• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

四个西欧国家在市场独占期满前后的孤儿药价格:目录价格和购买价格的跨国比较。

Prices of Orphan Drugs in Four Western European Countries Before and After Market Exclusivity Expiry: A Cross-Country Comparison of List Prices and Purchase Prices.

机构信息

Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Outpatient Pharmacy, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2023 Nov;21(6):905-914. doi: 10.1007/s40258-023-00832-6. Epub 2023 Sep 26.

DOI:10.1007/s40258-023-00832-6
PMID:37751107
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10628053/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Increasing pharmaceutical expenditure challenges the sustainability and accessibility of healthcare systems across Europe. Confidentiality restraints hinder assessment of actual prices of Orphan Medicinal Products (OMPs). Hence, we assessed the real prices of brand-name OMPs around market exclusivity expiry (MEE).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore developments in published list prices (LPs) and confidential hospital purchase prices (PPs) of brand-name OMPs relative to their market exclusivity status in Western European countries with similar GDPs.

METHODS

We analyzed LPs and PPs of 13 selected OMPs purchased by university hospitals in Western European countries between 2000 and 2020. For confidentially reasons, proportions were used, with the Dutch LPs of the selected OMPs at the year of MEE serving as reference values. PPs included pre-purchase discounts. Rebates were not considered.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from hospitals in Denmark (DK) (n = 1), France (FR) (n = 1), Germany (DE) (n = 2), and the Netherlands (NL) (n = 1). Average LPs and PPs of included OMPs dropped gradually but limited over time, with no explicit price drop after MEE. LP levels differed more per country than PP levels: LP range before MEE was 164% (DE)-101% (FR) and after MEE was 135% (DE)-82% (FR); PP range before MEE was 150% (DE)-102% (FR) and after MEE was 107% (DE)-80% (FR). Overall differences between LPs and PPs were < 3% in all countries, except for Denmark.

CONCLUSION

No evident price drops of included brand-name OMPs were observed around MEE and differences in purchase prices are modest in the selected Western European countries. Results were not subject to significance testing. More robust data are needed to strengthen negotiations with suppliers.

摘要

背景

在欧洲,不断增长的药品支出给医疗体系的可持续性和可及性带来了挑战。保密性限制阻碍了对孤儿药实际价格的评估。因此,我们评估了在市场独占期满(MEE)前后品牌孤儿药的实际价格。

目的

我们旨在探索在具有类似 GDP 的西欧国家,品牌孤儿药的公布标价(LP)和保密医院采购价(PP)相对于其市场独占地位的变化。

方法

我们分析了 2000 年至 2020 年期间,西欧大学医院购买的 13 种选定孤儿药的 LP 和 PP。由于保密性原因,我们使用了比例,以 MEE 当年荷兰选定孤儿药的 LP 作为参考值。PP 包含了采购前折扣。我们不考虑回扣。

结果

数据分析来自丹麦(DK)(n=1)、法国(FR)(n=1)、德国(DE)(n=2)和荷兰(NL)(n=1)的医院。纳入孤儿药的平均 LP 和 PP 逐渐下降,但随着时间的推移有限,MEE 后没有明显的价格下降。每个国家的 LP 水平差异大于 PP 水平:MEE 前的 LP 范围为 164%(DE)-101%(FR),MEE 后的 LP 范围为 135%(DE)-82%(FR);MEE 前的 PP 范围为 150%(DE)-102%(FR),MEE 后的 PP 范围为 107%(DE)-80%(FR)。除丹麦外,所有国家的 LP 和 PP 之间的总体差异均<3%。

