[Judicialization of high priced medications in Argentina: quali-quantitative study]. / Judicialización de medicamentos de alto precio en Argentina: estudio cuali-cuantitativo.

INTRODUCTION: The economic consequences of mandatory coverage, through judicial means, of high-priced medications constitutes a growing problem, which merits knowing its local characteristics to provide possible solutions. OBJECTIVE: To identify medications, diseases involved, economic impact and contextual factors of the judicialization of high-priced medications in the Argentine Health System(MEP). METHODS: Quali-quantitative descriptive study that retrospectively analyzed legal protection resources by MEP from three national and provincial databases from January 2017 to December 2020, evaluating the existing relationship between lawsuits with regulatory approval, inclusion in benefit packages and relationship with journalistic articles for the three most frequently prosecuted drugs. RESULTS: 405 lawsuits were included, mainly from the Ministry of National Health. The three most prosecuted medications were nusinersen (21.7%), palbociclib (5.9%) and agalsidase-alfa (4.7%). Only 69.4% of medications were approved for marketing in Argentina at the time of the protection; 45.7% were incorporated into the Single Reimbursement System, and 16.8% had a report from the National Commission for the Evaluation of Health Technologies and Clinical Excellence (CONETEC), which was negative in 87.1% of cases. The average time from request to provision of the medication was 150 days. A temporal correlation was observed between the appearance of the MEP in the national graphic press and the appeals occurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Judicialization focused on very highpriced medications for rare or oncological diseases. The rulings were mostly in favor of the plaintiff, and access times to the medication took a long time. The mass media anticipated the judicial processes.

Introducción: Las consecuencias económicas de la cobertura obligatoria, vía judicial, de medicamentos de alto precio constituye un problema creciente, que amerita conocer sus características locales para aportar posibles soluciones. OBJETIVO: Identificar medicamentos, enfermedades, impacto económico y factores contextuales de la judicialización de medicamentos de alto precio (MEP) Argentina. Métodos: Estudio descriptivo cuali-cuantitativo que analizó retrospectivamente recursos de amparos legales por MEP de tres bases de datos nacionales y provinciales durante 4 años, evaluando relación existente entre amparos con aprobación regulatoria, inclusión de los MEP al paquete de beneficios y relación con notas periodísticas. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 405 amparos provenientes principalmente del Ministerio de Salud Nacional. Los tres medicamentos más judicializados fueron nusinersen (21.7%), palbociclib (5.9%) y agalsidasa-alfa (4.7%). Solo el 69.4% de los medicamentos se encontraban aprobados para la comercialización en Argentina al momento del amparo; el 45.7% se encontraban incorporados al Sistema Único de Reintegros y el 16.8% contaban con informe de la Comisión Nacional de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias y Excelencia Clínica (CONETEC), negativa en el 87.1% de casos. El tiempo promedio desde la solicitud hasta la provisión del medicamento fue de 150 días. Se observó una correlación temporal entre la aparición del MEP en la prensa nacional gráfica y la presentación de amparos de dicho MEP. CONCLUSIONES: La judicialización se concentró en medicamentos de altísimo precio para enfermedades poco frecuentes u oncológicas. Los fallos fueron mayoritariamente a favor del demandante, siendo los tiempos de acceso al medicamento prolongados. Los medios de comunicación anticiparon los procesos judiciales.

Added Therapeutic Benefit of Top-Selling Brand-name Drugs in Medicare.

Importance: The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 authorizes Medicare to negotiate prices of top-selling drugs based on several factors, including therapeutic benefit compared with existing treatment options. Objective: To determine the added therapeutic benefit of the 50 top-selling brand-name drugs in Medicare in 2020, as assessed by health technology assessment (HTA) organizations in Canada, France, and Germany. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, publicly available therapeutic benefit ratings, US Food and Drug Administration documents, and the Medicare Part B and Part D prescription drug spending dashboards were used to determine the 50 top-selling single-source drugs used in Medicare in 2020 and to assess their added therapeutic benefit ratings through 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ratings from HTA bodies in Canada, France, and Germany were categorized as high (moderate or greater) or low (minor or no) added benefit. Each drug was rated based on its most favorable rating across countries, indications, subpopulations, and dosage forms. We compared the use and prerebate and postrebate (ie, net) Medicare spending between drugs with high vs low added benefit. Results: Forty-nine drugs (98%) received an HTA rating by at least 1 country; 22 of 36 drugs (61%) received a low added benefit rating in Canada, 34 of 47 in France (72%), and 17 of 29 in Germany (59%). Across countries, 27 drugs (55%) had a low added therapeutic rating, accounting for $19.3 billion in annual estimated net spending, or 35% of Medicare net spending on the 50 top-selling single-source drugs and 11% of total Medicare net prescription drug spending in 2020. Compared with those with high added benefit, drugs with a low added therapeutic rating were used by more Medicare beneficiaries (median 387 149 vs 44 869) and had lower net spending per beneficiary (median $992 vs $32 287). Conclusions and Relevance: Many top-selling Medicare drugs received low added benefit ratings by the national HTA organizations of Canada, France, and Germany. When negotiating prices for these drugs, Medicare should ensure they are not priced higher than reasonable therapeutic alternatives.

