The Supreme Court raised questions about the MRP of ₹27,000 for a cancer drug priced at ₹2,700. The court expressed concern about the significant price variation, price controls, and the burden on patients.
cancer drug cost
The Supreme Court has raised serious questions about the significant price discrepancies in the prices of medicines used to treat serious diseases like cancer. The court heard a case in which the Price to Retail (PTR) of a cancer drug was reported as ₹2,700, while the MRP was ₹27,000. This means there was a nearly 10-fold difference between the retail price and the MRP.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court expressed serious concern over this discrepancy and asked why there was no price control mechanism when life-saving medicines could be so expensive. The next hearing in the case will be on September 29.
Why ₹27000 MRP on a medicine worth ₹2700?
The case is being heard by a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta. During the hearing, the court was informed that a drug used to treat cancer is available at retailers for ₹2,700, but its MRP is listed at ₹27,000.
The court questioned this discrepancy, asking how such a high MRP could be set for a drug that the manufacturer sells to retailers at a much lower price. Justice Sandeep Mehta issued a strong comment, calling the situation extremely serious for patients. This issue is not limited to the price of a single cancer drug. The petitions raise several questions regarding the current system of drug pricing, the use of generic drugs, and the sale of medicines by hospitals.
The court also raised questions on the system of fixing the price of the medicine.
The Supreme Court argued that while the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013, prices of certain scheduled drugs are regulated, approximately 82% of drugs are outside the scope of price ceilings. The National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) regulates the prices of approximately 1,000 scheduled drugs. The petitioners argue that for drugs where initial pricing is not regulated, companies can set high initial MRPs. This can lead to significant price variations at the manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or hospital level.
Direct impact on patients
Treatment for a serious illness like cancer can require patients to take medications and other medical care for a long time. Consequently, significant differences in medication prices can place a significant financial burden on the patient and their family. The Supreme Court expressed concern about this aspect during the hearing. It was pointed out to the court that many families may be forced to sell their property or other assets to meet the cost of treatment.
The petitions allege that some private hospitals force patients to purchase medications from the hospital's own pharmacy instead of purchasing them from outside. This could reduce patients' access to affordable medication. However, these are allegations made by the petitioners and are currently under trial in court.
Questions also arose about the money for government schemes.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court also raised questions about the pricing of medicines under government health schemes. The Court stated that if a hospital purchases medicines at high prices under a government health scheme and later receives payment from the government, the burden ultimately falls on the public treasury and taxpayers. The Court specifically expressed concern about this aspect, citing schemes like Ayushman Bharat.
The government mentioned Jan Aushadhi centers.
Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, representing the central government, stated that the government is committed to ensuring the availability of affordable medicines. He also mentioned the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana. According to the government, many generic medicines are available at Janaushadhi Kendras at lower prices than branded medicines.
