Sustainable Financing of Innovative Therapies: A Review of Approaches

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 34, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 971-980

  Hollis, Aidan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; EXPERIMENTAL THERAPY; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FUNDING; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PERFORMANCE BASED RISK SHARING AGREEMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; PROSPECTIVE PRICING; PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP; REVIEW; RISK MANAGEMENT; ECONOMIC MODEL; ECONOMICS; INVENTION;

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; FINANCING, ORGANIZED; HUMANS; INVENTIONS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; RISK SHARING, FINANCIAL;

EID: 84973121382     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0416-x     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Pekarsky BAK. The New Drug Reimbursement Game. Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing; 2015.
2. Hailey D. Development of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(Suppl 1):24–7.
3. Jönsson B. Relative effectiveness and the European pharmaceutical market. Eur J Health Econ. 2011;12(2):97–102.
4. Persson U, Jönsson B. The end of the international reference pricing system? Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2016;14(1):1–8.
5. Rémuzat C, Urbinati D, Mzoughi O, El Hammi E, Belgaied W, Toumi M. Overview of external reference pricing systems in Europe. J Mark Access Heal Policy. 2015;3:27675.
6. Maguire PT, Gibson E. The Cancer Drugs Fund and Patient Acces Schemes within the UK: increased access to oncology medicines or reduced value for money? Value Health. 2015;18(7):A484 (Elsevier).
7. Picavet E, Dooms M, Cassiman D, Simoens S. Orphan drugs for rare diseases: Grounds for special status. Drug Dev Res. 2012;73(3):115–9.
8. Sussex J, Towse A, Devlin N. Operationalizing value-based pricing of medicines: a taxonomy of approaches. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(1):1–10.
9. Neumann PJ, Cohen JT, Weinstein MC. Updating Cost-Effectiveness—the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(9):796–7.
10. Ramsey S, Willke R, Glick H, Reed SD, Federico A, Jonsson B, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials II—an ISPOR good research practives task force report. Value Health. 2015;18:161–72.
11. Brazier JE, Yang Y, Tsuchiya A, Rowen DL. A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures. Eur J Heal Econ. 2010;11(2):215–25.
12. Chan KKW, Willan AR, Gupta M, Pullenayegum E. Underestimation of uncertainties in health utilities derived from mapping algorithms involving health-related quality-of-life measures: statistical explanations and potential remedies. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34(7):863–72.
13. Larson EB, Tachibana C, Thompson E, Coronado GD, DeBar L, Dember LM, et al. Trials without tribulations: minimizing the burden of pragmatic research on healthcare systems. Healthcare. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.hjdsi.2015.07.005 (Elsevier).
14. Kalkman S, Van Thiel GJMW, Grobbee DE, Van Delden JJM. Pragmatic randomized trials in drug development pose new ethical questions: a systematic review. Drug Discov Today. 2015;20(7):856–62 (Elsevier Ltd).
15. Appleby J, Devlin N, Parkin D, Buxton M, Chalkidou K. Searching for cost effectiveness thresholds in the NHS. Health Policy (New York). 2009;91(3):239–45.
16. Claxton K, Briggs A, Buxton MJ, Culyer AJ, McCabe C, Walker S, et al. Value based pricing for NHS drugs: an opportunity not to be missed? Br Med J. 2008;336(7638):251–4.
17. John London A. How should we model rare disease allocation decisions? Hastings Cent Rep [Internet]. 2012;42(1):3–3. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/hast.3.Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
18. Claxton K, Martin S, Soares M, Rice N, Spackman E, Hinde S, et al. Methods for the estimation of the National Institute for Health and care excellence cost-effectiveness threshold. Health Technol Assess (Rockv). 2015;19(14):1–503.
19. Jamison DT, Summers LH, Alleyne G, Arrow KJ, Berkley S, Binagwaho A, et al. Global health 2035: A world converging within a generation. Lancet. 2013;382(9908):1898–955 (Elsevier Ltd).
