Pharmaceutical policies in a crisis? Challenges and solutions identified at the PPRI Conference

Innovations in pharmaceutical policies and learnings for sustainable access to affordable medicines

Sustainable access to affordable medicines remains a public health issue globally, including for high-income countries. To foster the debate on avenues for the future, the fifth PPRI Conference held in Vienna on 25 and 26 April 2024 will offer a forum for the debate on innovating pharmaceutical policymaking to develop and implement futureproof policy options, which are able to address current and future challenges. The Conference invites a broad audience of stakeholders, including researchers, policymakers, payers, patients, industry and health professionals. The conference topics are organised in three strands: Strand 1 on 'Local challenges, global learnings' aims to contribute to lively discussions on the implementation of pharmaceutical policies across the globe. Best-practice examples will be presented, supplemented by case studies of less effective policies which can offer rich learnings. Strand 2 on 'Strengthening the evidence base' is the place for presentations and discussions on topics such as health technology assessments, managed entry agreements and real-world data. Strand 3 'Futureproofing pharmaceutical policies' is particularly dedicated to explore innovation in policymaking to achieve sustainable access to affordable medicines.

Policies and measures implemented to reduce the impact of international sanctions on Iran's pharmaceutical sector

Background and purpose

Continuous evaluation of the policies and interventions could explore their efficacies in improving the accessibility and availability of medicines in the local market. This study explained the health system policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran concerning the impact of the economic sanctions on the local pharmaceutical market and addressed the issue of whether these policies were able to improve patients' access to medicines.

Experimental approach

In this study, qualitative and quantitative research methods were used. In the qualitative part, semi-structured interviews with pharmaceutical system experts were used. In the next step, the structural analysis method was used. In the quantitative part, numerical sales data of the selected medicines were extracted and analyzed.

Findings/Results

Reported statistics regarding the presence of the medicines in the market indicates the obvious fluctuations in the numerical sales of medicines in the studied years. This may indicate that the policies implemented are not able to fully compensate for the negative effects of sanctions and improve access to medicine. In addition, according to some experts, policy, and management weaknesses are mainly rooted in unresolved domestic hurdles which have exacerbated the effects of international sanctions on the country's pharmaceutical market.

Conclusions and implications

Effective policy-making in response to economic sanctions can reduce the negative effect of international sanctions and result in drug shortages. Results of this study showed despite efforts made by the Iran health sector to subside the impact of sanctions on the pharmaceutical sector, there is an obvious disruption of the medicine supply chain in the market.

"Ready for the future?" - Status of national and cross-country horizon scanning systems for medicines in European countries

Background: Horizon scanning aims to systematically identify upcoming health technologies and thus allows policy-makers to be better prepared for the entry of new medicines with possibly high price tags into the national health system. The aim of this study is to survey the existence of national and cross-national horizon scanning systems for medicines in European countries.

Methods: Experts working in public authorities (members of the Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Information/PPRI network) in the WHO European region participated in surveys in 2014 and 2019 and informed about the status of horizon scanning in their country (response rate: 14 and 44 countries, respectively). Identified advanced horizon scanning systems as of 2019 were further investigated based on a literature review.

Results: In 2019, six countries (Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom) reported systematic use of horizon scanning for some new medicines, and four countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Ireland) had some horizon scanning activities ongoing. No systematic use of horizon scanning was reported from the remaining 34 countries. The findings of the survey undertaken five years earlier were similar, with even fewer systems in place. A recent development is the establishment of cross-country initiatives of governments that aim, among others, to jointly perform horizon scanning; the International Horizon Scanning Initiative (IHSI) initiated by the Beneluxa collaboration is the most advanced undertaking in this respect. Countries with systematic use tend to have horizon scanning fully integrated in a system for the management of new medicines, and they use horizon scanning outcomes to inform decisions as to whether or not a Health Technology Assessment will be conducted and price negotiations be started. Differences between existing horizon scanning systems mainly concern the timings of scanning and reporting, the sources for the inputs and the accessibility of the findings.

Conclusion: There appears to be a discrepancy between the perceived importance of horizon scanning based on some eye-opening examples in the past and its actual implementation in European health systems. The latter is likely attributable to horizon scanning being resource-intensive. The establishment of new national and international horizon scanning systems offers the opportunity to investigate their impact on sustainable access to affordable medicines from the start.

Integrative Review of Managed Entry Agreements: Chances and Limitations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Managed entry agreements (MEAs) consist of a set of instruments to reduce the uncertainty and the budget impact of new high-priced medicines; however, there are concerns. There is a need to critically appraise MEAs with their planned introduction in Brazil. Accordingly, the objective of this article is to identify and appraise key attributes and concerns with MEAs among payers and their advisers, with the findings providing critical considerations for Brazil and other high- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

An integrative review approach was adopted. This involved a review of MEAs across countries. The review question was 'What are the health technology MEAs that have been applied around the world?' This review was supplemented with studies not retrieved in the search known to the senior-level co-authors including key South American markets. It also involved senior-level decision makers and advisers providing guidance on the potential advantages and disadvantages of MEAs and ways forward.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included in the review. Most MEAs included medicines (96.8%), focused on financial arrangements (43%) and included mostly antineoplastic medicines. Most countries kept key information confidential including discounts or had not published such data. Few details were found in the literature regarding South America. Our findings and inputs resulted in both advantages including reimbursement and disadvantages including concerns with data collection for outcome-based schemes.

