Free to Read: Regulators Rebut Concerns Drug Bulk-Buying Program Is Falling Short on Quality

National health insurance and medicine authorities say claims about poor efficacy of some centrally procured medications are largely based on ‘anecdotes or subjective feelings’

Addressing the concern that lower purchasing prices could give manufacturers an incentive to cut corners, the authorities said that cost reductions aren't achieved through compromises in manufacturing. Photo: AI generated

China’s national health insurance and medicine regulators have defended the quality of drugs procured through the country’s central bulk-buying program, rebutting claims from medical professionals earlier this year that some of the medications had been less effective than advertised.

The findings, released Sunday by the National Healthcare Security Administration (NHSA) and the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), came after doctors in Beijing and Shanghai — who are also members of local political consultative bodies — voiced concerns that the government’s cost-cutting measures might compromise overall drug quality.

The authorities’ investigation found no evidence supporting the accusations. The NHSA and the NMPA characterized the claims about poor efficacy as largely based on “anecdotes or subjective feelings.”

The inquiry, launched on Jan. 21, included visits to seven major hospitals in Shanghai, consultations with medical professionals, and data collected from relevant departments.

In response to allegations that some anesthetics, laxatives and medications for high blood pressure in the state-run bulk procurement program did not work as well as expected, the regulators pointed to clinical studies and hospitals that refuted the claims, quoting several anonymous medical professionals surveyed who said they had not received such feedback.

The authorities highlighted analysis showing that certain centrally procured Chinese generic drugs were roughly as effective as their brand-name counterparts, which are often costlier. For laxatives used during endoscopies, they noted that the main drug used for such procedures had just been included in the program and had yet to be widely implemented.

The review also found the number of adverse drug reactions reported by hospitals remains within the expected range, they added.

Addressing the concern that lower purchasing prices could give manufacturers an incentive to cut corners, the authorities explained that cost reductions are achieved through economies of scale, streamlined procurement processes, and savings on marketing expenses, rather than compromises in manufacturing.

An anonymous clinical expert surveyed suggested the public concerns stemmed from “misunderstandings that equate lower prices with inferior quality” due to a poor understanding of the pharmaceutical industry, particularly the generics market, according to the NHSA and NMPA.

The regulators emphasized that the country’s quality consistency evaluation for generics is a rigorous and continuous process, where assessments are carried out at the approval stage and after the drug hits the market. They refuted concerns that the process is a “one-off evaluation.”

While defending the integrity of the current system, the authorities acknowledged there’s room for improvement. They pledged to strengthen oversight during the procurement bidding process, excluding drugs that carry greater quality risks, while paying closer attention to bids that are unusually low.

They will also require greater transparency from drug manufacturers regarding quality control both before and after the bidding process.