1 / 37

High costs of new drugs

High costs of new drugs. Carin A. Uyl-de Groot, PhD Professor of health technology assessment iBMG/iMTA, Erasmus University Rotterdam Uyl@bmg.eur.nl Thanks to Maureen Rutten and Marc Koopmanschap. Content. Introduction Chronology of drug innovation The life cycle of a drug

ban
Télécharger la présentation

High costs of new drugs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. High costs of new drugs Carin A. Uyl-de Groot, PhD Professor of health technology assessment iBMG/iMTA, Erasmus University Rotterdam Uyl@bmg.eur.nl Thanks to Maureen Rutten and Marc Koopmanschap

  2. Content • Introduction • Chronology of drug innovation • The life cycle of a drug • Pricing of new drugs • Challenges facing several stakeholders • Reimbursement

  3. Cancer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEpTTolebqo

  4. Examples prices of new drugs Pompe disease: Myozyme: - Cost: Euro 500,000 - Outcome: difficult to assess - ICER: around 1 mln Melanoma: Vemurafenib: • Progression free survival: 5.3 vs 1.6 months mnt months • Cost: 8.471 euro per month Melanoma: Ipilimumab: • 10-20% patients benefit • Cost: € 84.000,- per patient • Budget impact: €20-40 mln

  5. System objectives Sustainability Equity Quality of care 6 Policy goals in health care Goal: Ensuring affordable and equitable access for (all) patients to effective medicinces in a sustainable manner

  6. Policy goals, criteria and HTA aligned?

  7. Cost-effectiveness vs drug reimbursement • many EU countries: CE a formal reimbursement criterium, BUT: no country (except UK) has strict & transparant threshold (range) for acceptable cost per QALY NL 2005-11: only 30% (=19/63) of drugs with positive 1B decisions had pharmacoeconomic evidence!! (Franken et al 2012) • Many exemptions: 24 orphan drugs, 7 HIV drugs (Scotland stricter on PE evidence) • 4 “insufficiently founded” evaluations got a positive decision

  8. INTEREST HOUSING DEFENSE ROADS EDUCATION HEALTH CARE SECURITY EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT AID ENVIRONMENT

  9. Development drug expenditure (in mln), 2002-2009 Expensive drugs Other drugs 10

  10. Question: Why are the prices of new drugs high? • Development process • Succes rate • Uptake of innovation • Reimbursement

  11. Development phase: a long and winding road to registration and Medical Devices and Technologies Pfizer -- http://www.pfizer.co.uk/pfizer_uk/navigation/research_frame.htm

  12. Development phaseFrom discovery to patient Patent application Acute toxicity Pharmacology Phase I clinical trials Chronic toxicity Registration and transparency Phase II Phase III Reimbursement Pharmacovigilance Price 1 medicinal product 0 5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years Patent expiry 10 years of research 2 to 3 years of administrative procedures Source: “Recherche & Vie”, LIM (AGIM)

  13. Life cycle of a drug development introduction growth decline maturity ↑ Sales Time → Ellery and Hansen, Pharmaceutical Lifecycle management, Wiley 2012

  14. Development phase: clinical trials (phase 1 to 3) in humans € €€

  15. Development phaseDiscovery and development of a successful drug YEARS 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 INTRODUCTION /REGISTRATION POST-MARKETING SURVEILLANCE Phase IV 1 CLINICAL TEST (HUMANS) Phase I to III DEVELOPMENT 2 2 - 5 5 - 10 PRECLINICAL TEST (ANIMALS) BASIC RESEARCH SYNTHESIS, EXAMINATION & SCREENING 3,000 – 10,000 QUANTITY OF SUBSTANCES

  16. Costs of development new molecular entity (NME) • Estimation: 1 billion euros Cost factor: • R&D (including failures): 17% • Manufacturing • Marketing and promotion: 23% • More is spent on marketing than on R&D

  17. Costs per clinical phase in percentage of total R&D, period 2000-2007

  18. Declining number of NME approved by FDA Source: www.fda.gov

  19. Introduction phaseDifferences in the uptake of innovation

  20. Growth phase • Slower rate of growth than typical industrial product • Switching patients to other drugs may be risky • Me-too’s or established drug classes are doing well • Promotion limited • Health authorities cautious about letting new drug be introduced initially to a broad population because of safety issues • More and more biologics that target multiple smaller indications, which are introduced successively over the life of a drug • Cost containment policies affecting supply, demand, price

  21. Growth phase: International Reference Pricing (IRP) is used in some form in most European countries IMS HEALTH Pharmaquery Sept 2012

  22. Growth in real per capita pharmaceutical expenditure, 2000-09 (or nearest year) OECD (2011), “Pharmaceutical expenditure”, in Health at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing.