CONCLUSIONS

We are likely to see a growth in MEAs with the continual launch of new high-priced and often complex treatments, coupled with increasing demands on resources. Whilst outcome-based MEAs could be an important tool to improve access to new innovative medicines, there are critical issues to address. Comparing knowledge, experiences, and practices across countries is crucial to guide high- and middle-income countries when designing their future MEAs.

Effectiveness of National Pricing Policies for Patent-Protected Pharmaceuticals in the OECD: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to assess the current state of empirical research regarding the effectiveness of national pricing regulations of the patent-protected market for prescription pharmaceuticals. Effectiveness is understood to be the capacity of policies to have a desired impact on outcomes, such as health status, patient access, healthcare expenditure, and research investments, among others.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published literature on pricing regulations in OECD countries was performed. The PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the OECD iLibrary databases were searched in September 2016 and December 2017, with an update in August 2018. Interrupted time series studies and additional empirical studies were included, as well as systematic reviews if appropriate methods were applied. The risk of bias was assessed based on the recommendations of the BMJ guidelines, Cochrane EPOC criteria, QHES instrument, HTA good practice guidelines, CRD's guidance and the CHEC criteria. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the suggestions from EPOC and GRADE.

RESULTS

Thirty-one publications met the inclusion criteria. Most of the assessed empirical research included therapeutic (TRP) and/or external reference pricing (ERP), with a clear majority focusing on TRP. The main outcomes that were analysed were drug prices, expenditures and drug use. For value-based pricing (VBP), only limited empirical data were found.

CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence that TRP may reduce pharmaceutical prices and expenditures in the short term. Furthermore, TRP may lead to substitution effects towards lower-priced pharmaceuticals. The effects of TRP on patient access, healthcare utilisation and R&D investments were found to be uncertain. No conclusions were drawn for ERP and VBP. No evidence was found for the effects on health outcomes for any of the analysed policies. There is a strong need for evidence generation regarding effective pricing policies, particularly for VBP, managed entry agreements and non-financial outcomes.

Addressing the challenge of high-priced prescription drugs in the era of precision medicine: A systematic review of drug life cycles, therapeutic drug markets and regulatory frameworks

CONTEXT

Recent public outcry has highlighted the rising cost of prescription drugs worldwide, which in several disease areas outpaces other health care expenditures and results in a suboptimal global availability of essential medicines.

METHOD

A systematic review of Pubmed, the Financial Times, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Guardian was performed to identify articles related to the pricing of medicines.

FINDINGS

Changes in drug life cycles have dramatically affected patent medicine markets, which have long been considered a self-evident and self-sustainable source of income for highly profitable drug companies. Market failure in combination with high merger and acquisition activity in the sector have allowed price increases for even off-patent drugs. With market interventions and the introduction of QALY measures in health care, governments have tried to influence drug prices, but often encounter unintended consequences. Patent reform legislation, reference pricing, outcome-based pricing and incentivizing physicians and pharmacists to prescribe low-cost drugs are among the most promising short-term policy options. Due to the lack of systematic research on the effectiveness of policy measures, an increasing number of ad hoc decisions have been made with counterproductive effects on the availability of essential drugs. Future challenges demand new policies, for which recommendations are offered.

CONCLUSION

A fertile ground for high-priced drugs has been created by changes in drug life-cycle dynamics, the unintended effects of patent legislation, government policy measures and orphan drug programs. There is an urgent need for regulatory reform to curtail prices and safeguard equitable access to innovative medicines.

How Can Pricing and Reimbursement Policies Improve Affordable Access to Medicines? Lessons Learned from European Countries

This article discusses pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement policies in European countries with regard to their ability to ensure affordable access to medicines. A frequently applied pricing policy is external price referencing. While it provides some benchmark for policy-makers and has been shown to be able to generate savings, it may also contribute to delay in product launch in countries where medicine prices are low. Value-based pricing has been proposed as a policy that promotes access while rewarding useful innovation; however, implementing it has proven quite challenging. For high-priced medicines, managed-entry agreements are increasingly used. These agreements allow policy-makers to manage uncertainty and obtain lower prices. They can also facilitate earlier market access in case of limited evidence about added therapeutic value of the medicine. However, these agreements raise transparency concerns due to the confidentiality clause. Tendering as used in the hospital and offpatent outpatient sectors has been proven to reduce medicine prices but it requires a robust framework and appropriate design with clear strategic goals in order to prevent shortages. These pricing and reimbursement policies are supplemented by the widespread use of Health Technology Assessment to inform decision-making, and by strategies to improve the uptake of generics, and also biosimilars. While European countries have been implementing a set of policy options, there is a lack of thorough impact assessments of several pricing and reimbursement policies on affordable access. Increased cooperation between authorities, experience sharing and improving transparency on price information, including the disclosure of confidential discounts, are opportunities to address current challenges.