Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (RAs) approved to date are administered by injection; therefore, patient perceptions of an oral GLP-1 RA are unknown. This discrete choice experiment explored preferences for (unbranded) oral and injectable GLP-1 RA profiles among Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: An online survey was designed using literature review and qualitative interview findings, and administered to Japanese patients with T2D

The goal of this research is to understand the extent to which payers around the world are using discounted or net prices for international reference pricing (IRP) purposes as an alternative to list, manufacturing or wholesale prices. The research also examines what sources are being used to obtain these discounted prices. MethOds: Primary research was conducted with payers in 45 countries to establish the methodology of IRP in those countries. Specific questions were asked around both the current and potential future use of different types of prices for IRP. This was supplemented with secondary search and literature reviews of legislation and healthcare sources related to IRP to understand mechanisms of IRP. Results: Overall, it was shown that 8 countries used some form of discounted prices for IRP purposes, and that the number of countries is increasing. In addition, one country (Bulgaria), which previously had a requirement to reference discounted prices for

No abstract

A539of 16 criteria. Methods: 85 experts were interviewed to estimate the importance of each criterion in the decision-making on financing MT for rare diseases. We used 10-point scale, where 10 points mean major importance to the priority indicator, and 1point means minor importance. Mean estimates were calculated using descriptive statistics, then means were normalized. Results: Respondents were 41 years on average (ranging from 23 to 64 years), and included 20 public servants, 16 health administrators, 32 practitioners, and 14 researchers. 44 respondents had a scientific degree. The most important criteria were characteristics of treatment -"Effect of treatment on quality of life" and "Effect of treatment on life expectancy" with 1 points each. The least important criteria were both characteristics of the disease -"Cognitive disorders as manifestations of the disease and "Additional burden on the daily lives of care-givers" with 0.28 and 0.1 respectively. ConClusions: Characteristics of treatment turned out to be more important for respondents than characteristics of disease, therefore characteristics of treatment should be given consideration when evaluating rare diseases to determine priority financing.

A539of 16 criteria. Methods: 85 experts were interviewed to estimate the importance of each criterion in the decision-making on financing MT for rare diseases. We used 10-point scale, where 10 points mean major importance to the priority indicator, and 1point means minor importance. Mean estimates were calculated using descriptive statistics, then means were normalized. Results: Respondents were 41 years on average (ranging from 23 to 64 years), and included 20 public servants, 16 health administrators, 32 practitioners, and 14 researchers. 44 respondents had a scientific degree. The most important criteria were characteristics of treatment -"Effect of treatment on quality of life" and "Effect of treatment on life expectancy" with 1 points each. The least important criteria were both characteristics of the disease -"Cognitive disorders as manifestations of the disease and "Additional burden on the daily lives of care-givers" with 0.28 and 0.1 respectively. ConClusions: Characteristics of treatment turned out to be more important for respondents than characteristics of disease, therefore characteristics of treatment should be given consideration when evaluating rare diseases to determine priority financing.