Frailty, polypharmacy, and potentially inappropriate medications in old people: findings in a representative sample of the French population.

PURPOSE: This study analyses the relationship between medication use and frailty by considering the quantity of medications prescribed (polypharmacy) and the quality of medication prescribing (according to French criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medications-PIMs) in people aged 65 and over. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study based on the data from a nationally representative study about health and use of healthcare resources in France (ESPS 2012). The number of frailty criteria was assessed among exhaustion, unintentional weight loss, muscle weakness, impaired mobility, and low level of physical activity. Polypharmacy and PIMs were assessed from the data of reimbursement by the National Health Insurance over the whole year 2012. PIMs were defined according to the Laroche list plus additional criteria dealing with inappropriate prolonged use of medications. The analyses used Poisson regression models, with the number of frailty criteria as dependent variable. RESULTS: The study population was composed of 1003 women and 887 men, of mean age 74.7 +/- 7.4 years. Polypharmacy (5 to 9 drugs) and excessive polypharmacy (≥10 drugs) were reported in 42.9 and 27.4% of the study population, respectively, while 46.7% of the study population received at least one PIM during the year 2012. Polypharmacy and PIMs were both associated with the number of frailty criteria in models adjusted for socio-demographic and health characteristics of the participants. The prescription of anticholinergic medications was the only PIM that remained significantly associated with the number of frailty criteria after adjustment for polypharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: Polypharmacy and use of anticholinergic medications are independently associated with frailty in old people.

Factors influencing report of common mental health problems among psychologically distressed adults.

This study investigates the sociodemographic factors associated with self-report of common mental problems by the psychologically distressed in order to gain insight into the profile of the population subgroups least likely to receive mental health support whenever needed. Data from the 2006-2008 french National Survey on Health, Health Care and Insurance, were used, measuring psychological distress based on the Mental Health Inventory MHI-5. The patterns associated with education, employment situation and living arrangement were investigated in a sample of 11,543 subjects aged 30-54 years. Men with lower educational level were found to be doubly disadvantaged, as they were more subjected to distress than those with higher educational level and at the same time less likely to report common mental problems whenever distressed. While in both genders subjects not living with a spouse and non-employed subjects were also more subjected to distress, they were more likely than the others to report common mental problems in presence of distress. The findings were discussed in terms of living conditions, stigma, mental health literacy and help-seeking behaviour. Mental health promotion programmes should aim at educating the public, and particularly men and the lower educated public, on the signs of distress and their significance.

Personalizing health care: feasibility and future implications.

Considerable variety in how patients respond to treatments, driven by differences in their geno- and/ or phenotypes, calls for a more tailored approach. This is already happening, and will accelerate with developments in personalized medicine. However, its promise has not always translated into improvements in patient care due to the complexities involved. There are also concerns that advice for tests has been reversed, current tests can be costly, there is fragmentation of funding of care, and companies may seek high prices for new targeted drugs. There is a need to integrate current knowledge from a payer's perspective to provide future guidance. Multiple findings including general considerations; influence of pharmacogenomics on response and toxicity of drug therapies; value of biomarker tests; limitations and costs of tests; and potentially high acquisition costs of new targeted therapies help to give guidance on potential ways forward for all stakeholder groups. Overall, personalized medicine has the potential to revolutionize care. However, current challenges and concerns need to be addressed to enhance its uptake and funding to benefit patients.

Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increase in 'risk sharing' schemes for pharmaceuticals between healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical companies in Europe in recent years as an additional approach to provide continued comprehensive and equitable healthcare. There is though confusion surrounding the terminology as well as concerns with existing schemes. METHODS: A literature review was undertaken to identify existing schemes supplemented with additional internal documents or web-based references known to the authors. This was combined with the extensive knowledge of health authority personnel from 14 different countries and locations involved with these schemes. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A large number of 'risk sharing' schemes with pharmaceuticals are in existence incorporating both financial-based models and performance-based/outcomes-based models. In view of this, a new logical definition is proposed. This is "risk sharing' schemes should be considered as agreements concluded by payers and pharmaceutical companies to diminish the impact on payers' budgets for new and existing schemes brought about by uncertainty and/or the need to work within finite budgets". There are a number of concerns with existing schemes. These include potentially high administration costs, lack of transparency, conflicts of interest, and whether health authorities will end up funding an appreciable proportion of a new drug's development costs. In addition, there is a paucity of published evaluations of existing schemes with pharmaceuticals. CONCLUSION: We believe there are only a limited number of situations where 'risk sharing' schemes should be considered as well as factors that should be considered by payers in advance of implementation. This includes their objective, appropriateness, the availability of competent staff to fully evaluate proposed schemes as well as access to IT support. This also includes whether systematic evaluations have been built into proposed schemes.

