Feature

Low benefits spur alternative drug cost proposals


 

A three-tiered approach

Another novel idea would link drug prices to value, but allow costs to change with new information. The proposal would create a three-part pricing model where prices vary over fixed time intervals, according to an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine Catalyst.

First, drugmakers would agree to launch a drug with a low price, with a potentially significant increase after a specified period to observe performance. During a second period, the price would be adjusted up or down based on newly emergent evidence. After a window of higher prices to reward innovation, the cost would then decline in a third period to ensure long-term access.

The advantage is access to truly miraculous therapies in a very short time – from 3 to 5 years earlier than the current system, said Luca Pani, MD, a coauthor of the paper and professor of psychiatry at the University of Miami.

Dr. Luca Pani, MD, is professor of psychiatry at the Unviersity of Miami and VP for Regulatory Strategy and Market Access Innovation at VeraSci, Durham, N.C.

Dr. Luca Pani

“Another advantage emerges when it comes to drugs that treat patient populations with inaccurate epidemiology, in which we do not know exactly how many patients we have,” Dr. Pani said. “The model in this case allows to reduce the economic impact of this uncertainty.”

The main challenge would be finding a drug manufacturer that would agree to the arrangement, said Erik Snowberg, PhD, a coauthor of the study and a research associate for the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Dr. Erik Snowberg, a research associate for the National Bureau of Economic Research, coauthored a paper on a new value-based drug procing model.

Dr. Erik Snowberg

“There’s a lot of uncertainty right now,” Dr. Snowberg said. “The big challenge would be to find a drugmaker that would think about implementing this and finding the right payer for whom this would solve a pressing need.”

Despite the barriers to the idea, Dr. Pani said a more cost-effective drug cost structure is imperative, especially as the rapid rate of new therapies continues.

“We have a moral obligation to find alternative models that allow access and that are not only scientifically and economically sound and sustainable but also realistic and logical to implement,” he said.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Conflicts of interest common among authors of ASCO guidelines
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Poll: Medicare-for-all sees slight drop in support
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Burnout gets personal for 68% of physicians
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
About half of NCI cancer center directors received industry payments in 2017
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Professional coaching keeps doctors in the game
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
The states of health care: Ranking the best and worst
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Medical societies urge action to reduce gun violence
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Lancet joins movement to reject ‘manels’
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Women underrepresented as oncology trial corresponding authors
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Medicare’s CAR T-cell coverage decision draws praise, but cost issues linger
MDedge Hematology and Oncology