20. Marseille E, Larson B, Kazi DS, Kahn JG, Rosen S. Thresholds for the cost—effectiveness of interventions: alternative approaches. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;2015(93):118–24.
21. Ochalek J, Lomas J, Claxton K. Cost Per DALY averted thresholds for low- and middle-income countries: evidence from cross-country data. CHE Research Paper 122. 2015. https://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/CHERP122_cost_DALY_LMIC_threshold.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
22. Woods B, Revill P, Sculpher M, Claxton K. Country-level cost-effectiveness thresholds: initial estimates and the need for further research. 2015. https://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/CHERP109_cost-effectiveness_threshold_LMICs.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
23. Stafinski T, McCabe CJ, Menon D. Funding the unfundable. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):113–42.
24. Towse A, Garrison LP. Canʼt get no satisfaction? Will pay for performance help? Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):93–102.
25. Niezen MGH, De Bont A, Busschbach JJV, Cohen JP, Stolk EA. Finding legitimacy for the role of budget impact in drug reimbursement decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;1:49–55.
26. Loury G. Market structure and innovation. Q J Econ. 1979;93(3):395–410.
27. Dimasi JA, Paquette C. The economics of follow-on drug research and development. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;(22 Suppl.):1–14.
28. Hollis A. Comment on “The economics of follow-on drug research and development”. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(12):1187–92.
29. Fagnan DE, Gromatzky AA, Stein RM, Fernandez JM, Lo AW. Financing drug discovery for orphan diseases. Drug Discov Today. 2014;19(5):533–8 (Elsevier Ltd).
30. Garrison LP, Towse A, Briggs A, De Pouvourville G, Grueger J, Mohr PE, et al. Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements—good practices for design, implementation, and evaluation: Report of the ISPOR good practices for performance-based risk-sharing arrangements task force. Value Health. 2013;16(5):703–19 (Elsevier).
31. Carlson JJ, Sullivan SD, Garrison LP, Neumann PJ, Veenstra DL. Linking payment to health outcomes: A taxonomy and examination of performance-based reimbursement schemes between healthcare payers and manufacturers. Health Policy (New York). 2010;96(3):179–90 (Elsevier Ireland Ltd).
32. De Pouvourville G. Risk-sharing agreements for innovative drugs: A new solution to old problems? Eur J Heal Econ. 2006;7(3):155–7.
33. Hutton J, Trueman P, Henshall C. Coverage with evidence development: an examination of conceptual and policy issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23(4):425–32.
34. Garber AM, McClellan MB. Satisfaction guaranteed—“payment by results” for biologic agents. N Engl J Med. 2007;16(357):1575–7.
35. Cook JP, Vernon JA, Manning R. Risk-sharing agreements. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(7):551–6.
36. Navarria A, Drago V, Gozzo L, Longo L, Mansueto S, Pignataro G, et al. Do the current performance-based schemes in Italy really work? “success fee”: a novel measure for cost-containment of drug expenditure. Value Health. 2015;18(1):131–6 (Elsevier).
37. Edlin R, Hall P, Wallner K, McCabe C. Sharing risk between payer and provider by leasing health technologies: An affordable and effective reimbursement strategy for innovative technologies? Value Health. 2014;17(4):438–44 (Elsevier).
38. Claxton K. OFT, VBP: QED? Health Econ. 2007;16(6):545–58.
39. Kanavos P, Mills M. Options for the sustainable financing of innovative therapies. 2015.
40. Gallini N, Scotchmer S. Intellectual property: when is it the best incentive system? Innovation Policy and the Economy, vol. 2. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2002. p. 51–78.