Ongoing pharmaceutical reforms in France: implications for key stakeholder groups.

The rapid rise in pharmaceutical costs in France has been driven by new technologies and the growing prevalence of chronic diseases as well as considerable prescribing freedom and choice of physician among patients. This has led to the introduction of a number of reforms and initiatives in an attempt to moderate expenditure whilst ensuring universal coverage and rewarding innovation. These reforms include accelerating access to and granting average European prices for new innovative drugs, delisting drugs where there are concerns over their value and instigating rebates for excessive prescribing. Alongside this, ongoing initiatives to improve the quality and efficiency of prescribing include programmes to enhance generic prescribing and dispensing as well as to reduce antibacterial and anxiolytic/hypnotic prescribing. However, there have been few publications documenting the impact of specific reforms on the overall costs and quality of care, which have been exacerbated by compartmentalization of budgets. Estimates suggest savings of over 27 million euro/year by decreasing antibacterial prescribing, 450 million euro/year by not reimbursing ineffective drugs, 670 million euro/year from pharmaceutical company rebates and approximately 1 billion euro/year from increased prescribing and dispensing of generics (year 2003-7 values). Additional savings of at least 1.5 billion euro/year are seen as being possible from increased use of generics such as generic proton pump inhibitors, statins (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) and ACE inhibitors instead of current branded products such as angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]). Delisting drugs when there are concerns about their value provides an example to other countries with currently limited demand-side measures. Other possible examples include price : volume agreements and multifaceted campaigns to enhance generic prescribing and dispensing and reduce antibacterial prescribing. Possible future initiatives could include adopting more stringent criteria for categorizing new drugs as innovative as well as further reductions in the prices of generics. Other initiatives could include further enhancement of the quality and efficiency of prescribing, including formal auditing of physician prescribing, as well as increasing efforts to monitor the risk : benefit ratio of new drugs post-launch in real-world practice.

Barriers for Access to New Medicines: Searching for the Balance Between Rising Costs and Limited Budgets.

Introduction: There is continued unmet medical need for new medicines across countries especially for cancer, immunological diseases, and orphan diseases. However, there are growing challenges with funding new medicines at ever increasing prices along with funding increased medicine volumes with the growth in both infectious diseases and non-communicable diseases across countries. This has resulted in the development of new models to better manage the entry of new medicines, new financial models being postulated to finance new medicines as well as strategies to improve prescribing efficiency. However, more needs to be done. Consequently, the primary aim of this paper is to consider potential ways to optimize the use of new medicines balancing rising costs with increasing budgetary pressures to stimulate debate especially from a payer perspective. Methods: A narrative review of pharmaceutical policies and implications, as well as possible developments, based on key publications and initiatives known to the co-authors principally from a health authority perspective. Results: A number of initiatives and approaches have been identified including new models to better manage the entry of new medicines based on three pillars (pre-, peri-, and post-launch activities). Within this, we see the growing role of horizon scanning activities starting up to 36 months before launch, managed entry agreements and post launch follow-up. It is also likely there will be greater scrutiny over the effectiveness and value of new cancer medicines given ever increasing prices. This could include establishing minimum effectiveness targets for premium pricing along with re-evaluating prices as more medicines for cancer lose their patent. There will also be a greater involvement of patients especially with orphan diseases. New initiatives could include a greater role of multicriteria decision analysis, as well as looking at the potential for de-linking research and development from commercial activities to enhance affordability. Conclusion: There are a number of ongoing activities across countries to try and fund new valued medicines whilst attaining or maintaining universal healthcare. Such activities will grow with increasing resource pressures and continued unmet need.

