Medicines with one seller and many buyers: strategies to increase the power of the payer

Assessing, Pricing and Funding Point-of-Care Diagnostic Tests for Community-Acquired Acute Respiratory Tract Infections–Overview of Policies Applied in 17 European Countries

Point-of-care diagnostic tests for community-acquired acute respiratory tract infections (CA-ARTI) can support doctors by improving antibiotic prescribing. However, little is known about health technology assessment (HTA), pricing and funding policies for CA-ARTI diagnostics. Thus, this study investigated these policies for this group of devices applied in the outpatient setting in Europe. Experts from competent authority responded to a questionnaire in Q4/2020. Information is available for 17 countries. Studied countries do not base their pricing and funding decision for CA-ARTI diagnostics on an HTA. While a few countries impose price regulation for some publicly funded medical devices, the prices of CA-ARTI diagnostics are not directly regulated in any of the surveyed countries. Indirect price regulation through public procurement is applied in some countries. Reimbursement lists of medical devices eligible for public funding exist in several European countries, and in some countries these lists include CA-ARTI diagnostics. In a few countries, the public payer funds the health professional for performing the service of conducting the test. Given low levels of regulation and few incentives, the study findings suggest room for strengthening pricing and funding policies of CA-ARTI diagnostics to contribute to increased acceptance and use of these point-of-care tests.

How reliable are ICER's results published in current pharmacoeconomic literature? The controversial issue of price confidentiality

Pharmacoeconomic data are widely used along drug life cycle for supporting decision-making processes on research and development, pricing and reimbursement, and market access. In this context, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is the gold standard of either cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) or cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of pharmaceuticals and health technologies. However, the widespread use of confidentiality clauses in the agreements between pharmaceutical companies and the payers may affect the reliability of ICER value based on transparent price. The aim of this article is to evaluate a case study and simulate the impact of price confidentiality and other managed-entry agreement conditions on the ICER value. The case study was conducted selecting a CEA submitted to the Health Economic Evaluations Office of the Italian Medicines Agency by the pharmaceutical company, which specifically compared two alternative options reimbursed by the Italian NHS using confidential managed-entry agreements. So, a real model was used to collect the output of ICERs generated by the simulation model, considering price inputs of alternative options ranging from the transparent prices to the confidential net price. The simulation showed that price confidentiality may affect the estimated value of the ICER of a new medicine and, consequently, its interpretation. From a different point of view, the published ICER values may also give a completely false economic evidence if non-disclosure agreements are not taken into account. A proposal for editors of pharmacoeconomic journals to improve reliability of CEA is also discussed.

Affordable Prices Without Threatening the Oncological R&D Pipeline-An Economic Experiment on Transparency in Price Negotiations

The high prices of innovative medicines endanger access to care worldwide. Sustainable prices need to be affordable while sufficiently incentivizing research and development (R&D) investments. A proposed solution is increased transparency. Proponents argue that price and R&D cost confidentiality are drivers of high prices. On the contrary, supporters of confidentiality claim that confidentiality enables targeted discounts which make treatments affordable; moreover, pharmaceutical companies argue that R&D investments would suffer with more transparency. Despite the political relevance, limited empirical evidence exists on the effects of transparency regulations. We contribute to fill this gap with an experiment where we replicate the EU pharmaceutical market in a laboratory setting. In a randomized controlled study, we analyzed how participants, 400 students located in four European countries, negotiated in the current system of Price Secrecy in comparison with innovative bargaining settings where either prices only (Price Transparency) or prices and R&D costs (Full Transparency) were made transparent to buyers. We found that Price transparency had no statistically significant effect on average prices or number of patients treated and made R&D investments significantly smaller (-16.86%; P: 0.0024). On the other hand, Full Transparency reduced prices (-26%; P: 0.0004) and held the number of patients constant at the level of Price Secrecy. It produced price convergence between countries with low and high health budgets, and, despite lower prices, had no effect on R&D investments. Our findings provide novel evidence that combining price and R&D cost transparency could be an effective policy to contribute to sustainable medicine prices. See related article by Franzen et al. (Cancer Discov 2022;12:299-302).

