Facilitating [corrected] More Efficient Negotiations for Innovative Therapies: A Value-Based Negotiation Framework.

OBJECTIVES: An increasing number of innovative therapies (e.g., gene- and cell-based treatments) have been developed in the past 20 years. Despite the significant clinical potential of these therapies, access delays may arise because of differing perspectives of manufacturers and payers regarding issues such as the value of the product, clinical and financial uncertainties, and sustainability.Managed entry agreements (MEAs) can enable access to treatments that would not be reimbursed by conventional methods because of such concerns. However, although MEA typologies exist, there is currently no structured process to come to agreements on MEAs, which can be difficult to decide upon and implement.To facilitate more structured MEA negotiations, we propose a conceptual "value-based negotiation framework" with corresponding application tools. METHODS: The framework was developed based on an iterative process of scientific literature review and expert input. RESULTS: The framework aims to (i) systematically identify and prioritize manufacturer and payer concerns about a new treatment, and (ii) select a mutually acceptable combination of MEA terms that can best address priority concerns, with the lowest possible implementation burden. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed framework will be tested in practice, and is a step toward supporting payers and manufacturers to engage in more structured, transparent negotiations to balance the needs of both sides, and enabling quicker, more transparent MEA negotiations and patient access to innovative products.

Estimating the broader fiscal consequences of acute hepatic porphyria (AHP) with recurrent attacks in Belgium using a public economic analytic framework.

BACKGROUND: Acute hepatic porphyria (AHP) is a rare, debilitating disease characterized by potentially life-threatening attacks often resulting in chronic symptoms that negatively impact daily functioning and quality of life. Symptoms of AHP prevent many individuals from working and achieving lifetime work averages. The aim of this study was to apply a public economic framework to evaluate AHP in Belgium, taking into consideration a broad range of costs that are relevant to government in relation to social benefit payments and lifetime taxes paid. METHODOLOGY: A public economic framework was developed exploring lifetime costs for government attributed to an individual with AHP and recurrent attacks in Belgium. Work-activity and lifetime direct taxes paid, indirect consumption taxes and requirements for public benefits were estimated based on established clinical pathways for AHP and compared to the general population (GP). The model includes AHP-related healthcare costs and non-AHP healthcare costs for the GP. RESULTS: Lifetime earnings are reduced in an individual with AHP by €347,802 per person (p.p.), translating to reduced lifetime taxes paid of €183,187 for an AHP individual compared to the GP. We estimate increased lifetime disability benefit support of €247,242 for an AHP individual compared to GP. Lifetime healthcare costs for a person with AHP were estimated to be €3,030,316 due to frequent hospitalisations associated with porphyria attacks compared to the GP. The lifetime costs for a person with 12 attacks per annum factoring in transfers, taxes and healthcare costs are estimated to be €3,460,745 p.p. Eliminating AHP attacks after 10 years of active disease, thus, enabling a person to return to work increases lifetime earnings by €224,575 p.p. Increased work activity in such individuals would generate an estimated €118,284 p.p. over their lifetime. The elimination of AHP attacks could also lead to reductions in disability payments of €179,184 p.p. and healthcare cost savings of €1,511,027 p.p. CONCLUSIONS: Due to severe disability resulting from constant attacks, AHP patients with recurrent attacks incur significant public costs. Lifetime taxes paid are reduced as these attacks occur during peak earning and working years. In those patients, reducing AHP attacks can confer significant fiscal benefits for government, including reduced healthcare costs, reduced disability payments and improved tax revenue.

Estimating the fiscal impact of rare diseases using a public economic framework: a case study applied to hereditary transthyretin-mediated (hATTR) amyloidosis.

