Pricing and Reimbursement of Biosimilars in Central and Eastern European Countries

Objectives: The aim of this study was to review the requirements for the reimbursement of biosimilars and to compare the reimbursement status, market share, and reimbursement costs of biosimilars in selected Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries.

Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was conducted between November 2016 and January 2017 among experts from the following CEE countries: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Romania. The requirements for the pricing and reimbursement of biosimilars were reviewed for each country. Data on the extent of reimbursement of biologic drugs (separately for original products and biosimilars) in the years 2014 and 2015 were also collected for each country, along with data on the total pharmaceutical and total public health care budgets.

Results: Our survey revealed that no specific criteria were applied for the pricing and reimbursement of biosimilars in the selected CEE countries; the price of biosimilars was usually reduced compared with original drugs and specific price discounts were common. Substitution and interchangeability were generally allowed, although in most countries they were at the discretion of the physician after a clinical assessment. Original biologic drugs and the corresponding biosimilars were usually in the same homogeneous group, and internal reference pricing was usually employed. The reimbursement rate of biosimilars in the majority of the countries was the same and amounted to 100%. Generally, the higher shares of expenditures were shown for the reimbursement of original drugs than for biosimilars, except for filgrastim, somatropin, and epoetin (alfa and zeta). The shares of expenditures on the reimbursement of biosimilar products ranged from 8.0% in Estonia in 2014 to 32.4% in Lithuania in 2015, and generally increased in 2015. The share of expenditures on reimbursement of biosimilars in the total pharmaceutical budget differed between the countries, with the highest observed value for Slovakia and Hungary and the lowest—for Croatia.

Conclusions: The requirements for the pricing and reimbursement of biosimilar products as well as the access of patients to biologic treatment do not differ significantly between the considered CEE countries. Biosimilar drugs significantly influence the reimbursement systems of these countries, and the expenditure on the reimbursement of biosimilars is increasing as they are becoming more accessible to patients.

Persistence with first line anticholinergic medication in treatment-naïve overactive bladder patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the persistence of first line anticholinergic medication use by patients with overactive bladder (OAB). Data from a hospital outpatient database were matched with information obtained by a telephone survey of patients to determine which patients discontinued use of anticholinergic medication and to identify the reasons underlying discontinuation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study group included 377 OAB patients (52 men, 325 women) with a mean age of 60.29 ± 13.84 years. In total, 189 patients (50.1%) were treated with trospium (median dose 27.86 ± 12.73 mg), 41 patients (10.9%) with propiverine (28.17 ± 4.97 mg), nine patients (2.4%) with extended-release tolterodine (4.0 ± 0 mg), 48 patients (12.7%) with solifenacin (5.94 ± 1.97 mg) and 90 patients (23.9%) with fesoterodine (6.09 ± 2.01 mg).

RESULTS

The median time for persistence with the first line anticholinergic treatment was 6.53 ± 3.84 months. Persistence was significantly higher in patients treated with anticholinergic medication with an extended-release formulation than in patients treated with immediate-release anticholinergics. The most common reasons for termination of treatment were healing/resolution of symptoms (35.9%), low effectiveness (30.9%) and side-effects (23.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of the OAB patients were not satisfied with their first line treatment. Other treatment options should be sought, such as changing the medication or dosage, or possibly combining treatments.

Access to biologic treatment for rheumatoid arthritis in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess and compare patients' access to biologic anti-RA drugs in selected Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries and to analyze the determinants of differences between countries.

MATERIAL/METHODS

This is a multi-country survey study, based on a combination of desk research and direct contact with national RA stakeholders. Data was collected using a pre-defined questionnaire. Affordability was measured using an affordability index, calculated comparing the index of health care expenditures to the price index, using Poland as an index of 1.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients on biologic treatment in 2009 was highest in Hungary (5% RA patients on biologic treatment), followed by Slovenia (4.5%), Slovakia (3.5%), Czech Republic (2.92%), Romania (2.2%), Estonia (1.8%), and Croatia, Serbia, Poland (below 1.5%). Infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab and rituximab were included in the reimbursement system in all countries, but abatacept and tocilizumab were included only in Slovakia. In Slovenia, public payer covered 75% of the price, and 25% is covered by supplementary health insurance; in Bulgaria public payer covered 50% of etanercept and adalimumab costs, and 75% of rituximab cost. In other countries, biologic drugs are reimbursed at 100%. Affordability index for biologic drugs was the lowest in Slovenia (0.4). In each country national guidelines define which patients are eligible for biologic treatment. Disease Activity Score (DAS28) of over 5.1 and failure of 2 or more disease-modifying anti-RA drugs, including methotrexate, are commonly used criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The most important factors limiting access to biologic anti-RA treatment in the CEE region are macroeconomic conditions and restrictive treatment guidelines.

Costs of illness and care in Parkinson's disease: an evaluation in six countries

We investigated the costs of Parkinson's Disease (PD) in 486 patients based on a survey conducted in six countries. Economic data were collected over a 6-month period and presented from the societal perspective. The total mean costs per patient ranged from EUR 2620 to EUR 9820. Direct costs totalled about 60% to 70% and indirect costs about 30% to 40% of total costs. The proportions of costs components of PD vary notably; variations were due to differences in country-specific health system characteristics, macro economic conditions, as well as frequencies of resource use and price differences. However, inpatient care, long-term care and medication were identified as the major expenditures in the investigated countries.

Challenges in economic evaluation of new drugs: experience with rituximab in Hungary

BACKGROUND

Implementation of a new therapy into clinical practice is a complex process. Various countries have different requirements for information but most often focus on economic evaluation, which often plays a stronger role in healthcare decision making than does clinical evidence.

MATERIAL/METHODS

To identify all potential challenges in economic evaluation, the case of a new biological drug, rituximab, used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, has been taken as an example. We present methods and results of economic assessment, highlighting the specific issues that should be considered in countries with economic and health care conditions similar to those of Hungary.

RESULTS

In principle, economic evaluation requires data on characteristics of target population, disease progression, treatment impact, preferences, resource utilization and unit prices. Treatment effect/relative risk reduction and clinical practice patterns (resource use) may be more generalizable, whereas prices and baseline risk need to be jurisdiction specific. In order to address issues of transferability, investments need to be made in the collection of epidemiological and demographic data, plus data on clinical practice patterns, resource use, costs and health state valuation. In Hungary this problem has been solved through conducting a well designed 255 patient cross-sectional study.

CONCLUSIONS

The Hungarian example shows that there should be more investment in data collection for those parameters that are thought to differ most from place to place. Owing to the similarities between Central and Eastern Europe countries in health care systems, clinical practice patterns and economic indicators, they may be able to develop partnerships to develop relevant regional databases and registries.