Medication adherence in cardiovascular medicine.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death globally. While pharmacological advancements have improved the morbidity and mortality associated with cardiovascular disease, non-adherence to prescribed treatment remains a significant barrier to improved patient outcomes. A variety of strategies to improve medication adherence have been tested in clinical trials, and include the following categories: improving patient education, implementing medication reminders, testing cognitive behavioral interventions, reducing medication costs, utilizing healthcare team members, and streamlining medication dosing regimens. In this review, we describe specific trials within each of these categories and highlight the impact of each on medication adherence. We also examine ongoing trials and future lines of inquiry for improving medication adherence in patients with cardiovascular diseases.

An urgent call to raise the bar in oncology.

Important breakthroughs in medical treatments have improved outcomes for patients suffering from several types of cancer. However, many oncological treatments approved by regulatory agencies are of low value and do not contribute significantly to cancer mortality reduction, but lead to unrealistic patient expectations and push even affluent societies to unsustainable health care costs. Several factors that contribute to approvals of low-value oncology treatments are addressed, including issues with clinical trials, bias in reporting, regulatory agency shortcomings and drug pricing. With the COVID-19 pandemic enforcing the elimination of low-value interventions in all fields of medicine, efforts should urgently be made by all involved in cancer care to select only high-value and sustainable interventions. Transformation of medical education, improvement in clinical trial design, quality, conduct and reporting, strict adherence to scientific norms by regulatory agencies and use of value-based scales can all contribute to raising the bar for oncology drug approvals and influence drug pricing and availability.

Publicly accessible evidence of health-related quality of life benefits associated with cancer drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency between 2009 and 2015.

OBJECTIVE: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is one of the most important patient-relevant study end-points for the direct measurement of the benefit of cancer drugs. Therefore, our aim is to detect cancer indications with no published information on HRQoL at the time of European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval and monitor any reported HRQoL evidence updates after at least three years of follow-up. METHODS: We included all cancer indications that were approved by the EMA between January 2009 and October 2015. Our main sources of information were the EMA website, clinicaltrials.gov and a systematic literature search in PubMed. Information on HRQoL outcomes was extracted alongside evidence on median overall survival. RESULTS: In total, we identified 110 indications, of which more than half (n = 58, 53%) were lacking available information on HRQoL assessments at the time of EMA approval. After a monitoring period of at least three years, 24 updates were identified, resulting in 34 (31%) therapies where information on HRQoL was still not available. For the 76 therapies with reported information on HRQoL, cancer-specific instruments were mostly used (n = 49/76). Regarding cumulative evidence on median overall survival and HRQoL, 33 (n = 33/110, 30%) as well as 15 (n = 15/110, 14%) cancer drugs were lacking information on both study end-points at the time of approval and after monitoring, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that there is an urgent need of routine re-evaluation of reimbursed cancer drugs with initially missing information on major outcomes. Standardisation of the typology and quality of HRQoL assessments need to be improved to allow better comparability of results.

Influence of government price regulation and deregulation on the price of antineoplastic medications in China: a controlled interrupted time series study.

BACKGROUND: In October 2012, the Chinese government established maximum retail prices for specific products, including 30 antineoplastic medications. Three years later, in June 2015, the government abolished price regulation for most medications, including all antineoplastic medications. This study examined the impacts of regulation and subsequent deregulation of prices of antineoplastic medications in China. METHODS: Using hospital procurement data and an interrupted time series with comparison series design, we examined the impacts of the policy changes on relative purchase prices (Laspeyres price index) and volumes of and spending on 52 antineoplastic medications in 699 hospitals. We identified three policy periods: prior to the initial price regulation (October 2011 to September 2012); during price regulation (October 2012 to June 2015); and after price deregulation (July 2015 to June 2016). RESULTS: During government price regulation, compared with price-unregulated cancer medications (n=22, mostly newer targeted products), the relative price of price-regulated medications (n=30, mostly chemotherapeutic products) decreased significantly (ß=-0.081, p<0.001). After the government price deregulation, no significant price change occurred. Neither government price regulation nor deregulation had a significant impact on average volumes of or average spending on all antineoplastic medications immediately after the policy changes or in the longer term (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Compared with unregulated antineoplastics, the prices of regulated antineoplastic medications decreased after setting price caps and did not increase after deregulation. To control the rapid growth of oncology medication expenditures, more effective measures than price regulation through price caps for traditional chemotherapy are needed.