BACKGROUND: A wide range of rare diseases can have fiscal impacts on government finances that extend beyond expected healthcare costs. Conditions preventing people from achieving national lifetime work averages will influence lifetime taxes paid and increase the likelihood of dependence on public income support. Consequently, interventions that influence projected lifetime work activity, morbidity and mortality can have positive and negative fiscal consequences for government. The aim of this study was to apply a public economic framework to a rare disease that takes into consideration a broad range of costs that are relevant to government in relation to transfers received and taxes paid. As a case study we constructed a simulation model to calculate the fiscal life course of an individual with hereditary transthyretin-mediated (hATTR) amyloidosis in The Netherlands. In this lethal disease different progressive disease scenarios occur, including polyneuropathy and/or cardiomyopathy. RESULTS: Due to progressive disability, health care resource use, and early death, hATTR amyloidosis with polyneuropathy receives more transfers from government compared to the general population. In a scenario where a patient is diagnoses with hATTR at age 45, an individual pays €180,812 less in lifetime taxes and receives incrementally €111,695 in transfers from the government, compared to a person without hATTR. Patients suffering from cardiomyopathy die after median 4 years. The health costs of this scenario are therefore lower than that of the other polyneuropathy-based scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: The fiscal analysis illustrates how health conditions influence not only health costs, but also the cross-sectorial public economic burden attributed to lost tax revenues and public disability allowances. Due to the progressive nature of hATTR amyloidosis used in this study, public costs including disability increase as the disease progresses with reduced lifetime taxes paid. The results indicate that halting disease progression early in the disease course would generate fiscal benefits beyond health benefits for patients. This analysis highlights the fiscal consequences of diseases and the need for broader perspectives applied to evaluate health conditions. Conventional cost-effectiveness framework used by many health technology assessment agencies have well-documented limitations in the field of rare diseases and fiscal modeling should be a complementary approach to consider.

Principles for consistent value assessment and sustainable funding of orphan drugs in Europe.

The European Orphan Medicinal Products (OMP) Regulation has successfully encouraged research to develop treatments for rare diseases resulting in the authorisation of new OMPs in Europe. While decisions on OMP designation and marketing authorisation are made at the European Union level, reimbursement decisions are made at the national level. OMP value and affordability are high priority issues for policymakers and decisions regarding their pricing and funding are highly complex. There is currently no European consensus on how OMP value should be assessed and inequalities of access to OMPs have previously been observed. Against this background, policy makers in many countries are considering reforms to improve access to OMPs. This paper proposes ten principles to be considered when undertaking such reforms, from the perspective of an OMP manufacturer. We recommend the continued prioritisation of rare diseases by policymakers, an increased alignment between payer and regulatory frameworks, pricing centred on OMP value, and mechanisms to ensure long-term financial sustainability allowing a continuous and virtuous development of OMPs. Our recommendations support the development of more consistent frameworks and encourage collaboration between all stakeholders, including research-based industry, payers, clinicians, and patients.

Population access to new vaccines in European countries.

Time from registration to population access to new vaccines can take considerable time in European countries. Reasons might be found in the regulatory framework, decision-making processes or the assessment of vaccines by evaluating bodies. The aim of this study was to determine whether some decision-making processes can explain between-country differences in the time to population access to new vaccination programs. Information gathered from a survey among European National Vaccine Industry Groups was combined with information from official health authorities, vaccine manufacturers and literature published. Firstly, a retrospective survey was conducted to measure access time to new vaccines against three diseases in 17 European countries. Secondly, qualitative information on the country-specific decision-making frameworks for the introduction of new "vaccination programs" was identified in a cross-sectional survey. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (ρ) were used for data analysis. The median access time to new vaccines was 6.4 years (95% confidence interval: 5.7-7.1 years) post marketing authorization. National assessments underlying immunization policy decisions (recommendation phase) absorbed most of the access time. Correlation analysis suggested that processes with established timelines and clarity in regard to vaccine evaluation criteria used could ameliorate the effectiveness of the decision-making process. In order to reduce the time to access for new, beneficial vaccines, the underlying vaccination recommendation, implementation and funding process needs to be understood and optimized, where necessary.