Access and pricing of medicines for patients with rare diseases in the European Union: an industry perspective

INTRODUCTION

The EU Orphan Regulation has successfully stimulated R&D of medicines for rare diseases, resulting in substantial increase of orphan designations and authorized orphan medicinal products in the EU during the last decade. Despite such important advances, access to treatment across the 27 EU Member States is still highly variable.

AREAS COVERED

We provide an overview of the current situation of patient access to orphan drugs in the EU. We discuss the EU policy landscape regarding joint assessment and pricing & reimbursement negotiations of medicinal products, price and sustainability of orphan drugs for health care systems and the importance of Real-World Data and registry infrastructures for rare diseases. Additionally, we provide recommendations for areas of improvement throughout the lifecycle of orphan drugs, aiming to preserve a positive R&D climate for rare diseases in the EU and accelerate patient access.

EXPERT OPINION

The EU needs to maintain a strong patient-centric pharmaceutical ecosystem that encourages long-term investments and rewards innovation in areas of high unmet medical need. Areas of potential improvement range from enhanced alignment of regulatory and HTA evidence requirements and use of specific value frameworks for the assessment of orphan drugs to the development of registry infrastructures and innovative performance-based pricing agreements.

Determinants of drug prices: a systematic review of comparison studies

OBJECTIVE

In this systematic review on drug price comparison studies, we report on recent determinants of drug prices in a national and international context to facilitate regulation of drug prices by purchasers and policymakers worldwide. Determinants of drug prices were divided into non-modifiable and modifiable and were categorised as pertaining to a country's income level, pharmaceutical market system and its policies and government.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Determinants of drug prices or price variance.

DESIGN

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library for peer-reviewed articles published between 2004 and 22 July 2020 that reported an association of the primary outcome with one or more determinants. We performed a best-evidence synthesis of these associations for determinants covered in at least three studies.

RESULTS

31 publications were included. Only one publication described net drug prices and 30 described retail drug prices. Five modifiable determinants were associated with lower retail prices: generic market portion, discounts, tendering policies, central (governmental) purchasing and pricing regulation schemes. The originators market portion and a system in which mark-ups are common were associated with higher retail prices. Retail prices were highest in the USA, even compared with other high-income countries. A positive association between national income level and drug retail prices could not be established among middle-income and high-income countries. Retail prices were highest in low-income countries when adjusted for purchasing power parity.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature on determinants of net drug prices is extremely sparse. Various healthcare system interventions, market-specific and governmental regulations are consistently associated with lower retail prices. Some interventions are easily implementable in developing or middle-income countries, such as tendering, central purchasing and fixed pricing regulation schemes. Net drug price comparison studies are needed to overcome the lack of price transparency and to quantify the effectiveness of policy measures on net drug prices.

Medicine price transparency and confidential managed-entry agreements in Europe: findings from the EURIPID survey

Pricing of pharmaceuticals is an all-time challenge for healthcare systems. Often public payers agree with companies on confidential managed-entry agreements (MEAs) that, e.g. foresee discounts under specific circumstances. The EURIPID Executive Committee surveyed 22 European countries, who all reported the use of confidential agreements between pharmaceutical companies and public payers, confirming that the actual prices paid are typically lower than the published list price. In 68% of the countries, the confidentiality of MEAs is required by non-disclosure clauses between companies and public payers. In some countries (27%) this is even backed up by a specific law. Our study identified legal constraints for the sharing of information on actual prices and confidential agreements among European countries and consequently restrictions in transparency. In conclusion, the EURIPID survey findings suggest that the current possibility to improve the medicines' price transparency across countries is limited and the issue probably requires international institutional engagement, at least to coordinate initiatives toward a greater collaboration among member states.