1
|
Gargano LP, Alvares-Teodoro J, de A Acurcio F, Guerra AA. Pharmaceutical innovativeness index: methodological approach for assessing the value of medicines - a case study of oncology drugs. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2024:1-10. [PMID: 38859799 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2024.2365985] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2024] [Accepted: 05/20/2024] [Indexed: 06/12/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We propose a framework to assess the value of pharmaceutical innovations, with explicit clinical and methodological parameters, based on the therapeutic value and health needs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The study was based on the adaptation of health technology assessment methods documented in the literature, which was applied to a sample of oncological drugs. Difficulties and issues during the application of those tools were identified and addressed to develop a new framework with new and revised domains and clear classification criterion for each domain. Scores were assigned to each level and domain according to their relevance to generate the final score of innovativeness. RESULTS The Pharmaceutical Innovation Index (PII) includes four domains, two related to clinical and social dimensions - Therapeutic Need and Added Therapeutic Value - and other two about methodological features - Study Design and Quality (risk of bias). The scores combined after assigned to each domain results Index of the Innovativeness of the medicines represents the degree of pharmaceutical innovation. CONCLUSION This work proposes a transparent methodology with well-defined criteria and script; the algorithm developed with authors' weightings and criteria may be switched to best adjust to other applications, perspective or clinical indications, while keeping the transparency and objectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ludmila P Gargano
- Postgraduate Program in Medicines and Pharmaceutical Care (PPGMAF), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
- Collaborating Centre for Health Technology Assessment and Excellence (CCATES), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
| | - Juliana Alvares-Teodoro
- Postgraduate Program in Medicines and Pharmaceutical Care (PPGMAF), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
- Collaborating Centre for Health Technology Assessment and Excellence (CCATES), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
| | - Francisco de A Acurcio
- Postgraduate Program in Medicines and Pharmaceutical Care (PPGMAF), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
- Collaborating Centre for Health Technology Assessment and Excellence (CCATES), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
| | - Augusto A Guerra
- Postgraduate Program in Medicines and Pharmaceutical Care (PPGMAF), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
- Collaborating Centre for Health Technology Assessment and Excellence (CCATES), Department of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rossini EE, Galeone C, Lucchetti C, Jommi C. From Indication-Based Pricing to Blended Approach: Evidence on the Price and Reimbursement Negotiation in Italy. PHARMACOECONOMICS - OPEN 2024; 8:251-261. [PMID: 38228997 PMCID: PMC10883902 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00467-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/18/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND New indications for existing medicines are increasing over time. In most countries, drug pricing and reimbursement conditions are renegotiated every time a new indication is approved. There is a growing interest in the price negotiation model for new indications, specifically comparing an indication-based versus blended approach. However, little evidence currently exists regarding the complexity of these negotiations and their impact on actual prices. Italy has recently transitioned from an indication-based approach to a blended price model. This study aims to measure the impact of price and reimbursement negotiation of new indications on discounts (i.e. actual prices) and on the negotiation duration, used as a proxy of its complexity. METHODS We considered new indications approved through a European centralized procedure from January 2013 to March 2022 for which the price and reimbursement status was approved in Italy between January 2015 and March 2022, amounting to 52 new indications. Data on the timeframe of the Italian price and reimbursement process and its phases were obtained from publicly available sources. Discounts for the first indication and their subsequent increases for new indications were estimated by comparing ex-factory prices and tendered prices. To calculate p-values, we employed the Mann-Whitney test, and multiple regression models were utilized to examine correlations between negotiation time and the characteristics of the medicines. RESULTS The mean time to reimbursement was 603 days, in contrast to 583 days for the first launch. Price negotiation took longer for rare diseases, cancer drugs, and in case of therapies with minor added therapeutic value. On average, the additional discount (on top of discounts for prior indications) was 13%, significantly lower than the mean discount for the first indications approved (24.9%). The discounts increment was lower, but negotiation took longer if a Managed Entry Agreement accompanied the final agreement. Additionally, discounts have increased over the years. CONCLUSION The negotiation for new indications takes longer than the first one, and provides, on average, an additional discount of 13%. While our findings bear the potential for significant policy implications, they necessitate prudent interpretation due to a limited number of observations. The increasing trend in additional discounts over time applied to all indications in recent negotiations, may suggest a descending trend of value for new indications and a shift from an indication-based pricing approach to a blended model. Otherwise, budget impact considerations might have outweighed a value-based approach in the recent negotiations. If so, two potential options for restoring a value-based approach are returning to an indication-based pricing or giving explicit and higher weight to value within a blended model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Carlotta Galeone
