On May 12, 2025, the Trump administration issued an executive order to lower prescription drug costs by mandating that the US pay no more than prices in peer countries. The legality of implementing this so-called most favored nation (MFN) pricing through executive action is unclear. However, the idea of benchmarking US drug prices to prices in other countries is not new. The Trump administration unsuccessfully attempted a more limited MFN policy during its first term, and a 2019 bill passed by House Democrats used international prices as upper limits for Medicare price negotiations. Although lowering drug prices is a priority, achieving this by linking prices in the US to those in other countries is a misguided approach built on a misdiagnosis of the reason prices are higher in the US than in other countries.

The responses to our study on wealth and mortality in the United States and Europe raise important questions about causal inference, potential confounding, and the interpretation of cross-national differences. As noted by the correspondents, our findings reflect associations, not causal relationships. Although the patterns we observed were consistent across settings, more work is needed to disentangle the complex relationship between wealth and health.

Uncertainties about the benefits and harms of new drugs are common at the time of drugs’ approval. It is unclear to what extent the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) communicates these uncertainties in the FDA-approved prescribing information (the drug label), which is the primary channel of communication between the FDA and physicians. Although physicians might not regularly consult the drug label for prescribing decisions, other information sources used by physicians either index or incorporate information from the label. We searched FDA review documents for uncertainties identified by FDA reviewers with new cancer drugs. We considered the subset of uncertainties highlighted in the FDA’s Benefit-Risk Framework as important to the FDA’s approval decision. During the period 2019–22, the FDA approved fifty-two new cancer drugs. In review documents, FDA reviewers identified a total of 213 clinical trial uncertainties with new cancer drugs, 50 percent of which were considered to be important uncertainties to the FDA’s approval decision. Labels for physicians reported information on 26 percent of all uncertainties and 48 percent of uncertainties that were important to the FDA’s approval decision. Communicating uncertainties about the evidence of drugs in the label is essential for informing physicians about drugs’ safe and effective use.