Peter B. Bach, MD, MAPP

Director, Center for Health Policy and Outcomes, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Peter is a pulmonary and critical care physician, writer, and recognized health policy expert on federal regulatory processes related to prescription drug pricing and reimbursement. His research has been published in numerous peer-reviewed journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of the American Medical Association, as well as in the New York Times, New York Magazine, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg. PR Week named him as one of the top 50 health influencers of 2021 for his work on aligning cost of care with clinical value, just ahead of Demi Lovato.

Throughout his education and career, Peter has focused on health disparities, disease prevention, and treatment access. In a highly publicized and unprecedented move, Peter and his colleagues announced in 2012 MSKCC would not cover Zaltrap, a drug with no improved clinical outcomes but double the cost of the standard of care. This controversy led to the development of a price tracking database and the founding of the Drug Pricing Lab in 2015.

In addition to leading the Center for Health Policy and Outcomes and Drug Pricing Lab, Peter is a tenured faculty member at MSKCC, full professor at Weill Cornell Medical College, and Senior Scholar at the International Agency for Research on Cancer. He has been inducted into the National Academic of Medicine, American Society of Clinical Investigators, and the Johns Hopkins University Society of Scholars, and served as Senior Advisor to the Administrator on healthcare quality and cancer policy at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2005-2006).

He completed his undergraduate studies at Harvard College, master’s in public policy from the University of Chicago, and medical degree from the University of Minnesota, and trained at Johns Hopkins Medical Center.

Disclosures (2018-present):

Speaking: Mercer Consulting, United Rheumatology, Morgan Stanley, NYS Rheumatology, Oppenheimer & Co., Cello Health (formerly Defined Health), Oncology Analytics, Anthem, Magellan Health, Kaiser Permanente Institute for Health Policy, America’s Health Insurance Plans, Geisinger, Meyer Cancer Center of Weill Cornell Medicine, National Pharmaceutical Council

Advisory: EQRx, GRAIL, Foundation Medicine

Board of Directors: Oncology Analytics

Funding: Arnold Ventures, Kaiser Permanente, National Cancer Institute, Conquer Cancer Foundation

Focus Areas

Drug industry pricing and programs
Medicare and government Programs
Value-based pricing
Connect

Research & Insights

We conduct non-partisan, independent research, and make our work accessible and informative to policymakers and the general audience alike. Browse our featured research or explore our work by article type.

Understanding the Rewards of Successful Drug Development: Thinking Inside the…
The ability to charge high prices is only one component of a complex system of risks and rewards that underlies pharmaceutical innovation.
NEJM 01/30/2020
The "Netflix Model" of Financing Hepatitis C Treatment
An alternative payment model is proposed to support a population-level payment paradigm.
JAMA Viewpoint 11/20/2018
Spending On Prescription Drugs In The US: Where Does All…
Supply chain intermediaries, or “middlemen,” are being blamed for capturing much of the money that is often categorized as drug spending.
HA Blog 07/31/2018
Value-Based Pricing for Drugs: Theme and Variations
A taxonomy of the features that make a payment model truly value-based.
JAMA Viewpoint 05/02/2018
In Cancer Care, Cost Matters
A phenomenally expensive new cancer drug, Zaltrap, was not more clinically effective than existing medicines for colorectal cancer yet it was priced more than twice as high so we refused to offer it.
NYTimes 10/14/2012
The Drugs at the Heart of Our Pricing Crisis
The US drug pricing system is broken, but not irreparable. For large-molecule biologic drugs, enter: Production Plus Profit Pricing (P-quad, pronounced like Ahab's seagoing vessel).
NYTimes 03/15/2021
Biosimilars: Market Changes do not equal policy success
Numerous articles and reports have trumpeted biosimilar market growth, but it's critical we do not lose sight of the sole objective for creating the biosimilar market: to reduce the cost of older biologic drugs for society and taxpayers.
Drug Pricing Lab 03/15/2021
Bottom-Up Pricing Estimate for P-quad
How much would biologic drugs cost under P-quad pricing? Two approaches to estimating fully loaded costs plus a profit (10% and 20% examined) suggest net discounts from current prices would be at least 65% to 75%
Drug Pricing Lab 03/12/2021
Ethics of Clinical Trials to Evaluate Biosimilars
Biosimilars require extensive, expensive, and time-consuming human testing prior to market entry, a process vastly different than generics. So why are we still doing them?
MedRx IV 03/09/2021
COVID-19 Reduced Average Life Expectancy of Americans by Five Days,…
The CDC made a mistake.
STAT 02/25/2021
Instead of debating 'first-shot' vs 'set-aside' vaccine approaches, hospitals' study…
Hospitals could start studies of their own employees to answer important questions, including whether the first-shot approach has downsides when compared to the set-aside strategy.
STAT 01/04/2021
After 4 Years of Trump, Medicare and Medicaid Badly Need…
Many promising ideas won't work as expected, and that's all the more reason for CMS to evaluate how medical care is delivered to its patients.
NYTimes 12/01/2020

Meet the Rest of the Team

The Drug Pricing Lab’s team brings together tremendous experience in medicine, economics, consulting, sociology, and finance.
Meet the Team
Newsletter

Stay up to date on our work and news