[Cost of obesity in France]. / Evaluation du coût associé à l'obésité en France.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the costs associated with obesity in France. METHODS: We used data from the 2002 survey on health and social protection as well as health care consumption data from the EPAS sample of the national health insurance funds. After excluding those younger than 18 years, pregnant women and people diagnosed with cancer, we classified subjects as underweight, normal weight, or obese and then studied two subpopulations: (P1) obese patients (body mass index (BMI) >or= 30 kg/m2) and (P2) patients who were obese or overweight (BMI >or= 27 kg/m2) and had additional cardiovascular risk factors: hypertension, dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes, myocardial infarction (present or history), transient ischemic attack, intermittent claudication or sleep apnea. The Heckman approach was used to adjust for several factors. RESULTS: The study included 4651 individuals, with a mean age was 47 years. The obesity prevalence rate was estimated at 10.7% for P1; the P2 prevalence was 16.0%. Average healthcare costs for the entire study group were 1534 euro, 1105 euro for ambulatory care (72%) and 429 euro (28%) for inpatient care. Costs for obese subjects (P1 and P2) averaged 2500 euro, twice the costs for normal-weight people (1263 euro). After taking into account age, sex, socioeconomic status, alcohol consumption and smoking, the 100% reimbursement rate for chronic diseases (all else being equal), the extra cost of obesity, compared with normal weight, was estimated between 506 euro (P1) and 648 euro (P2). CONCLUSION: The annual total cost of obesity was estimated to range from 2.1 to 6.2 billion euros in 2002 and account for 1.5 to 4.6% of total health expenditures in France.

Adaptive Pathways: Possible Next Steps for Payers in Preparation for Their Potential Implementation.

Medicines receiving a conditional marketing authorization through Medicines Adaptive Pathways to Patients (MAPPs) will be a challenge for payers. The "introduction" of MAPPs is already seen by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as a fait accompli, with payers not consulted or involved. However, once medicines are approved through MAPPs, they will be evaluated for funding by payers through different activities. These include Health Technology Assessment (HTA) with often immature clinical data and high uncertainty, financial considerations, and negotiations through different types of agreements, which can require monitoring post launch. Payers have experience with new medicines approved through conditional approval, and the fact that MAPPs present additional challenges is a concern from their perspective. There may be some activities where payers can collaborate. The final decisions on whether to reimburse a new medicine via MAPPs will have more variation than for medicines licensed via conventional processes. This is due not only to increasing uncertainty associated with medicines authorized through MAPPs but also differences in legal frameworks between member states. Moreover, if the financial and side-effect burden from the period of conditional approval until granting full marketing authorization is shifted to the post-authorization phase, payers may have to bear such burdens. Collection of robust data during routine clinical use is challenging along with high prices for new medicines during data collection. This paper presents the concept of MAPPs and possible challenges. Concerns and potential ways forward are discussed and a number of recommendations are presented from the perspective of payers.

Entry time effects and follow-on drug competition.

Pharmaceutical firms have been criticized for concentrating efforts of R&D on the so-called me-too or follow-on drugs. There have been many comments for and against the dissemination of these incremental innovations but few papers have broached the subject from an econometric point of view, possibly because identification of me-too or follow-on drugs is not so obvious. This paper focuses on the impact of entry order on follow-on drug competition in the French market between the years 2001 and 2007. More precisely, this study examines the effects on market share of first entrants in the follow-on drug market and how this possible competitive advantage changes over time. First results are coherent with theoretical microeconomic issues concerning the importance of being first. We find evidence that first movers in the follow-on drug market have the ability to capture and maintain greater market share for a long period of time. The hierarchical market position of follow-on drugs does not seem to be affected by generic drug emergence. From a dynamic perspective, our analysis shows that market share is positively correlated with the ability of follow-on drugs to set prices higher than the average follow-on drug prices in a specific therapeutic class, which means that market power remains considerably important for first movers. Moreover, we found that the optimum level of innovation to maximize market share is the highest one.

Payers' Views of the Changes Arising through the Possible Adoption of Adaptive Pathways.

Payers are a major stakeholder in any considerations and initiatives concerning adaptive licensing of new medicinal products, also referred to as Medicines Adaptive Pathways to patients (MAPPs). Firstly, the scope and necessity of MAPPs need further scrutiny, especially with regard to the definition of unmet need. Conditional approval pathways already exist for new medicines for seriously debilitating or life-threatening diseases and only a limited number of new medicines are innovative. Secondly, MAPPs will result in new medicines on the market with limited evidence about their effectiveness and safety. Additional data are to be collected after approval. Consequently, adaptive pathways may increase the risk of exposing patients to ineffective or unsafe medicines. We have already seen medicines approved conventionally that subsequently proved ineffective or unsafe amongst a wider, more co-morbid population as well as medicines that could have been considered for approval under MAPPs but subsequently proved ineffective or unsafe in Phase III trials and were never licensed. Thirdly, MAPPs also put high demands on payers. Routine collection of patient level data is difficult with high transaction costs. It is not clear who will fund these. Other challenges for payers include shifts in the risk governance framework, implications for evaluation and HTA, increased complexity of setting prices, difficulty with ensuring equity in the allocation of resources, definition of responsibility and liability and implementation of stratified use. Exit strategies also need to be agreed in advance, including price reductions, rebates, or reimbursement withdrawals when price premiums are not justified. These issues and concerns will be discussed in detail including potential ways forward.

