Pharmaceutical drug prices and trends for ABIRATERONE

Subscribe to access the full database, or Start Trial
Drug Name	NDC	Price/Unit ($)	Unit	Date
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250 MG TAB	00143-9597-21	0.80367	EACH	2026-07-22
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250 MG TAB	00378-6920-78	0.80367	EACH	2026-07-22
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250 MG TAB	00904-6948-04	0.80367	EACH	2026-07-22
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250 MG TAB	16714-0963-01	0.80367	EACH	2026-07-22
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250 MG TAB	43598-0358-04	0.80367	EACH	2026-07-22
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250 MG TAB	50268-0032-11	0.80367	EACH	2026-07-22
>Drug Name	>NDC	>Price/Unit ($)	>Unit	>Date

Subscribe to access the full database, or Start Trial

Price type key: Federal Supply Schedule (FSS): generally available to all Federal Govt agencies / 'BIG4' prices: VA, DoD, Public Health & Coast Guard only / National Contracts (NC): Available to specific agencies
Drug Name	Vendor	NDC	Count	Price ($)	Price/Unit ($)	Unit	Dates	Price Type
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 500MG TAB	AvKare, LLC	42291-0073-60	60	1579.15	26.31917	EACH	2023-09-22 - 2028-06-14	FSS
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250MG TAB	Golden State Medical Supply, Inc.	60505-4327-01	120	984.92	8.20767	EACH	2023-06-16 - 2028-06-14	FSS
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250MG TAB	Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	00378-6920-78	120	359.18	2.99317	EACH	2023-01-01 - 2027-12-31	FSS
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 500MG TAB	Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	00378-6921-91	60	1607.83	26.79717	EACH	2023-01-01 - 2027-12-31	FSS
ABIRATERONE ACETATE 250MG TAB	GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS INC., USA	68462-0135-08	120	224.95	1.87458	EACH	2022-10-15 - 2027-10-14	FSS
>Drug Name	>Vendor	>NDC	>Count	>Price ($)	>Price/Unit ($)	>Unit	>Dates	>Price Type

Last updated: July 11, 2026

Abiraterone (abiraterone acetate) faces expanding generic and biosimilar-like substitution pressure only in the sense of small-molecule generic erosion, not biologics. The market’s pricing ceiling is set by (1) patent and exclusivity expiry for key formulations and dosing presentations, (2) payer formularies and switching policies, (3) supply and competition intensity from approved generics, and (4) tender economics in major markets. A defensible near-term price view is that wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) typically compresses sharply in year 1 to year 3 after meaningful generic entry, then stabilizes at a lower baseline driven by procurement rates and rebate structures. Mid-to-late decade pricing is primarily determined by how quickly branded access is displaced by lowest-cost generics across frequent regimens: metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).

What is the current market size and revenue exposure for abiraterone (US and major EU5)

How big is the global abiraterone market versus key competitors

Abiraterone is a backbone androgen-axis therapy for prostate cancer. The commercial footprint historically centered on Zytiga (Janssen). The competitive set includes enzalutamide (Xtandi), apalutamide (Erleada), darolutamide (Nubeqa), and chemotherapy/combination strategies depending on disease state.

Revenue exposure is driven by regimen share:

mCRPC: abiraterone is used post-ADT and across sequencing lines.
mHSPC: abiraterone combinations increased uptake in the ADT era with intensification strategies.
Combination/switch behavior: many systems favor switching within androgen receptor pathway inhibitors based on payer preference and drug cost.

Business implication: the “revenue line” for abiraterone is not only unit volume. It tracks how quickly payers move to the lowest net-cost androgen-axis alternatives and how much utilization remains for abiraterone when enzalutamide/apalutamide/darolutamide are preferred.

What drives net price, not just WAC

Net price for abiraterone is shaped by:

Rebates and contracting (especially in US managed care)
Hospital/IDN group purchasing discounts (EU)
Tender dynamics and national procurement rules (EU5)
Patient copay strategy and pharmacy channel behavior (US)

Featured snippet answer: Abiraterone’s pricing is primarily a function of tender and formulary mechanics after generic entry. WAC declines can precede net price declines; net price typically falls faster when the formulary tier drops and utilization shifts.

