The median $40,000 cost per trial enrollee is high because pharma companies essentially run a parallel, premium healthcare system for participants. They pay for all care and level it up globally to standardize the experiment.

Related Insights

The U.S. market's high prices create the large profit pool necessary to fund risky drug development. If the U.S. adopted price negotiation like other countries, the global incentive for pharmaceutical innovation would shrink, resulting in fewer new drugs being developed worldwide.

While the FDA is often blamed for high trial costs, a major culprit is the consolidated Clinical Research Organization (CRO) market. These entrenched players lack incentives to adopt modern, cost-saving technologies, creating a structural bottleneck that prevents regulatory modernization from translating into cheaper and faster trials.

A significant portion of biotech's high costs stems from its "artisanal" nature, where each company develops bespoke digital workflows and data structures. This inefficiency arises because startups are often structured for acquisition after a single clinical success, not for long-term, scalable operations.

To fix the R&D funding imbalance, the CEO proposes a 'one fair price' system. A drug would have one US price with no rebates, and a price in other developed nations would be indexed to their GDP per capita.

China is no longer just a low-cost manufacturing hub for biotech. It has become an innovation leader, leveraging regulatory advantages like investigator-initiated trials to gain a significant speed advantage in cutting-edge areas like cell and gene therapy. This shifts the competitive landscape from cost to a race for speed and novel science.

The Orphan Drug Act successfully incentivized R&D for rare diseases. A similar policy framework is needed for common, age-related diseases. Despite their massive potential markets, these indications suffer from extremely high failure rates and costs. A new incentive structure could de-risk development and align commercial goals with the enormous societal need for longevity.

To commercialize curative 'one-and-done' genetic medicines, Eli Lilly is considering a subscription-like model. The procedure could be free upfront, with patients or insurers paying an ongoing fee only as long as it works.

Investing in clinical studies is not just for product validation; it's a powerful marketing strategy. It allows you to make scientifically-backed claims in ads that competitors cannot legally replicate, creating a significant and sustainable competitive advantage.

Selling low-cost vaccines to organizations like Gavi isn't just charity for pharmaceutical companies. It creates massive economies of scale, lowering the cost of goods for their high-margin primary markets and increasing overall net profit, creating a powerful win-win incentive structure.

Government subsidies within healthcare systems like the ACA create a perverse incentive for providers and insurers to inflate prices. This triggers a toxic flywheel: higher costs demand more subsidies, which in turn fuel further price hikes, making the underlying problem of affordability worse over time.