Introduction and Utilization of High Priced HCV Medicines across Europe; Implications for the Future.

BACKGROUND: Infection with the Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) is a widespread transmittable disease with a diagnosed prevalence of 2.0%. Fortunately, it is now curable in most patients. Sales of medicines to treat HCV infection grew 2.7% per year between 2004 and 2011, enhanced by the launch of the protease inhibitors (PIs) boceprevir (BCV) and telaprevir (TVR) in addition to ribavirin and pegylated interferon (pegIFN). Costs will continue to rise with new treatments including sofosbuvir, which now include interferon free regimens. OBJECTIVE: Assess the uptake of BCV and TVR across Europe from a health authority perspective to offer future guidance on dealing with new high cost medicines. METHODS: Cross-sectional descriptive study of medicines to treat HCV (pegIFN, ribavirin, BCV and TVR) among European countries from 2008 to 2013. Utilization measured in defined daily doses (DDDs)/1000 patients/quarter (DIQs) and expenditure in Euros/DDD. Health authority activities to influence treatments categorized using the 4E methodology (Education, Engineering, Economics and Enforcement). RESULTS: Similar uptake of BCV and TVR among European countries and regions, ranging from 0.5 DIQ in Denmark, Netherlands and Slovenia to 1.5 DIQ in Tayside and Catalonia in 2013. However, different utilization of the new PIs vs. ribavirin indicates differences in dual vs. triple therapy, which is down to factors including physician preference and genotypes. Reimbursed prices for BCV and TVR were comparable across countries. CONCLUSION: There was reasonable consistency in the utilization of BCV and TVR among European countries in comparison with other high priced medicines. This may reflect the social demand to limit the transmission of HCV. However, the situation is changing with new curative medicines for HCV genotype 1 (GT1) with potentially an appreciable budget impact. These concerns have resulted in different prices across countries, with their impact on budgets and patient outcomes monitored in the future to provide additional guidance.

Disinvestment and Value-Based Purchasing Strategies for Pharmaceuticals: An International Review.

Pharmaceutical expenditure has increased rapidly across many Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries over the past three decades. This growth is an increasing concern for governments and other third-party payers seeking to provide equitable and comprehensive healthcare within sustainable budgets. In order to create headroom for increasing utilisation, and to fund new high-cost therapies, there is an active push to 'disinvest' from low-value drugs. The aim of this article is to review how reimbursement policy decision makers have sought to partially or completely disinvest from drugs in a range of OECD countries (UK, France, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) where they are publicly funded or subsidised. We employed a systematic literature search strategy and the incorporation of grey literature known to the authorship team. We canvass key policy instruments from each country to outline key approaches to the identification of candidate drugs for disinvestment assessment (passive approaches vs. more active approaches); methods of disinvestment and value-based purchasing (de-listing, restricting treatment, price or reimbursement rate reductions, encouraging generic prescribing); lessons learnt from the various approaches; the potential role of coverage with evidence development; and the need for careful stakeholder management. Dedicated sections are provided with detailed coverage of policy approaches (with drug examples) from each country. Historically, countries have relied on 'passive disinvestment'; however, due to (1) the availability of new cost-effectiveness evidence, or (2) 'leakage' in drug utilisation, or (3) market failure in terms of price competition, there is an increasing focus towards 'active disinvestment'. Isolating low-value drugs that would create headroom for innovative new products to enter the market is also motivating disinvestment efforts by multiple parties, including industry. Historically, disinvestment has mainly taken the form of price reductions, especially when market failures are perceived to exist, and restricting treatment to subpopulations, particularly when a drug is no longer considered value for money. There is considerable experimentation internationally in mechanisms for disinvestment and the opportunity for countries to learn from each other. Ongoing evaluation of disinvestment strategies is essential, and ought to be reported in the peer-reviewed literature.

