RESUMO
The high cost of many new anticancer medicines significantly impedes breakthrough discoveries from reaching patients. A commonly heard refrain is that high prices are necessary to compensate for the high costs of research and development (R&D). Yet, there are promising policy proposals aimed at improving affordability without compromising innovation. In seeking new policy solutions, we argue for a shift away from entrenched opinion toward an evidence-based discourse that is grounded in experiments and real-world pilot studies. We offer a novel perspective and practical recommendations on how empirical evidence could and should be gathered to inform evidence-based policy interventions that lead to sustainable medicine prices in oncology.See related article by Franzen et al. (Cancer Res Commun 2022;2:39-47).
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/economia , Custos e Análise de Custo , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Humanos , Políticas , Estados UnidosRESUMO
The high prices of innovative medicines endanger access to care worldwide. Sustainable prices need to be affordable while sufficiently incentivizing research and development (R&D) investments. A proposed solution is increased transparency. Proponents argue that price and R&D cost confidentiality are drivers of high prices. On the contrary, supporters of confidentiality claim that confidentiality enables targeted discounts which make treatments affordable; moreover, pharmaceutical companies argue that R&D investments would suffer with more transparency. Despite the political relevance, limited empirical evidence exists on the effects of transparency regulations. We contribute to fill this gap with an experiment where we replicate the EU pharmaceutical market in a laboratory setting. In a randomized controlled study, we analyzed how participants, 400 students located in four European countries, negotiated in the current system of Price Secrecy in comparison with innovative bargaining settings where either prices only (Price Transparency) or prices and R&D costs (Full Transparency) were made transparent to buyers. We found that Price transparency had no statistically significant effect on average prices or number of patients treated and made R&D investments significantly smaller (-16.86%; P: 0.0024). On the other hand, Full Transparency reduced prices (-26%; P: 0.0004) and held the number of patients constant at the level of Price Secrecy. It produced price convergence between countries with low and high health budgets, and, despite lower prices, had no effect on R&D investments. Our findings provide novel evidence that combining price and R&D cost transparency could be an effective policy to contribute to sustainable medicine prices. See related article by Franzen et al. (Cancer Discov 2022;12:299-302).
Assuntos
Custos de Medicamentos , Negociação , Humanos , Custos e Análise de Custo , Pesquisa , Preparações FarmacêuticasRESUMO
This study aims to investigate possible different outcomes in the inpatient treatment of anorexia nervosa (AN) related to different timings of psychopharmacological and nutritional interventions. A retrospective observational study was conducted, involving young patients hospitalized for AN, treated with naso-gastric tube feeding (NGT). Participants were divided into five groups according to early (0-7 days) or late (8+ days) introduction of atypical antipsychotics (AAP) and NGT: early AAP-early NGT (EE), early AAP-late NGT (EL), late AAP-early NGT (LE), late AAP-late NGT (LL) and a control group treated with NGT only (NGT). Concurrent clinical and treatment variables were analyzed. AN psychopathology was measured with the Eating Disorder Inventory-3 (EDI-3) EDRC score. Outcomes were assessed as admission-discharge body-mass index (BMI) improvement and length of hospital stay (LOS). Contributions of variables related to outcomes were assessed with multifactorial-analyses of variance (MANOVA). Seventy-nine patients were enrolled in the study. LOS was different among treatment groups (F (4, 75) = 5.993, p < 0.001), and EE patients showed lower LOS than LE (p < 0.001) and LL (p = 0.025) patients. BMI improvement was not significantly different among treatment groups but correlated negatively with age (F (1, 72) = 10.130, p = 0.002), and admission BMI (F (1, 72) = 14.681, p < 0.001). In conclusion, patients treated with early AAP and early NGT showed lower LOS than those treated with late AAP. Prognostic treatment variables should be investigated in wider samples.