  23. Challenges • Pipeline NME drying • Cancer: need for more therapeutic value (not only end of life drugs) • Higher development costs • Increased regulatory requirements because of safety concerns • Tougher environment for pricing, reimbursement, listing • Increased competition • Earlier generic drugs • Poor image

  24. Tougher environment for pricing, reimbursement, listing Regulatory Quality Efficacy Safety Pricing, Reimbursement Comparative effectiveness in real world Cost-effectiveness (trial-based and model-based) Purchase, listing Budget impact analyses

  25. What is our “Product”? - Product Positioning • A molecule is not a product…..for price estimation purposes we must define its “positioning” • “Positioning” (here) = place in the treatment regimen Positioning variables …different implications for….. Line of therapy? Negative Differentiation Value Positive Differentiation Value D Target Patients? V Prevention or treatment? Reference Price R Perceived Value Monotherapy or combination?

  26. 2. Overlay global context and optimize 3. Implement and maintain a Global Pricing Strategy Optimization Modeling Individual Demand curves Cohesive Global Strategy • Global floor or corridor • Launch sequence • Price targets Cross Market Interactions Price Optimization across countries 1. Assess individual market price/demand dynamics US France Germany UK Canada etc

  27. Recent turbulence, turning point in NL? “CvZ to delist 2 expensive ultra-orphan drugs” (Pompe/Fabry, after 5 yrs conditional reimbursement) Fueled discussion (“finally….”) => • Ethical to stop treatment? • Ethical to value health monetarily? • Ethical to deny the scarcity of resources? • Better options to limit cost explosion? • Why are these orphan drugs so expensive? • Negotiate on prices with industry? 9/2012 CvZ, struggle-> advise “reimburse”, but not in regular benefit package…………

  28. Recent turbulence ultra orphans in NL Argument contra reimbursement: • Cost per QALY too high (up to 1 mln € per QALY) Argument pro: • For subgroup that benefits it is established treatment for several years (“acquired right on care”) Lesson: maybe conditional reimbursement of these orphan drugs 5 years ago was unwise?

  29. A proposal for ultra orphans in NL Say: WTP/QALY for normal drugs up to 80,000 € per QALY, Say: for ultra orphan drugs WTP 300,000 € per QALY For sub group that really benefits say a gain of 0.75 QALY per year Given max WTP/QALY -> max drug costs per year: = 225,000 € (as 225,000/0.75= 300,000). Message of reimbursement authorities to producers: “Don’t develop drugs with annual treatment costs of more than 225,000 €, we will not even allow conditional reimbursement”.

  30. Reimbursement (1) Coveragewithevidence NL: finalreimbursementdecisionafter 4 years, based on cost-effectiveness in dailypracticeandappropriate drug use (extended in 2013); • Quitecomfortable arrangement for producers: 4 years a high price (t=0-4, risk forpayer);

  31. Reimbursement (2) • Volume-price agreements (France ea) • sales < Y price P1; sales > Y lower price P2 Advantages: • less uncertainty on budget impact • industry can cover R & D costs (Price1*Volume1) Disadvantages: • does not address value for money • negotiations not transparant

  32. Reimbursement (3) • Contract : reimbursement depend on treatment success (outcomes based risk sharing, Pay for performance) • August 2012 CVZ omalizumab (severe asthma) • Advantages: • “no cure, no pay” => value for money • application on best patient sub groups • after contract new decision possible • Disadvantages: • transaction costs contract • clear outcome indicator crucial • cost of monitoring/registration

  33. Equal access: dynamics in treatments multiple myeloma (I)

  34. Equal access: non small cell lung cancer patients receiving 1st line Iressa or Tarceva (II) <25% 25% - 50% 50% - 75% >75%

  35. Thank you!

More Related