Are new models needed to optimize the utilization of new medicines to sustain healthcare systems?

Medicines have made an appreciable contribution to improving health. However, even high-income countries are struggling to fund new premium-priced medicines. This will grow necessitating the development of new models to optimize their use. The objective is to review case histories among health authorities to improve the utilization and expenditure on new medicines. Subsequently, use these to develop exemplar models and outline their implications. A number of issues and challenges were identified from the case histories. These included the low number of new medicines seen as innovative alongside increasing requested prices for their reimbursement, especially for oncology, orphan diseases, diabetes and HCV. Proposed models center on the three pillars of pre-, peri- and post-launch including critical drug evaluation, as well as multi-criteria models for valuing medicines for orphan diseases alongside potentially capping pharmaceutical expenditure. In conclusion, the proposed models involving all key stakeholder groups are critical for the sustainability of healthcare systems or enhancing universal access. The models should help stimulate debate as well as restore trust between key stakeholder groups.

Changes in osteoarthritis management by general practitioners in the COX2-inhibitor era-concomitant gastroprotective therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Two selective COX2 inhibitors, rofecoxib and celecoxib, were introduced on the French market in 2000. We evaluated their use in the treatment of osteoarthritis by general practitioners, with special attention to concomitant prescription of gastroprotective agents. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Thales Epidemiology Observatory is a medical database compiled by a representative sample of 1000 general practitioners in France. We examined the data collected during the year before and the year after the introduction of rofecoxib and celecoxib on the French market (November 1999-October 2001). During each of the 2 years of the study period, about 200,000 visits for 70,000 patients were entered into the database. RESULTS: COX2 inhibitors were prescribed at a rapidly increasing rate during the second year, when they accounted for 38% of the prescription volume for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and 25% of prescribed medication costs. In some patients, COX2 inhibitors were substituted for nonselective NSAIDs, and in others they were used as first-line NSAID therapy. On average over the 2-year study period, 22.1% of prescriptions for conventional NSAIDs included a prescription for a gastroprotective agent; this proportion increased from 18.6% in November 1999 to 24.8% in October 2001. Among prescriptions for COX2 inhibitors, 17.5% included a gastroprotective agent. CONCLUSION: General practitioners have been prompt to use COX2 inhibitors in the treatment of osteoarthritis. However, they have not decreased their use of concomitant gastroprotective treatment. Thus, they seem aware that proof of a lower long-term risk of gastrointestinal toxicity with COX2 inhibitors is lacking, and that elderly patients such as those with osteoarthritis are at high risk for gastrointestinal side effects of NSAIDs.

Multiple policies to enhance prescribing efficiency for established medicines in Europe with a particular focus on demand-side measures: findings and future implications.

INTRODUCTION: The appreciable growth in pharmaceutical expenditure has resulted in multiple initiatives across Europe to lower generic prices and enhance their utilization. However, considerable variation in their use and prices. OBJECTIVE: Assess the influence of multiple supply and demand-side initiatives across Europe for established medicines to enhance prescribing efficiency before a decision to prescribe a particular medicine. Subsequently utilize the findings to suggest potential future initiatives that countries could consider. METHOD: An analysis of different methodologies involving cross national and single country retrospective observational studies on reimbursed use and expenditure of PPIs, statins, and renin-angiotensin inhibitor drugs among European countries. RESULTS: Nature and intensity of the various initiatives appreciably influenced prescribing behavior and expenditure, e.g., multiple measures resulted in reimbursed expenditure for PPIs in Scotland in 2010 56% below 2001 levels despite a 3-fold increase in utilization and in the Netherlands, PPI expenditure fell by 58% in 2010 vs. 2000 despite a 3-fold increase in utilization. A similar picture was seen with prescribing restrictions, i.e., (i) more aggressive follow-up of prescribing restrictions for patented statins and ARBs resulted in a greater reduction in the utilization of patented statins in Austria vs. Norway and lower utilization of patented ARBs vs. generic ACEIs in Croatia than Austria. However, limited impact of restrictions on esomeprazole in Norway with the first prescription or recommendation in hospital where restrictions do not apply. Similar findings when generic losartan became available in Western Europe. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple demand-side measures are needed to influence prescribing patterns. When combined with supply-side measures, activities can realize appreciable savings. Health authorities cannot rely on a "spill over" effect between classes to affect changes in prescribing.

