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 Maintenance Immunosuppression Therapies in a Matched-Pair Analysis Cohort of 16 Years of Renal Transplant in the Brazilian National Health System.

The maintenance of patients with renal transplant typically involves two or more drugs to prevent rejection and prolong graft survival. The calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) are the most commonly recommended medicines in combinations with others. While immunosuppressive treatment regimens are well established, there is insufficient long-term effectiveness data to help guide future management decisions. The study analyzes the effectiveness of treatment regimens containing CNI after renal transplantation during 16 years of follow-up with real-world data from the Brazilian National Health System (SUS). This was a retrospective study of 2318 SUS patients after renal transplantion. Patients were propensity score-matched (1:1) by sex, age, type and year of transplantation. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the cumulative probabilities of survival. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate factors associated with progression to graft loss. Multivariable analysis, adjusted for diabetes mellitus and race/color, showed a greater risk of graft loss for patients using tacrolimus plus mycophenolate compared to patients treated with cyclosporine plus azathioprine. In conclusion, this Brazilian real-world study, with a long follow-up period using matched analysis for relevant clinical features and the representativeness of the sample, demonstrated improved long-term effectiveness for therapeutic regimens containing cyclosporine plus azathioprine. Consequently, we recommend that protocols and clinical guidelines for renal transplantation should consider the cyclosporine plus azathioprine regimen as a potential first line option, along with others.