Callenbach Marcelien H E, Vreman Rick A, Leopold Christine, Mantel-Teeuwisse Aukje K, Goettsch Wim G
Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 99, 3584 CG, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
National Health Care Institute (ZIN), Diemen, The Netherlands.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Jan;43(1):53-66. doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01433-4. Epub 2024 Oct 5.
To construct a framework and calculation tool to compare the consequences of implementing different payment models for high-cost, one-off potentially curative therapies and enable decision making to ultimately enhance timely patient access to innovative health interventions.
A framework outlining steps to determine potentially suitable payment models was developed. Based on the framework, a supporting calculation tool operationalised as an Excel-based model was constructed to quantify the associated costs for an average patient during the timeframe of the intended payment agreement, the total budget impact and associated benefits expressed in quality-adjusted life-years for the total expected lifetime of the patient population. To demonstrate the potential of the framework, three case studies were used: onasemnogene abeparvovec (Zolgensma), brexucabtagene autoleucel (Tecartus) and etranacogene dezaparvovec (Hemgenix). A hypothetical case study was used to illustrate the output of the calculation tool.
Part 1 of the framework presents steps for matching a suitable reimbursement and payment model with the disease and treatment characteristics. The reimbursement and payment models are further specified in Part 2. Part 3 guides end users through the setup of a calculation tool with which the financial impact can be calculated of two payment models: a price discount model and an outcome-based spread payment model with a discount. Part 4 concerns the output of the calculation tool, showing how different payment models lead to different financial consequences under three assumptions of longer term effectiveness.
The presented framework provides decision makers with insight into the financial consequences of their chosen payment model under different assumptions. This can aid reimbursement negotiations by clarifying the optimal choice given a therapy's characteristics.
构建一个框架和计算工具,以比较实施不同支付模式用于高成本、一次性潜在治愈性疗法的后果,并支持决策制定,最终提高患者及时获得创新健康干预措施的机会。
制定了一个框架,概述确定潜在合适支付模式的步骤。基于该框架,构建了一个以Excel模型形式运行的支持性计算工具,以量化在预期支付协议期限内平均患者的相关成本、总预算影响以及以质量调整生命年表示的患者群体预期终身的相关效益。为展示该框架的潜力,使用了三个案例研究:onasemnogene abeparvovec(Zolgensma)、brexucabtagene autoleucel(Tecartus)和etranacogene dezaparvovec(Hemgenix)。使用一个假设案例研究来说明计算工具的输出。
框架的第1部分介绍了将合适的报销和支付模式与疾病及治疗特征相匹配的步骤。第2部分进一步明确了报销和支付模式。第3部分指导最终用户设置计算工具,通过该工具可以计算两种支付模式的财务影响:价格折扣模式和带折扣的基于结果的分摊支付模式。第4部分涉及计算工具的输出,展示了在长期有效性的三种假设下不同支付模式如何导致不同的财务后果。
所提出的框架使决策者能够深入了解在不同假设下其选择的支付模式的财务后果。这可以通过明确给定疗法特征下的最优选择来辅助报销谈判。