | 121 | 359 | 314 | 583 | −223 | −112 | 0 | 112 |
Single drug formulations | ||||||||||||||
[efavirenz 600 mg] q.d. | 56 | 55 | 103 | −47 | −28 | −8 | 11 | 46 | 44 | 84 | −37 | −22 | −6 | 9 |
[nevirapine 200 mg] b.i.d. | 31 | 13 | 35 | −4 | 1 | 6 | 10 | 30 | 16 | 40 | −10 | −5 | 1 | 7 |
[zidovudine 300 mg] b.i.d | 88 | 57 | 113 | −25 | −5 | 15 | 36 | 82 | 59 | 117 | −35 | −14 | 8 | 29 |
[didanosine 250 mg] b.i.d | 159 | 52 | 105 | 54 | 73 | 92 | 110 | 165 | 55 | 109 | 55 | 75 | 94 | 114 |
Summary | ||||||||||||||
Column total | 1787 | 1214 | 2292 | −475 | −82 | 351 | 784 | 1488 | 1074 | 2041 | −557 | −173 | 210 | 592 |
Arithmetic mean profit margin (%) | −27 | −5 | 20 | 44 | −37 | −12 | 14 | 40 | ||||||
Decrease in profit margin between 2010 and 2012 (%) | 11 | 7 | 6 | 4 | ||||||||||
Average decrease in profit margin across sensitivity analysis outcomes (%) | 7 | |||||||||||||
2) Scenario “Publicly owned producer” | ||||||||||||||
Three drug combination tablets | ||||||||||||||
[lamivudine 150 mg + stavudine 30 mg + nevirapine 200 mg], b.i.d | 63 | 37 | 91 | −28 | −21 | −13 | −6 | 57 | 38.8 | 92 | −35 | −27 | −20 | −12 |
[lamivudine 150 mg + zidovudine 300 mg + nevirapine 200 mg] b.i.d. | 131 | 87 | 140 | −9 | 8 | 26 | 43 | 119 | 89.6 | 143 | −24 | −6 | 12 | 30 |
[lamivudine 300 mg + tenofovir 300 mg + efavirenz 600 mg] q.d. | 192 | 126 | 153 | 40 | 65 | 90 | 115 | 162 | 102 | 128 | 34 | 54 | 74 | 95 |
[emtricitabine 200 mg + tenofovir 300 mg + efavirenz 600 mg] q.d. | 242 | 136 | 159 | 83 | 109 | 136 | 162 | 186 | 126 | 149 | 37 | 62 | 86 | 111 |
Two drug combination tablets | ||||||||||||||
[lamivudine 150 mg + stavudine 30 mg] b.i.d. | 39 | 24 | 77 | −38 | −33 | −29 | −24 | 36 | 24 | 77 | −42 | −37 | −32 | −27 |
[lamivudine 150 mg + zidovudine 300 mg] b.i.d. | 101 | 73 | 127 | −25 | −18 | −3 | 11 | 94 | 75 | 128 | −34 | −19 | −4 | 11 |
[lamivudine 300 mg + tenofovir 300 mg] q.d. | 109 | 71 | 98 | 11 | 25 | 40 | 54 | 65 | 58 | 85 | −19 | −8 | 4 | 15 |
[emtricitabine 200 mg + tenofovir 300 mg] q.d. | 143 | 78 | 105 | 38 | 54 | 70 | 85 | 87 | 73 | 99 | −13 | 2 | 16 | 31 |
[lopinavir 200 mg + ritonavir 50 mg], 4 tablets/day | 433 | 405 | 512 | −79 | 2 | 83 | 164 | 359 | 314 | 374 | −14 | 48 | 111 | 174 |
Single drug formulations | ||||||||||||||
[efavirenz 600 mg] q.d. | 56 | 55 | 81 | −25 | −14 | −3 | 7 | 46 | 44 | 70 | −24 | −15 | −6 | 2 |
[nevirapine 200 mg] b.i.d. | 31 | 13 | 66 | −35 | −33 | −30 | −27 | 30 | 16 | 69 | −40 | −36 | −33 | −30 |
[zidovudine 300 mg] b.i.d | 88 | 57 | 110 | −22 | −11 | 0 | 12 | 82 | 59 | 112 | −30 | −18 | −6 | 5 |
[didanosine 250 mg] b.i.d | 159 | 52 | 106 | 54 | 64 | 75 | 85 | 165 | 55 | 108 | 57 | 67 | 78 | 89 |
Summary | ||||||||||||||
Column total | 1787 | 1214 | 1825 | −35 | 197 | 442 | 681 | 1488 | 1074 | 1634 | −147 | 67 | 281 | 494 |
Arithmetic mean profit margin (%) | −2 | 11 | 25 | 38 | −10 | 4 | 19 | 33 | ||||||
Decrease in profit margin between 2010 and 2012 (%) | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | ||||||||||
Average decrease in profit margin across sensitivity analysis outcomes (%) | 6 |