Dabigatran - a continuing exemplar case history demonstrating the need for comprehensive models to optimize the utilization of new drugs.

BACKGROUND: There are potential conflicts between authorities and companies to fund new premium priced drugs especially where there are effectiveness, safety and/or budget concerns. Dabigatran, a new oral anticoagulant for the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), exemplifies this issue. Whilst new effective treatments are needed, there are issues in the elderly with dabigatran due to variable drug concentrations, no known antidote and dependence on renal elimination. Published studies showed dabigatran to be cost-effective but there are budget concerns given the prevalence of AF. These concerns resulted in extensive activities pre- to post-launch to manage its introduction. OBJECTIVE: To (i) review authority activities across countries, (ii) use the findings to develop new models to better manage the entry of new drugs, and (iii) review the implications based on post-launch activities. METHODOLOGY: (i) Descriptive review and appraisal of activities regarding dabigatran, (ii) development of guidance for key stakeholder groups through an iterative process, (iii) refining guidance following post launch studies. RESULTS: Plethora of activities to manage dabigatran including extensive pre-launch activities, risk sharing arrangements, prescribing restrictions and monitoring of prescribing post launch. Reimbursement has been denied in some countries due to concerns with its budget impact and/or excessive bleeding. Development of a new model and future guidance is proposed to better manage the entry of new drugs, centering on three pillars of pre-, peri-, and post-launch activities. Post-launch activities include increasing use of patient registries to monitor the safety and effectiveness of new drugs in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Models for introducing new drugs are essential to optimize their prescribing especially where concerns. Without such models, new drugs may be withdrawn prematurely and/or struggle for funding.

Multilevel analysis of the influence of patients' and general practitioners' characteristics on patented versus multiple-sourced statin prescribing in France.

BACKGROUND: The French National Health Insurance and the Ministry of Health have introduced multiple reforms in recent years to increase prescribing efficiency. These include guidelines, academic detailing, financial incentives for the prescribing and dispensing of generics drugs as well as a voluntary pay-for-performance programme. However, the quality and efficiency of prescribing could be enhanced potentially if there was better understanding of the dynamics of prescribing behaviour in France. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the patient and general practitioner characteristics that influence patented versus multiple-sourced statin prescribing in France. METHODOLOGY: Statistical analysis was performed on the statin prescribing habits from 341 general practitioners (GPs) that were included in the IMS-Health Permanent Survey on Medical Prescription in France, which was conducted between 2009 and 2010 and involved 14,360 patients. Patient characteristics included their age and gender as well as five medical profiles that were constructed from the diagnoses obtained during consultations. These were (1) disorders of lipoprotein metabolism, (2) heart disease, (3) diabetes, (4) complex profiles and (5) profiles based on other diagnoses. Physician characteristics included their age, gender, solo or group practice, weekly workload and payment scheme. RESULTS: Patient age had a statistically significant impact on statin prescribing for patients in profile 1 (disorders of lipoprotein metabolism) and profile 3 (complex profiles) with a greater number of patented statins being prescribed for the youngest patients. For instance, patients older than 76 years with a complex profile were prescribed fewer patented statins than patients aged 68-76 years old with the same medical profile (coefficient: -0.225; p = 0.0008). By contrast, regardless of the patient's age, the medical profile did not affect the probability of prescribing a patented statin except in young patients with heart diseases who were prescribed a greater number of patented statins (coefficient: 0.3992; p = 0.0007). Prescribing was also statistically influenced by physician features, e.g., older male physicians were more likely to prescribe patented statins (coefficient: 0.245; p = 0.0417) and GPs practicing in groups were more likely to prescribe multiple sourced statins (coefficient: -0.178; p = 0.0338), which is an important finding of the study. GPs with a lower workload prescribed a greater number of patented statins. CONCLUSION: There is significant variability in the prescribing of different statins among patient and physician profiles as well as between solo and group practices. Consequently, there are opportunities to target demand-side measures to enhance the prescribing of multiple-sourced statins. Further studies are warranted, in particular in other therapeutic classes, to provide a counter-balance to the considerable marketing activities of pharmaceutical companies.

Dabigatran - a case history demonstrating the need for comprehensive approaches to optimize the use of new drugs.