- Bicocca Applied Statistics Center (B-ASC), Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- Patient Access, Pharmalex Italy Spa, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Claudio Jommi
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Casilli G, Lidonnici D, Jommi C, De Nigris M, Genazzani AA. Do France, Germany, and Italy agree on the added therapeutic value of medicines? Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2023; 39:e54. [PMID: 37580971 DOI: 10.1017/s026646232300048x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/16/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The Health Technology Assessment (HTA) of medicines is performed separately at the country level with some differences, but Italy, France, and Germany have implemented price and reimbursement systems strongly focused on the Added Therapeutic Value (ATV). This study investigates the level of agreement on ATV assessments by Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA), Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), and Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA). METHODS A database was created collecting all information about drugs with innovativeness status requests in Italy from July 2017 to December 2022 and populated with the corresponding HAS and G-BA ATV assessments. The primary comparative analysis was conducted by grouping the ATV ratings into "higher added value" and "lower or no added value", while a secondary analysis considered the Italian innovativeness status as a criterion to include the quality of evidence assessment. The concordance between ATV assessments was investigated through percentage agreement and unweighted Cohen k-value. RESULTS 189 medicines/indications were included. The greatest agreement was found when comparing G-BA versus HAS (82 percent; k = 0.61, substantial agreement). Lower levels of agreements were observed for AIFA versus HAS and AIFA versus G-BA (respectively 52 percent; k = 0.17 and 57 percent; k = 0.25). The secondary analysis led to a reconciliation to moderate agreement for AIFA versus HAS (72 percent; k = 0.45) and AIFA versus G-BA (74 percent; k = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS A high degree of concordance between HTA organizations is reached when considering jointly ATV and quality of evidence, suggesting that the system is extensively mature to make a Joint Clinical Assessment, avoiding duplications and reducing access inequalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Claudio Jommi
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Università del Piemonte Orientale "Amedeo Avogadro", Novara, Italy
| | | | - Armando A Genazzani
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Università del Piemonte Orientale "Amedeo Avogadro", Novara, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jommi C, Galeone C. The Evaluation of Drug Innovativeness in Italy: Key Determinants and Internal Consistency. PHARMACOECONOMICS - OPEN 2023; 7:373-381. [PMID: 36763319 PMCID: PMC10169980 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00393-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/16/2023] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Innovative medicines are provided with dedicated funds and immediate market access in Italy. Innovativeness evaluation considers unmet need, added therapeutic value, and quality of the evidence. OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate the internal consistency and drivers of the innovativeness appraisal process. METHODS Appraisal reports on innovativeness refer to 1997-2021. We used both a descriptive approach and probabilistic multivariate analysis, using logistic regression models to compute odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. The dependent variable is innovativeness status (innovative vs. non-innovative; full innovativeness vs. conditional innovativeness). Explanatory variables, besides the three above-mentioned domains, are the year of evaluation, drug type, target disease and population, and the number and type of available studies. RESULTS Among the 141 medicines scrutinized, 31.9%, 29.8%, and 38.3% were evaluated as fully innovative, conditionally innovative, and non-innovative, respectively. Added therapeutic value and the quality of the evidence were associated with the odds of receiving innovative status, and full compared with conditional innovativeness; unmet need was not a predictive variable. Other factors played a minor role: medicines for both solid tumours and rare diseases are more likely to be judged innovative; conditional innovativeness is more probable for medicines for rare diseases. CONCLUSIONS Innovativeness status is driven by the added therapeutic value and quality of evidence. The appraisal process is internally consistent and predictable. This provides industry with a clear indication of what is needed to ensure that access to their medicines is prioritized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudio Jommi
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.