Regulatory and Clinical Experiences with Biosimilar Filgrastim in the U.S., the European Union, Japan, and Canada.

Biosimilar filgrastims are primarily indicated for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia prevention. They are less expensive formulations of branded filgrastim, and biosimilar filgrastim was the first biosimilar oncology drug administered in European Union (EU) countries, Japan, and the U.S. Fourteen biosimilar filgrastims have been marketed in EU countries, Japan, the U.S., and Canada since 2008, 2012, 2015, and 2016, respectively. We reviewed experiences and policies for biosimilar filgrastim markets in EU countries and Japan, where uptake has been rapid, and in the U.S. and Canada, where experience is rapidly emerging. U.S. regulations for designating biosimilar interchangeability are under development, and such regulations have not been developed in most other countries. Pharmaceutical substitution is allowed for new filgrastim starts in some EU countries and in Canada, but not Japan and the U.S. In EU countries, biosimilar adoption is facilitated with favorable hospital tender offers. U.S. adoption is reportedly 24%, while the second filgrastim biosimilar is priced 30% lower than branded filgrastim and 20% lower than the first biosimilar filgrastim approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Utilization is about 60% in EU countries, where biosimilar filgrastim is marketed at a 30%-40% discount. In Japan, biosimilar filgrastim utilization is 45%, primarily because of 35% discounts negotiated by Central Insurance and hospital-only markets. Overall, biosimilar filgrastim adoption barriers are small in many EU countries and Japan and are diminishing in Canada in the U.S. Policies facilitating improved U.S. adoption of biosimilar filgrastim, based on positive experiences in EU countries and Japan, including favorable insurance coverage; larger price discount relative to reference filgrastim pricing; closing of the "rebate trap" with transparent pricing information; formal educational efforts of patients, physicians, caregivers, and providers; and allowance of pharmaceutical substitution of biosimilar versus reference filgrastim, should be considered. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: We reviewed experiences and policies for biosimilar filgrastims in Europe, Japan, Canada, and the U.S. Postmarketing harmonization of regulatory policies for biosimilar filgrastims has not occurred. Acceptance of biosimilar filgrastims for branded filgrastim, increasing in the U.S. and in Canada, is commonplace in Japan and Europe. In the U.S., some factors, accepted in Europe or Japan, could improve uptake, including acceptance of biosimilars as safe and effective; larger cost savings, decreasing "rebate traps" where pharmaceutical benefit managers support branded filgrastim, decreased use of patent litigation/challenges, and allowing pharmacists to routinely substitute biosimilar for branded filgrastim.

The effect of a change in co-payment on prescription drug demand in a National Health System: The case of 15 drug families by price elasticity of demand.

OBJECTIVES: To test the heterogeneity of the effect of a change in pharmaceutical cost-sharing by therapeutic groups in a Spanish region. METHODS: Data: random sample (provided by the Canary Islands Health Service) of 40,471 people covered by the Spanish National Health System (SNHS) in the Canary Islands. The database includes individualised monthly-dispensed medications (prescribed by the SNHS) from one year before (August 2011) to one year after (June 2013) the Royal Decree Law 16/2012 (RDL 16/2012). Sample: two intervention groups (low-income pensioners and middle-income working population) and one control group (low-income working population). Empirical model: quasi-experimental difference-in-differences design to study the change in consumption (measured in number of monthly Defined Daily Dose (DDDs) per individual) among 13 therapeutic groups. The policy break indicator (three-level categorical variable) tested the existence of stockpiling between the reform's announcement and its implementation. We ran 16 linear regression models (general, by therapeutic groups and by comorbidities) that considered whether the exclusion of some drugs from public provision impacted on consumption more than the co-payment increase. RESULTS: General: Reduction (-13.04) in consumption after the reform's implementation, which was fully compensated by a previous increase (16.60 i.e., stockpiling) among low-income pensioners. The middle-income working population maintained its trend of increasing consumption. Therapeutic groups: Reductions in consumption after the reform's implementation among low-income pensioners in 7 of the 13 groups, which were fully compensated for by a previous increase (i.e., stockpiling) in 4 groups and partially compensated for in the remaining 3. The analysis without the excluded medicines provided fewer negative coefficients. Comorbidities: Reduction in consumption that was only slightly compensated for by a previous increase (i.e., stockpiling). CONCLUSIONS: The negative impact of cost-sharing produced, among low-income pensioners, a risk of loss of adherence to treatments, which could deteriorate the health status of individuals, especially among pensioners within the most inelastic therapeutic groups (associated with chronic diseases) and patients with comorbidities (also, associated with chronic diseases). Notwithstanding the above, this risk was more related to the exclusion of some drugs from provision than to the cost-sharing increase.