What patents and exclusivity protect abiraterone, and when do they expire

Key legal categories impacting abiraterone exclusivity

For small molecules like abiraterone acetate, exclusivity typically comes from:

Primary composition-of-matter and process patents for abiraterone acetate
Formulation patents tied to specific dosing forms or stability/release characteristics
Method-of-use patents for disease states and regimens
Orange Book-listed patents (US) that can block generic approvals until expiration

Where generic entry timing comes from

Generic entry can occur when:

Orange Book-listed patents expire, or
A generic applicant receives approval via Paragraph IV (at-risk launch) or settlement

Commercial impact: pricing pressure is strongest after at least one high-credibility, high-supply generic reaches scale and is adopted by payers.

When does generic competition realistically reduce abiraterone prices

Typical price trajectory after generic launch

A high-confidence market structure for mature generics is:

Year 0-1 after launch: WAC begins to drop; channel inventory and contracting delays net-price movement.
Year 1-3: aggressive formulary placement of multiple generics; rebates intensify; tender winners compress net cost.
Year 3+: pricing stabilizes around the lowest-net-cost cohort, with periodic re-capture by new entrants or discrete tender cycles.

What makes abiraterone different from “plain vanilla” generics

It is a branded legacy oncology drug with long treatment duration, so payer migration affects many months of spend.
Dosing complexity, supportive meds, and administration patterns influence payer willingness to substitute across alternatives, even when abiraterone is available as generic.

Featured snippet answer: Expect the sharpest price drop in year 1 to year 3 after scale generic adoption, then stabilization as procurement anchors around lowest-cost contracts.

How many generic and authorized competitors exist for abiraterone

Competition intensity and “who matters”

Price compression usually depends on the number of ANDA suppliers that can supply reliably at scale, not just approvals on paper.

Market mechanics:

One or two suppliers can temporarily maintain higher pricing if procurement favors them.
When at least three to five suppliers are active in tenders, prices generally trend toward cost-plus procurement levels.

Business implication: for projections, the relevant input is supplier capacity and tender outcomes, not merely total number of generic approvals.

What is the Orange Book status of abiraterone (and how does it affect launch risk)

Why Orange Book listings matter

Orange Book-listed patents determine:

Whether a generic must certify to expiration or file Paragraph IV
Whether litigation and settlements delay approval or launch
Whether formulation and method-of-use patents remain bottlenecks even after composition patents expire

Featured snippet answer: Orange Book status is the gating mechanism for US generic timing. Pricing impact begins when launch occurs and payers accept substitution.

What patent litigation affects abiraterone generics and at-risk launches

How litigation maps to pricing

Patent litigation influences:

Delay of generic launch
Settlement terms (including “brand exclusivity” payments or agreed launch dates)
At-risk launches that can still win volumes if courts or settlements allow earlier entry

Commercial impact framework:

Litigation that blocks entry keeps branded pricing flatter.
Settlements that schedule delayed generic launches shift the price decline timing later.
Paragraph IV wins shorten the timeline and accelerate payer migration.

How does abiraterone price compare with enzalutamide and apalutamide

Cross-drug pricing power

Even if abiraterone’s unit price falls, total spend can remain elevated if:

Formulary restrictions favor it over competing androgen-axis therapies
Clinicians resist switching due to perceived efficacy or side-effect profiles
Contracts set class-based pricing that keeps net price closer to peers

Comparison logic:

If enzalutamide and apalutamide are at lower net prices via aggressive contracting or earlier generic pressure, abiraterone’s payer pull weakens.
If competing therapies face their own exclusivity or supply bottlenecks, abiraterone’s net price may decline more slowly.

What formulation patents and label-expansion patents could protect higher-priced abiraterone presentations

Dose form and regimen-linked patents

For abiraterone, protective layers that can delay substitution include:

Specific formulations impacting drug stability, excipient systems, or dosing convenience
Method-of-use patents linked to mCRPC or mHSPC populations
Subgroup claims that extend market exclusivity even if composition patents expire

Pricing impact: if patents restrict the “preferred” use label, payers may still cover generic abiraterone off-label in a compliant way, but utilization may slow and net price compression can be slower.

How strong is the patent estate for abiraterone, and what is the generic entry risk

Patent estate strength drivers

Patent estate strength for a mature molecule is typically a function of:

Remaining unexpired patents listed in the Orange Book
Presence of ongoing litigation or settlements impacting launch dates
Diversity of patent types (composition, formulation, method-of-use)

Commercial risk mapping:

Weak estate: predictable early entry and rapid price drops
Strong estate: delayed entry and delayed erosion

What is the biosimilar risk profile for abiraterone

Abiraterone is a small molecule; biosimilar pathways do not apply.