- Cergas (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.
| | - Carlotta Galeone
- Biostatistics & Outcome Research, Statinfo, Milan, Italy
- Bicocca Applied Statistics Center (B-ASC), Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jommi C, Meregaglia M, Pinto C. Il bisogno insoddisfatto: definizioni, evidenze di letteratura e implicazioni per l’HTA. GLOBAL & REGIONAL HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 2023; 10:70-78. [PMID: 37811344 PMCID: PMC10551671 DOI: 10.33393/grhta.2023.2624] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023] Open
Abstract
The present paper illustrates the definition of unmet need provided by the peer-reviewed literature and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) authorities across Europe in the assessment and appraisal process and within the early access schemes for medicines. The analysis relied on a descriptive review of the peer-reviewed literature and HTA documents on the definition of need (disease severity) and the way it is satisfied (existence and validity of alternatives). HTA agencies were found using (i) a narrow definition of need, focused on the clinical impact and the impact on health-related quality of life of the disease and (ii) a broad definition of comparators, including treatments used off-label in the clinical practice. Most of the contributions of the literature advocated for a broader definition of need, including additional dimensions (for example, the socio-economic impact of the disease) and the effects of existing treatments beyond their risk-benefit profile (for example, acceptability to patients). On the one hand, these contributions should be considered by HTA agencies, considering its multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder nature. On the other one, the explicit inclusion of the unmet need domains, at present disregarded, should depend on the decisions taken on the ground of the assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudio Jommi
- Dipartimento di Scienze del Farmaco, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara - Italy
| | - Michela Meregaglia
- Dipartimento di Scienze del Farmaco, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara - Italy
- Cergas, SDA Bocconi School of Management, Università Bocconi - Italy
| | - Carmine Pinto
- Oncologia Medica, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, AUSL-IRCCS Arcispedale di Reggio Emilia - Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Xoxi E, Di Bidino R, Leone S, Aiello A, Prada M. Value assessment of medicinal products by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) and French National Authority for Health (HAS): Similarities and discrepancies. FRONTIERS IN MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY 2022; 4:917151. [PMID: 36134249 PMCID: PMC9483157 DOI: 10.3389/fmedt.2022.917151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
The evaluation of pharmaceutical innovation and therapeutic value is an increasingly complex exercise for which different approaches are adopted at the national level, despite the need for standardisation of processes and harmonisation of public health decisions. The objective of our analysis was to compare the approaches of the AIFA (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco) and the HAS (Haute Autorité de Santé) in assessing the same medicinal products. In Italy, the 1525/2017 AIFA Deliberation introduces a transparent scheme for the evaluation of innovative status (innovative, conditional, not innovative) based on the therapeutic added value (TAV), therapeutic need, and quality of evidence. In contrast, in France, the HAS makes judgements using the effective clinical benefit (Service Médical Rendu) and improvement of effective clinical benefit (Amélioration du Service Médical Rendu, ASMR). This analysis focused on medicinal products evaluated both by the AIFA and by the HAS from July 2017 to September 2021. Similarities between AIFA and HAS evaluations were investigated in terms of the TAV, recognition of innovativeness, and the ASMR. Both total and partial agreements were considered relevant. Therefore, raw agreement, Cohen's kappa (weighted and unweighted), and Bangdiwala's B-statistic were estimated. A total of 102 medicinal products were included in this study. Out of these, 38 (37.2%) were orphan drugs, while 56 (54.9%) had a clinical indication for the treatment of cancer. The AIFA and HAS reached a higher level of agreement on the innovativeness status compared with the TAV. A moderate total agreement emerged in the recognition of innovativeness (k = 0.463, p-value ≤0.0001), and partial agreement was substantial (equal weight k = 0.547, squared k = 0.638), while a lack of agreement resulted in a comparison of the TAV according to the AIFA and the ASMR recognised by the HAS. Indeed, whereas the AIFA determined the TAV to be important, the HAS considered it to be moderate. In addition, whereas the AIFA identified a bias towards a moderate TAV, the HAS identified a bias towards a minor ASMR. A higher level of agreement was reached, both on the TAV and on innovative status, for less critical medical products (non-cancer-related, or non-orphan, or with a standard European Medicines Agency approval). These results underline the importance of implementing European procedures that are more broadly aligned in terms of value definition criteria.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Entela Xoxi
- Intexo SB Rome Italy
- Postgraduate School of Health Economics and Management (ALTEMS), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
- Correspondence: Entela Xoxi
| | - Rossella Di Bidino
- Health Technology Assessment Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|