Delays in access to affordable medicines: putting policy into perspective

Improving Interactions Between Health Technology Assessment Bodies and Regulatory Agencies: A Systematic Review and Cross-Sectional Survey on Processes, Progress, Outcomes, and Challenges

The need to optimize drug development and facilitate faster access for patients has ignited discussions around the importance of improving interactions between health technology assessment (HTA) bodies and regulatory agencies. In this study, we conducted a systematic review to examine processes, progress, outcomes, and challenges of harmonization/interaction initiatives between HTA bodies and regulatory agencies. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts database were searched up to 21 October 2019. Searches for gray literature (working papers, commissioned reports, policy documents, etc.) were performed via Google scholar and several institutional websites. An online cross-sectional survey was also conducted among HTA (n = 22) and regulatory agencies (n = 6) across Europe to supplement the systematic review. Overall, we found that while there are areas of divergence, there has been progress over time in narrowing the gap in evidentiary requirements for HTA bodies and regulatory agencies. Most regulatory agencies (4/6; 67%) and half (11/22, 50%) of the HTA bodies reported having a formal link for “collaborating” with the other. Several mechanisms such as early tripartite dialogues, parallel submissions (reviews), adaptive licensing pathways, and postauthorization data generation have been explored as avenues for improving collaboration. A number of pilot initiatives have shown positive effects of these models to reduce the time between regulatory and HTA decisions, which may translate into faster access for patients to life-saving therapies. Thus, future approaches aimed at improving harmonization/interaction between HTA bodies and regulatory agencies should build on these existing models/mechanisms while examining their long-term impacts. Several barriers including legal, organizational, and resource-related factors were also identified, and these need to be addressed to achieve greater alignment in the current regulatory and reimbursement landscape.

Reimbursement Lag of New Drugs Under Taiwan's National Health Insurance System Compared With United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Korea

Drug lag—delayed approval or reimbursement—is a major barrier to accessing cutting‐edge drugs. Unlike approval lag, reimbursement lag is under‐researched. We investigated the key determinants of reimbursement lag under Taiwan National Health Insurance (NHI), and compared this lag with those in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Korea. Using retrospective data on 190 new NHI‐reimbursed drugs from 2007 to 2014, we studied reimbursement lag in Taiwan vs. other countries, and investigated associated factors using generalized linear models (GLMs). The median reimbursement lags during before (“first‐generation”) and after (“second‐generation”) NHI drug reimbursement scheme in Taiwan were 378 and 458 days, respectively. The “first‐generation” lag was shorter only than that in South Korea, whereas the “second‐generation” lag only exceeded those of the United Kingdom and Japan. In GLM models, higher drug expenditure and the introduction of the “second‐generation” NHI were two statistically significant parameters associated with reimbursement lag among antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents. For other drug classes, the reimbursement price proposed by pharmaceutical companies and use of price‐volume agreements were two statistically significant parameters associated with longer reimbursement lags. The current reimbursement lag in Taiwan is longer than 1 year, but only longer than those of the United Kingdom and Japan. The determinants differ between drug categories. A specific review process for antineoplastic and immunomodulating drugs may expedite reimbursement. There is a clear need for systematic data collection and analysis to ascertain factors associated with reimbursement lag and thereby inform future policy making.

Affordability Assessment from a Static to Dynamic Concept: A Scenario-Based Assessment of Cardiovascular Medicines

The out-of-pocket payments for prescription medications can impose a financial burden on patients from low- and middle- incomes and who suffer from chronic diseases. The present study aims at evaluating the affordability of cardiovascular disease (CVD) medication in Iran. This includes measuring affordability through World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) methodology. In this method, affordability is characterized as the number of days’ wages of the lowest-paid unskilled government worker. The different medication therapy scenarios are defined in mono-and combination therapy approaches. This method adds on to WHO/HAI methodology to discover new approaches to affordability assessments. The results show the differences in the medicines affordability when different approaches are used in mono-and combination therapy between 6 main sub-therapeutic groups of CVD. It indicates the medicine affordability is not a static concept and it changes dynamically between CVD therapeutic subgroups when it used alone or in combination with other medicines regarding patients’ characteristics and medical conditions. Hypertension and anti-arrhythmia therapeutic groups had the most non-affordability and hyperlipidemia had the most affordable medicines. Therefore, affordability can be considered as a dynamic concept, which not only affected by the medicine price but significantly affected by a patient’s characteristics, the number of medical conditions, and insurance coverage.

Patient access to medicines in two countries with similar health systems and differing medicines policies: Implications from a comprehensive literature review

BACKGROUND

Countries with similar health systems but different medicines policies might result in substantial medicines usage differences and resultant outcomes. The literature is sparse in this area.

OBJECTIVE

To review pharmaceutical policy research in New Zealand and Australia and discuss differences between the two countries and the impact these differences may have on subsequent medicine access.

METHODS

A review of the literature (2008-2016) was performed to identify relevant, peer-reviewed articles. Systematic searches were conducted across the six databases MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Direct, Springer Links, Scopus and Google Scholar. A further search of journals of high relevance was also conducted. Using content analysis, a narrative synthesis of pharmaceutical policy research influencing access to medicines in Australia and New Zealand was conducted. The results were critically assessed in the context of policy material available via grey literature from the respective countries.

RESULTS

Key elements regarding pharmaceutical policy were identified from the 35 research papers identified for this review. Through a content analysis, three broad categories of pharmaceutical policy were found, which potentially could influence patient access to medicines in each country; the national health system, pricing and reimbursement. Within these three categories, 9 subcategories were identified: national health policy, pharmacy system, marketing authorization and regulation, prescription to non-prescription medicine switch, orphan drug policies, generic medicine substitution, national pharmaceutical schedule and health technology assessment, patient co-payment and managed entry agreements.

CONCLUSIONS

This review systematically evaluated the current literature and identified key areas of difference in policy between Australia and NZ. Australia appears to cover and reimburse a greater number of medicines, while New Zealand achieves much lower prices for medicines than their Australian counterparts and has been more successful in controlling national pharmaceutical expenditure. Delays in patient access to new therapies in New Zealand have considerable implications for overall patient access to medicines; however, higher patient co-payments and relative pharmaceutical expenditure in Australia and its effect upon patient access to medicines must also be considered.

Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement in Japan: For Faster, More Complete Access to New Drugs

BACKGROUND

In Japan, National Health Insurance (NHI) has ensured that all Japanese citizens can use the health services they need for more than 50 years. This paper gives an overview of the Japanese NHI drug price listing scheme and practice, and it also discusses the issue of drug price setting and health insurance system from the viewpoint of better patient access to new drugs as well as the environment for innovative new drug development.

METHODS

For each New Molecular Entity (NME) approved between October 2004 and December 2014, we checked its presence in the list of NHI drug prices as of January 31, 2015, to calculate the NHI coverage rate and the average time between marketing approval and the date of NHI listing.

RESULTS

A total of 304 NMEs were listed in the NHI price list during the study period, and the NHI coverage rate (excepting preventive vaccines) was 97.4%. The average time between marketing authorization and the initiation of reimbursement was 66 days. There were 88 drugs that gained premiums for innovativeness/usefulness.

CONCLUSIONS

From the view of NHI coverage scope and speed, the hurdle to access new drugs in Japan is shown to be lower than in other countries that also set public prices for reimbursement. Although the difficulty of controlling health expenditures increases, drug pricing that properly reflects the drug's clinical value is important in that it also furthers the development of medical technology. Better price setting can also facilitate patient access to innovative drugs.