What generic entry risks exist for abiraterone in US

Key risk factors for pricing volatility

Pricing can deviate from base-case projections when:

A dominant supplier exits manufacturing or faces quality issues
Tender winners change due to procurement changes
Courts delay a launch or settlements move effective dates
Shortages create temporary relief in pricing pressure

Featured snippet answer: The main generic-entry risks are supply reliability and litigation-driven timing changes, not biosimilar substitution.

How do international procurement and reimbursement affect abiraterone price

EU5 procurement mechanics that matter

In EU5 (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK), price formation depends on:

Health technology assessment outcomes for competing androgen-axis therapies
National reimbursement rules and reference pricing
Tender systems for oncology drug supply in hospitals

Commercial implication: price compression can be faster in markets with tender-based procurement once generic abiraterone is accepted.

UK and payer structures

UK pricing tends to be driven by:

NHS procurement and reimbursement decisions
Uptake constraints based on commissioning and local formularies

Price projections for abiraterone: base case, downside, and upside

Projection framework (what you can model)

A practical projection model uses:

Generic launch timing (effective “first meaningful adoption” date)
Number of competing suppliers active at scale
Contracting intensity (rebate and tender aggressiveness)
Regimen share shift to competing androgen-axis therapies

Base case (typical for mature oncology generics)

Near term (0-12 months post meaningful generic adoption): steep WAC compression and rapid net-price decline through rebates and formulary tier changes.
Mid term (12-36 months): stabilization around lowest-cost suppliers; slight volatility due to tenders and competition laps.
Long term (3-7 years): gradual drift toward stable procurement pricing with periodic step-down when new entrants or new tender cycles reset pricing.

Downside case (slower erosion)

Slower-than-expected decline if:

Litigation delays or settlement schedules delay utilization shift
Fewer suppliers achieve reliable supply at scale
Payer preference keeps abiraterone on preferred tiers longer relative to peers

Upside case (faster erosion)

Faster decline if:

Multiple suppliers win tenders simultaneously
Courts/settlements reduce launch delays and enable rapid switching
Rapid substitution within androgen-axis therapy classes limits branded/remaining higher-cost options

What to treat as the key projection variable: the “switch date” from payer acceptance to mass utilization. Pricing declines are steeper after switch date, not merely after first generic approval.

What are the likely revenue scenarios for brand holders and generic entrants

Brand-holder revenue scenario

Brand revenue typically declines in step with:

Utilization shift to generics
Share loss to lower-net-cost peers in androgen-axis class
Contract resets in major accounts

Expected pattern:

Large initial drop after generic adoption becomes formulary standard
Continued erosion as remaining restricted access is removed

Generic entrant revenue scenario

Generic entrants can capture:

Initial volume through pharmacy benefits or IDN formularies
Additional share as tenders rotate

But margin pressure is high:

Competitive contracting compresses unit price quickly
Supply reliability becomes critical due to oncology adherence requirements

Key pricing and volume drivers to monitor for abiraterone

Formulary status changes by payer and major PBM
Tender outcomes in EU5 hospital procurement
Supplier count at scale and any manufacturing interruptions
Competition sequencing between abiraterone vs enzalutamide vs apalutamide vs darolutamide in mHSPC and mCRPC
New guideline or evidence updates that alter regimen selection

Key Takeaways

Abiraterone pricing is driven less by nominal WAC and more by net-price contracting outcomes tied to formulary and tender acceptance after generic adoption.
The sharpest erosion typically occurs within year 1 to year 3 of meaningful scale generic penetration.
Cross-drug competition within androgen-axis therapies materially affects abiraterone’s ability to resist price declines.
Main uncertainty for price projections is timing and speed of payer switching, which depends on Orange Book-linked patent clearance and litigation/settlement outcomes, plus supplier scale and tender dynamics.

FAQs

How do Paragraph IV challenges for abiraterone affect the timing of generic launches and price drops?
Which abiraterone presentations (tablet strength/formulation) tend to face the fastest generic substitution?
How does abiraterone net pricing typically change after formulary tier down in US commercial plans?
What EU procurement mechanisms accelerate abiraterone price erosion versus US reimbursement dynamics?
How does abiraterone compete on cost-effectiveness when payers compare it with enzalutamide and apalutamide in mHSPC?

References (APA)

FDA. (n.d.). Drugs@FDA: Drug Details. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/
FDA. (n.d.). Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/
FDA. (n.d.). Patent and Exclusivity Information. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/
IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science. (n.d.). Medicines use and spending reports (global and country-level oncology spend context). IQVIA. https://www.iqvia.com/insights/the-iqvia-institute