Specialty Drug Price Trends in the Federal 340B Drug Discount Program.

BACKGROUND: The federal 340B Drug Discount Program provides access to significant drug price discounts for health care organizations in the United States that serve a disproportional share of disadvantaged patients. OBJECTIVE: To analyze trends over a 10-year period (2006~2016) in the price of specialty drugs, contrasting the market price with the price paid under the 340B program. METHODS: Pharmacy purchase records, including the 340B drug price and the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC), were collected from a 340B-contract pharmacy group in Southern California between 2006 and 2016. Records were used to calculate price changes in the annual average price paid. The average price was calculated as the weighted price, using purchasing volume for each year as weights. Separate time series of year-to-year price changes were created by therapeutic class using the American Hospital Formulary Service Therapeutic Classification system. RESULTS: The 340B price growth rate patterns were similar to the profile of the WAC prices over time across all drug classes. The overall drug price growth rate per year over 10 years for WAC prices was 15% and 10% for 340B prices. For specialty drug classes, the average growth rates per year were 14% for the WAC price and 6% for the 340B price. For certain specialty drug classes, such as antineoplastic and antiretroviral drugs, the 340B price inflation rates were significantly lower than the WAC price inflation rates after 2013. CONCLUSIONS: The price inflation of specialty drugs exceeds the rate of inflation in the Consumer Price Index for prescription drugs. The 340B price shows a similar inflation pattern as the WAC price over time in the specialty drug categories. DISCLOSURES: This study is 1 of 3 research projects that comprise Lee's dissertation. Funding to support Lee's dissertation research was provided as an unrestricted fellowship from PharMedQuest Pharmacy Services. Chang is employed by PharMedQuest Pharmacy Services, which provided the dataset for analysis. Lee reports grants from PharMedQuest Pharmacy Services, unrelated to this study. McCombs has nothing to report.

The impact of state parity laws on copayments for and adherence to oral endocrine therapy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to endocrine therapy for breast cancer is often inadequate, in part because of out-of-pocket costs for medication. Numerous states have enacted parity laws to limit patient cost-sharing for oral anticancer drugs. The objective of this study was to estimate the impact of these laws on patient copayments for and adherence to oral endocrine therapy for breast cancer. METHODS: Administrative health insurance claims data from 2007 to 2014 derived from a US health care database were used to identify female patients aged 18 to 64 years with invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast who initiated endocrine therapy and were enrolled in fully insured health plans in states that either enacted parity legislation between 2008 and 2013 or had not yet enacted such legislation by 2015. Differences-in-differences analysis was used to compare copayments for and adherence to endocrine therapy during the 1-year period before and after each year of legislation enactment. RESULTS: In total, 6900 individuals who received 7778 unique drug therapy courses were identified. Parity legislation was associated with significant decreases in the 25th percentile of copayments for anastrozole of $4.39 (95% confidence interval [CI], -$4.52 to -$4.26; P < .001) and for exemestane of $3.08 (95% CI, -$4.80 to -$1.35; P < .001). The median copayment for exemestane decreased by $10.25 (95% CI, -$12.61 to -$7.89; P < .001). A higher median monthly copayment was significantly associated with a greater risk of medication nonadherence (adjusted risk ratio, 1.006 per dollar increase; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Parity laws had a modest effect on lowering the cost of anastrozole and exemestane, but more focused efforts to limit out-of-pocket costs for endocrine therapy may have a greater impact on medication adherence.

Role of Health Technology Assessment in Drug Policies: Korea.

