Financial Characteristics of Outcomes-Based Agreements: What Do Canadian Public Payers and Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Prefer?

Wills, Allison; Mitha, Arif

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2023.12.011

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the paucity of long-term effectiveness data for treatments for rare diseases, making future payments conditional on the actual health outcomes and cost savings achieved would be a financially prudent approach for governments. Moreover, a recent study conducted found that pharmaceutical manufacturers and public payers had high interest in outcomes-based agreements and understood their role in facilitating timely market access for patients in need, provided that they are carefully designed to ensure value [ 85 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative policy analysis of national rare disease funding policies in Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States: a scoping review

Ng,

Ong,

Chan

et al. 2024

Health Econ Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Rare diseases pose immense challenges for healthcare systems due to their low prevalence, associated disabilities, and attendant treatment costs. Advancements in gene therapy, such as treatments for Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), have introduced novel therapeutic options, but the high costs, exemplified by Zolgensma® at US$2.1 million, present significant financial barriers. This scoping review aimed to compare the funding approaches for rare disease treatments across high-performing health systems in Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), aiming to identify best practices and areas for future research. Methods In accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and the methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley and ensuing recommendations, a comprehensive search of electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane) and grey literature from health department websites and leading national organizations dedicated to rare diseases in these countries was conducted. Countries selected for comparison were high-income countries with advanced economies and high-performing health systems: Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the UK, and the US. The inclusion criteria focused on studies detailing drug approval processes, reimbursement decisions and funding mechanisms, and published from 2010 to 2024. Results Based on a thorough review of 18 published papers and grey literature, various strategies are employed by countries to balance budgetary constraints and access to rare disease treatments. Australia utilizes the Life Saving Drugs Program and risk-sharing agreements. Singapore depends on the Rare Disease Fund, which matches public donations. South Korea’s National Health Insurance Service covers specific orphan drugs through risk-sharing agreements. The UK relies on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to evaluate treatments for cost-effectiveness, supported by the Innovative Medicines Fund. In the US, a combination of federal and state programs, private insurance and non-profit support is used. Conclusion Outcome-based risk-sharing agreements present a practical solution for managing the financial strain of costly treatments. These agreements tie payment to actual treatment efficacy, thereby distributing financial risk and promoting ongoing data collection. Countries should consider adopting and expanding these agreements to balance immediate expenses with long-term benefits, ultimately ensuring equitable access to crucial treatments for patients afflicted by rare diseases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%