Literature DB >> 20716236

Value based pricing, research and development, and patient access schemes. Will the United Kingdom get it right or wrong?

Adrian Towse1.   

Abstract

The National Health Service (NHS) should reward innovation it values. This will enable the NHS and the United Kingdom (UK) economy to benefit and impact positively on the Research and Development (R&D) decision making of companies. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) currently seeks to do this on behalf of the NHS. Yet the Office of Fair Trading proposals for Value Based Pricing add price setting powers--initially for the Department of Health (DH) and then for NICE. This introduces an additional substantial uncertainty that will impact on R&D and, conditional on R&D proceeding, on launch (or not) in the UK. Instead of adding to uncertainty the institutional arrangements for assessing value should seek to be predictable and science based, building on NICE's current arrangements. The real challenge is to increase understanding of the underlying cost-effectiveness of the technology itself by collecting evidence alongside use. The 2009 Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme sought to help do this with Flexible Pricing (FP) and Patient Access Schemes (PASs). The PASs to date have increased access to medicines, but no schemes proposed to date have yet helped to tackle outcomes uncertainty. The 2010 Innovation Pass can also be seen as a form of 'coverage with evidence development.' The NHS is understandably concerned about the costs of running such evidence collection schemes. Enabling the NHS to deliver on such schemes will impact favourably on R&D decisions. Increasing the uncertainty in the UK NHS market through government price setting will reduce incentives for R&D and for early UK launch.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20716236      PMCID: PMC2949908          DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2010.03740.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0306-5251            Impact factor:   4.335


  11 in total

1.  Drugs, money and society (Part II).

Authors:  Tom Walley
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Continuing the multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme is unjustified.

Authors:  Christopher McCabe; Jim Chilcott; Karl Claxton; Paul Tappenden; Cindy Cooper; Jennifer Roberts; Nicola Cooper; Keith Abrams
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-06-03

3.  If it ain't broke, don't price fix it: the OFT and the PPRS.

Authors:  Adrian Towse
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Risk sharing and payment by results.

Authors:  A Breckenridge; T Walley
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Value based pricing for NHS drugs: an opportunity not to be missed?

Authors:  Karl Claxton; Andrew Briggs; Martin J Buxton; Anthony J Culyer; Christopher McCabe; Simon Walker; Mark J Sculpher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-02-02

6.  Considering the value associated with innovation in health technology appraisal decisions (deliberations): a NICE thing to do?

Authors:  Colin Green
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.561

7.  Can't get no satisfaction? Will pay for performance help?: toward an economic framework for understanding performance-based risk-sharing agreements for innovative medical products.

Authors:  Adrian Towse; Louis P Garrison
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  NICE and new: appraising innovation.

Authors:  Robin E Ferner; Dyfrig A Hughes; Jeffrey K Aronson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-01-05

9.  Multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme: two year results of clinical cohort study with historical comparator.

Authors:  Mike Boggild; Jackie Palace; Pelham Barton; Yoav Ben-Shlomo; Thomas Bregenzer; Charles Dobson; Richard Gray
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-12-02

10.  OFT, VBP: QED?

Authors:  Karl Claxton
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.046

View more
  9 in total

1.  Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Caroline Davis; Christopher McCabe
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2011-08-30

2.  From NCE to NICE: the role of pharmacoeconomics.

Authors:  Dyfrig A Hughes
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 3.  World health dilemmas: Orphan and rare diseases, orphan drugs and orphan patients.

Authors:  Christina N Kontoghiorghe; Nicholas Andreou; Katerina Constantinou; George J Kontoghiorghes
Journal:  World J Methodol       Date:  2014-09-26

4.  Value-based pricing: incentive for innovation or zero net benefit?

Authors:  Dyfrig A Hughes
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Immuno-Oncology Medicines: Policy Implications and Economic Considerations.

Authors:  Georges Adunlin; Stefanie P Ferreri; Jenny Dong; Maisha Kelly Freeman
Journal:  Innov Pharm       Date:  2019-08-08

Review 6.  Market Access Agreements for pharmaceuticals in Europe: diversity of approaches and underlying concepts.

Authors:  Szymon Jarosławski; Mondher Toumi
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four European countries.

Authors:  Elena Nicod
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2016-08-18

Review 8.  Risk-Sharing Agreements in the EU: A Systematic Review of Major Trends.

Authors:  Trevor Jozef Piatkiewicz; Janine Marie Traulsen; Tove Holm-Larsen
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2018-06

9.  Views of European Drug Development Stakeholders on Treatment Optimization and Its Potential for Use in Decision-Making.

Authors:  Robbe Saesen; Stéphane Lejeune; Gianluca Quaglio; Denis Lacombe; Isabelle Huys
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 5.810

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.