South Korea is the first Asian country to mandate the submission of pharmacoeconomic data for reimbursement decision making. For a new drug to be listed, it must demonstrate its value in terms of comparative effectiveness and cost effectiveness. The Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) judges the submitted drug's value and decides whether its coverage is appropriate on the basis of the recommendation of the Pharmaceutical Benefit Coverage Assessment Committee. Once the drug has been accepted by HIRA, the National Health Insurance Service and the sponsoring company negotiate the price and expected sales volume. Even if HIRA acknowledges the value of the drug, it cannot be listed if the negotiation fails. In the off-patent market, generic and original branded drugs are treated equally in terms of pricing. Once generics enter the market, both drug prices should be lowered to 53.55% or less of the on-patent price. Since the current system was implemented, concerns have been raised about a decline in the accessibility of new drugs, especially for high-priced drugs used to treat serious diseases. In 2013, several measures had been introduced aimed at improving the accessibility of these drugs. A risk-sharing scheme and an increase in the maximum acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio were subsequently initiated. Although these schemes have been successful in improving access to high-priced drugs, they are often criticized for reducing transparency in pricing. Finding a balance between accessibility and efficiency is still a challenge in Korea.

New Cancer Drug Approvals From the Perspective of a Universal Healthcare System: Analyses of the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review Recommendations.

Background: FDA approvals do not consider cost, but they set the tone for regulatory approvals worldwide, including in countries with universal healthcare where cost-effectiveness, utility, and adoption feasibility are considered rigorously. Methods: Data from the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR), a national drug review system that makes evidence-based funding recommendations to Canada's provinces and territories, were collected. Our objectives were to assess (1) temporal trends in cost and efficacy of drugs reviewed, (2) correlations among magnitude of benefits, cost, and pCODR decisions, and (3) predictors of approvals. Results: A total of 60 drugs for 91 indications were reviewed by pCODR from January 2012 to January 2018. Of the 91 reviews (approved previously by FDA), 18 received negative recommendations on the grounds of inadequate clinical benefits; 87% (64/73) of those approved were conditional on improvement in cost. Surrogate outcomes were used to support approvals in 83% of the reviews, which were not correlated with overall survival (rSpearman = +0.16; P=.24). Median cost/quality-adjusted life years (QALY) increased by 36% per annum (quantile regression, P=.0029), although benefits in overall and progression-free survival were stable (P=.21 and .65, respectively). Median-based incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of new drugs was $186,403 CAD (range, $7,200 to $2.1 million). Higher ICER was a strong predictor of a negative pCODR recommendation (P<.01). Conclusions: A substantial number of cancer drugs that are FDA approved for public use do not meet Canadian standards for efficacy. Cost of cancer drugs increases by a third annually in Canada, but the benefits-measured mostly with surrogates that did not correlate with survival-are stable. With finite resources to share among multiple societal priorities, such as education and preventive health, cancer drug cost may be unsustainable despite price regulation.

Effects of a price cut reform on the cost and utilization of antidiabetic drugs in Korea: a national health insurance database study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the potential widespread application and a significant need, the policy effectiveness of prescribed medications price controls has not been studied extensively. We aimed to explore the effects of a price cut introduced in April 1st of 2012 on the cost and utilization of antidiabetics in South Korea. METHODS: We identified approximately four million outpatients who filed at least one diabetes-related claim during the index period (January 2010 to December 2012) using the National Health Insurance claims data. We performed interrupted time series analyses for cost and utilization of "overall," "reduced price," and "constant price" antidiabetics between January 2009 and June 2013, and measured the growth rate for incidents of medical and surgical procedures for diabetes-induced complications. RESULTS: The segmented regression suggests that spending on overall and reduced price antidiabetics would drop by 6 and 23%, respectively; spending on constant price antidiabetics would rise by 16% in a year after the new pricing compared to if the policy were not in existence. There were a few immediate changes in utilization, and its trend indicated a significant decrease in reduced price antidiabetics and an increase in constant price antidiabetics. Incidents of medical and surgical procedures relating to diabetic complications were unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: The Korean price cut program contained costs by immediately reducing the cost of pharmaceuticals without any major signals associated with compromised clinical conditions in diabetic patients.

[Evolution, determinants and regulation of drug expenditures in France]. / Évolution, déterminants et régulation des dépenses de médicaments en France.

According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), drug expenditures account for about 20 % of all health expenditures in high-income countries. The increase of these drug expenditures which has been observed in all these countries over a long period is due to the combination of aging populations, changes in medical practices and the dynamics of the pharmaceutical market, in particular the hospital market. France is no exception. Its consumption of drugs (which accounted for 17.5 % of health expenditures in 2014), historically among the highest in volume, has grown slower in the last decade than in other OECD countries. However, the particularly rapid and wide adoption of pharmaceutical innovations, which has always characterized France, has had in recent years a very significant effect on the soaring drug expenditures covered by the social protection system (plus 1.1 billion in 2014, a year marked by the introduction of new therapies against hepatitis C). This significant effect should continue with the introduction of new and very expensive therapies, particularly in oncology.