Informing the United States Medicare Drug Price Negotiation for Apixaban and Rivaroxaban: Methodological Considerations for Value Assessments Many Years After Launch.

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate how health technology assessment methods can be used to support Medicare's price negotiations for apixaban and rivaroxaban.

METHODS

Following the statutory outline of evidence that will be considered by Medicare, we conducted a systematic literature review, network meta-analyses, and decision analyses to evaluate the health outcomes and costs associated with apixaban and rivaroxaban compared with warfarin and dabigatran for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Our methods inform discussions about the therapeutic impact of apixaban and rivaroxaban and suggest price premiums above their therapeutic alternatives over a range of cost-effectiveness thresholds.

RESULTS

Network meta-analyses found apixaban resulted in a lower risk of major bleeding compared with warfarin and dabigatran and a lower risk of stroke/systemic embolism compared with warfarin but not compared with dabigatran. Rivaroxaban resulted in a lower risk of stroke/systemic embolism versus warfarin but not dabigatran, and there was no difference in major bleeding. Decision-analytic modeling of apixaban suggested annual price premiums up to $4350 above the price of warfarin and up to $530 above the price for dabigatran at cost-effectiveness thresholds up to $200 000 per equal value of life-years gained. Analyses of rivaroxaban showed an annual price premium of up to $3920 above warfarin and no premium above that paid for dabigatran.

CONCLUSIONS

Although health technology assessment is typically performed near the time of regulatory approval, with modifications, we produced comparative clinical and relative cost-effectiveness findings to help guide negotiations on a "fair" price for drugs on the market for over a decade.