结论

在 MEE 前后,纳入的品牌孤儿药的价格没有明显下降,在选定的西欧国家,采购价格的差异较小。结果不受显著性检验的影响。需要更可靠的数据来加强与供应商的谈判。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/8f1641f1cddf/40258_2023_832_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/35ba7fd2c93a/40258_2023_832_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/389d9dcb803d/40258_2023_832_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/331454462ab8/40258_2023_832_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/8f1641f1cddf/40258_2023_832_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/35ba7fd2c93a/40258_2023_832_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/389d9dcb803d/40258_2023_832_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/331454462ab8/40258_2023_832_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9412/10628053/8f1641f1cddf/40258_2023_832_Fig4_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Prices of Orphan Drugs in Four Western European Countries Before and After Market Exclusivity Expiry: A Cross-Country Comparison of List Prices and Purchase Prices.四个西欧国家在市场独占期满前后的孤儿药价格:目录价格和购买价格的跨国比较。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2023 Nov;21(6):905-914. doi: 10.1007/s40258-023-00832-6. Epub 2023 Sep 26.
2
The European challenges of funding orphan medicinal products.欧洲资助罕见病药物面临的挑战。
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018 Nov 6;13(1):184. doi: 10.1186/s13023-018-0927-y.
3
An analysis of orphan medicine expenditure in Europe: is it sustainable?欧洲孤儿药支出分析:是否可持续?
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019 Dec 11;14(1):287. doi: 10.1186/s13023-019-1246-7.
4
The Expiry of Humira Market Exclusivity and the Entry of Adalimumab Biosimilars in Europe: An Overview of Pricing and National Policy Measures.修美乐市场独占期的到期及阿达木单抗生物类似药在欧洲的进入:定价与国家政策措施概述
Front Pharmacol. 2021 Jan 8;11:591134. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.591134. eCollection 2020.
5
Comparison of US and EU Prices for Orphan Drugs in the Perspective of the Considered US Orphan Drugs Act Modifications and Discussed Price-Regulation Mechanisms Adjustments in US and European Union.从美国孤儿药法案的考虑修改和美国及欧盟讨论的价格调控机制调整角度,比较孤儿药在美国和欧盟的价格。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Sep 24;19(19):12098. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191912098.
6
Cancer drugs in 16 European countries, Australia, and New Zealand: a cross-country price comparison study.16 个欧洲国家、澳大利亚和新西兰的癌症药物:一项国家间价格比较研究。
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Jan;17(1):39-47. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00449-0. Epub 2015 Dec 4.
7
Estimating the budget impact of orphan drugs in Sweden and France 2013-2020.估算2013 - 2020年瑞典和法国罕见病药物的预算影响。
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014 Feb 13;9:22. doi: 10.1186/1750-1172-9-22.
8
Availability of and access to orphan drugs: an international comparison of pharmaceutical treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension, Fabry disease, hereditary angioedema and chronic myeloid leukaemia.孤儿药的可及性和可获得性:肺动脉高压、法布雷病、遗传性血管性水肿和慢性髓性白血病的药物治疗的国际比较。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Jan;29(1):63-82. doi: 10.2165/11539190-000000000-00000.
9
Estimates of Medicaid and Non-Medicaid Net Prices of Top-Selling Brand-name Drugs Incorporating Best Price Rebates, 2015 to 2019.2015 年至 2019 年,纳入最佳价格回扣的畅销品牌药的医疗补助和非医疗补助净价估计。
JAMA Health Forum. 2023 Jan 6;4(1):e225012. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.5012.
10
Comparing access to orphan medicinal products in Europe.比较欧洲罕见病药物的可及性。
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019 May 3;14(1):95. doi: 10.1186/s13023-019-1078-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Mapping challenges in the accessibility of treatment products for urea cycle disorders: A survey of European healthcare professionals.尿素循环障碍治疗产品可及性的映射挑战:一项针对欧洲医疗保健专业人员的调查
J Inherit Metab Dis. 2025 Jan;48(1):e12815. doi: 10.1002/jimd.12815. Epub 2024 Dec 3.

本文引用的文献

1
The Expiry of Humira Market Exclusivity and the Entry of Adalimumab Biosimilars in Europe: An Overview of Pricing and National Policy Measures.修美乐市场独占期的到期及阿达木单抗生物类似药在欧洲的进入:定价与国家政策措施概述
Front Pharmacol. 2021 Jan 8;11:591134. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.591134. eCollection 2020.
2
From blockbuster to "nichebuster": how a flawed legislation helped create a new profit model for the drug industry.从重磅炸弹药物到“小众炸弹药物”:一项有缺陷的立法如何助力制药行业创造新的盈利模式。
BMJ. 2020 Jul 28;370:m2983. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m2983.
3
Market Exclusivity for Drugs with Multiple Orphan Approvals (1983-2017) and Associated Budget Impact in the US.
具有多种孤儿药批准的药物的市场独占权(1983-2017)及其在美国的相关预算影响。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2020 Oct;38(10):1115-1121. doi: 10.1007/s40273-020-00934-2.
4
Comparing access to orphan medicinal products in Europe.比较欧洲罕见病药物的可及性。
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019 May 3;14(1):95. doi: 10.1186/s13023-019-1078-5.
5
Projecting Pharmaceutical Expenditure in EU5 to 2021: Adjusting for the Impact of Discounts and Rebates.预测欧盟 5 国 2021 年的医药支出:调整折扣和返利的影响。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018 Dec;16(6):803-817. doi: 10.1007/s40258-018-0419-1.
6
Differential Pricing of Pharmaceuticals: Theory, Evidence and Emerging Issues.药品差别定价:理论、证据与新问题。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Dec;36(12):1395-1405. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0696-4.
7
Patient Access to Medicines for Rare Diseases in European Countries.欧洲国家罕见病药物的患者可及性。
Value Health. 2018 May;21(5):553-560. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.01.007. Epub 2018 Mar 16.
8
Can Price Transparency Contribute to More Affordable Patient Access to Medicines?价格透明度能否有助于患者以更可承受的价格获得药品?
Pharmacoecon Open. 2017 Sep;1(3):145-147. doi: 10.1007/s41669-017-0028-1.
9
Determinants of Market Exclusivity for Prescription Drugs in the United States.美国处方药市场独占的决定因素。
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Nov 1;177(11):1658-1664. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.4329.
10
Payers' experiences with confidential pharmaceutical price discounts: A survey of public and statutory health systems in North America, Europe, and Australasia.付款方对药品保密价格折扣的体验:对北美、欧洲和澳大拉西亚公共及法定医疗系统的一项调查。
Health Policy. 2017 Apr;121(4):354-362. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.02.002. Epub 2017 Feb 16.