41. Sachs J. Rational Drug Pricing. Huffington Post [Internet]. 2015; Available from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/rational-drug-pricing_b_8188790.html. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
42. Fellows GK, Hollis A. Funding innovation for treatment for rare diseases: adopting a cost-based yardstick approach. Orphanet J Rare Dis [Internet]. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2013;8(1):180. Available from: http://ojrd.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1750-1172-8-180. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
43. Office of Fair Trading. Pharmaceutical price regulation scheme, annexe H [Internet]. 2007. Available from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140402142426/http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/comp_policy/oft885.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
44. Averch H, Johnson LL. Behavior of the firm under regulatory constraint. Am Econ Rev. 1962;52(5):1052–69.
45. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ. 2003;22(2):151–85.
46. DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG, Hansen RW. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: new estimates of R&D costs. J Health Econ. 2016;47:20–33 (Elsevier B.V.).
47. Chiu S. Pharmaceutical cost transparency act of 2016. California Assembly AB-463;2016.
48. Wyden R, Grassley C. The price of Sovaldi and its impact on the US Health Care System [Internet]. 2015. Available from: http://www.finance.senate.gov/download/the-price-of-sovaldi-and-its-impact-on-the-us-health-care-system-full-report. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
49. Danzon PM, Towse A. Differential pricing for pharmaceuticals: reconciling access, R&D and patents. Int J Health Care Financ Econ. 2003;3(3):183–205.
50. Smith A. Lectures on jurisprudence. In: Meek RL, Raphael DD, Stein PG, editors. The glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1978.
51. Azoulay P, Zivin JSG, Li D, Sampat BN. Public R&D investments and private-sector patenting: evidence from NIH funding rules. Natl Bur Econ Res Work Pap Ser [Internet]. 2015; No. 20889. Available from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20889\nhttp://www.nber.org/papers/w20889.pdf. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
52. Hemel DJ, Ouellette LL. Beyond the patents—prizes debate. Tex Law Rev. 2013;92:303–82.
53. Seoane-Vazquez E, Rodriguez-Monguio R, Szeinbach SL, Visaria J. Incentives for orphan drug research and development in the United States. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2008;3:33.
54. Moran M, Guzman J, Ropars AL, Illmer A. The role of product development partnerships in research and development for neglected diseases. Int Health. 2010;2(2):114–22.
55. DNDi. Business plan 2015–2023 [Internet]. 2015. Available from: http://www.dndi.org. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
56. Bishai DM, Champion C, Steele ME, Thompson L. Product development partnerships hit their stride: Lessons from developing a meningitis vaccine for Africa. Health Aff. 2011;30(6):1058–64.
57. Flynn S, Hollis A, Palmedo M. An economic justification for open access to essential medicine patents in developing countries. J Law Med Ethics. 2009;37(2):184–208.
58. Servick K. The drug push. Science. 2015;348(6237):850–3.
59. Sanders B. Medical innovation prize fund act [Internet]. 2007. p. 1–23. Available from: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s627. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.
60. Banerjee A, Hollis A, Pogge T. The health impact fund: incentives for improving access to medicines. Lancet. 2010;375(9709):166–9.
61. Wang B, Liu J, Kesselheim AS. Variations in time of market exclusivity among top-selling prescription drugs in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(4):635–7.
62. Liu M, La Croix S. A cross-country index of intellectual property rights in pharmaceutical inventions. Res Policy. 2015;44(1):206–16 (Elsevier B.V.).
63. Liu J. Compulsory Licensing and Anti-Evergreening: interpreting the TRIPS flexibilities in sections 84 and 3 (d) of the Indian Patents Act. Harv Int’l LJ. 2015;56:207.
64. Chatterjee C, Kubo K, Pingali V. The consumer welfare implications of governmental policies and firm strategy in markets for medicines. J Health Econ. 2015;44:255–73 (Elsevier B.V).
65. Harrington SE. Cost of capital for pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device firms. In: Danzon PM, Nicholson S, editors. The Oxford handbook of the economics of the biopharmaceutical industry 2012. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.
66. Gleeson DH, Neuwelt P, Monasterio E, Lopert R. How the transnational pharmaceutical industry pursues its interests through international trade and investment agreements: a case study of the Trans Pacific Partnership [Internet]. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2668576. Accessed 30 Apr 2016.