BACKGROUND: There are potential conflicts between authorities and companies to fund new premium priced drugs especially where there are safety and/or budget concerns. Dabigatran, a new oral anticoagulant for the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), exemplifies this issue. Whilst new effective treatments are needed, there are issues in the elderly with dabigatran due to variable drug concentrations, no known antidote and dependence on renal elimination. Published studies have shown dabigatran to be cost-effective but there are budget concerns given the prevalence of AF. There are also issues with potentially re-designing anticoagulant services. This has resulted in activities across countries to better manage its use. OBJECTIVE: To (i) review authority activities in over 30 countries and regions, (ii) use the findings to develop new models to better manage the entry of new drugs, and (iii) review the implications for all major stakeholder groups. METHODOLOGY: Descriptive review and appraisal of activities regarding dabigatran and the development of guidance for groups through an iterative process. RESULTS: There has been a plethora of activities among authorities to manage the prescribing of dabigatran including extensive pre-launch activities, risk sharing arrangements, prescribing restrictions, and monitoring of prescribing post-launch. Reimbursement has been denied in some countries due to concerns with its budget impact and/or excessive bleeding. Development of a new model and future guidance is proposed to better manage the entry of new drugs, centering on three pillars of pre-, peri-, and post-launch activities. CONCLUSION: Models for introducing new drugs are essential to optimize their prescribing especially where there are concerns. Without such models, new drugs may be withdrawn prematurely and/or struggle for funding.

Analysis of the impact of removing mucolytics and expectorants from the list of reimbursable drugs on prescription rates: a time-series analysis for France 1998-2010.

OBJECTIVES: After a comprehensive review of the therapeutic advantage of all drugs reimbursed by the French Public Health Insurance, a large number of drugs were removed from the list of reimbursable drugs, among them mucolytics and expectorants (ATC Class R05C) in March 2006. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of this measure on the mucolytic and expectorant class, on the prescription of possible substitute drugs (other bronchodilators, antitussives and antibacterials) and on the costs for Public Health Insurance. METHODS: Prescription data were taken from a 850 French physicians sample surveyed by the IMS-Health Permanent Survey on Medical Prescription from 1998 to 2010. We performed linear segmented regression to determine changes in the level and slope of the prescription rates and to estimate the budget impact. RESULTS: Following their removal from the list of reimbursable drugs, the prescription rate for mucolytics declined significantly and we recorded an increase in the prescription rates for antitussives and bronchodilators. The medically unexpected increase in antitussives can be viewed as a negative side-effect of the policy. Four years after the reform, total savings for Public Health Insurance were estimated at EUR 32.1 million. CONCLUSIONS: Further removals from the list of reimbursable drugs should take into account the possibility of negative impact on public health and potential savings.

Use of Generics-A Critical Cost Containment Measure for All Healthcare Professionals in Europe?

Pharmaceutical expenditures in ambulatory care rose rapidly in Europe in the 1990s and early 2000s. This was typically faster than other components of healthcare spending, leading to reforms to moderate future growth. A number of these centered on generic medicines with measures to lower reimbursed prices as well as enhance their prescribing and dispensing. The principal objective of this paper is to review additional measures that some European countries can adopt to further reduce reimbursed prices for generics. Secondly, potential approaches to address concerns with generics when they arise to maximize savings. Measures to enhance the prescribing of generics will also briefly be discussed. A narrative review of the extensive number of publications and associated references from the co-authors was conducted supplemented with known internal or web-based articles. In addition, health authority and health insurance databases, principally from 2001 to 2007, were analyzed to assess the impact of the various measures on price reductions for generic omeprazole and generic simvastatin vs. pre-patent loss prices, as well as overall efficiency in Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) and statin prescribing. The various initiatives generally resulted in considerable lowering of the prices of generics as well as specifically for generic omeprazole and generic simvastatin vs. pre-patent loss prices. At one stage in the UK, generic simvastatin was just 2% of the originator price. These measures also led to increased efficiency for PPI and statin prescribing with reimbursed expenditure for the PPIs and statins either falling or increasing at appreciably lower rates than increases in utilization. A number of strategies have also been introduced to address patient and physician concerns with generics to maximize savings. In conclusion, whilst recent reforms have been successful, European countries must continue learning from each other to fund increased volumes and new innovative drugs as resource pressures grow. Policies regarding generics and their subsequent impact on reimbursement and utilization of single sourced products will continue to play a key role to release valuable resources. However, there must continue to be strategies to address concerns with generics when they exist.