Abstract
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.
Reference17 articles.
1. Langley PC. Focusing pharmacoeconomic activities: reimbursement or the drug life cycle? Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(2):181-188. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079903125002838PMID:15006012
2. Bertram M, Lauer J, Stenberg K, Edejer T. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care interventions for priority setting in the health system: an update from WHO CHOICE. IJHPM; 2021. Available at: https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2020.244. Accessed July 5, 2021.
3. World Health Organization. Resolution WHA72.8: Improving the transparency of markets for medicines, vaccines, and other health products. Geneva: World Health Assembly 72; 2019. Available at: https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA72/A72_R8-en.pdf. Accessed July 5, 2021.
4. Morgan SG, Vogler S, Wagner AK. Payers’ experiences with confidential pharmaceutical price discounts: A survey of public and statutory health systems in North America, Europe, and Australasia. Health Policy. 2017;121(4):354-362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.02.002PMID:28238340
5. Morgan SG, Bathula HS, Moon S. Pricing of pharmaceuticals is becoming a major challenge for health systems. BMJ. 2020;368:14627. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4627 PMID:31932289
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献