2016 Forum: "Value Based Drug Pricing"

27 views

Published on

October 21, 2016

Published in: Healthcare
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
27
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Timelines for FDA approval of orally administered anticancer drugs
  • 2016 Forum: "Value Based Drug Pricing"

    1. 1. Value based drug pricing Peter B. Bach, MD, MAPP Memorial Sloan KetteringCancer Center bachp@mskcc.org @peterbachmd
    2. 2. Recent Projects •Indication Specific Pricing •Medicare Part B Payment Pilot •Excess cost from drug waste •Tracking of Recent Pricing Trends
    3. 3. Rising prices of cancer drugs
    4. 4. Cost for an additional year of life goes up each year in cancer
    5. 5. Monthly cost of lowering LDL-C by one mg Year Approved Drug Statin Intolerant No prior statin 1996-2003 Crestor/Lipitor $ 1.85 $ 1.85 2005 Ezetimibe $ 9.36 $ 10.68 2015 Alirocumab $ 11.59 $ 14.15 Cystic Fibrosis Drugs Year Approved Drug Forced Expiratory Volume improvement Price/month Cost/% FEV 2012 Kalydeco 10.6-12.5% $25932.41 $2254.99 2015 Orkambi 2.6-3% $21583.33 $7708.33 Diminishing returns
    6. 6. Price hikes = diminishing returns $- $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Cost($) Year Prices of Gleevec vs. iPhone over time Price of iPhone/GHz with contract AWP of 1 week treatment of 400mg Gleevec
    7. 7. Price hikes are mainstream
    8. 8. Prices Access
    9. 9. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/06/30/the-next-big-debate-in-health-
    10. 10. https://www.princeton.edu/~reinhard/pdfs/ALTARUM_JULY_2016_XX_7-18-2016.pdf
    11. 11. Solutions? • Competition? • Pay for outcomes? • Value based insurance design • Value based pricing
    12. 12. Timelines for FDA approval of orally administered anticancer drugs. Caroline S. Bennette et al. Health Aff 2016;35:805-812 ©2016 by Project HOPE - The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc. Competition?
    13. 13. Exhibit 3 Change in costs for a thirty-day supply of oral anticancer drugs recently approved by the FDA, 2007–13 Change after: Change in costs 95% CI P-value Additional supplemental indication +9.2% 4.3, 14.3 0.001 Additional compendium- recommended off-label indication +4.3% 0.0, 8.9 0.061 FDA approval of a competitor drug −1.8% −3.1, −0.4 0.003 One year +4.4% 3.1, 6.0 <0.001 Effect of “competition”?? Competition?
    14. 14. Pay for outcomes/performance • Price of drug/service linked to how well it works in the ‘real world’ • Involves up-front payment, then post-hoc true up or reconciliation • Not a lot of working models in the US, no data
    15. 15. Tight Broad Price of pill $$$$ Price of pill $$
    16. 16. Performance-based pricing schemes Neumann, Peter J., et al. "Risk-sharing arrangements that link payment for drugs to health outcomes are proving hard to implement." Health Affairs 30.12 (2011): 2329-2337.
    17. 17. Value Based Insurance Design • Focuses on patient out of pocket costs (co-pay) – Lower OOP costs for services that are more beneficial • Core notion is lower OOP costs increase use – No OOP for screening tests, for instance • Does not contemplate the price of the service or drug
    18. 18. Value based drug pricing • Price should match benefits • Insurance coverage should follow – Low copays, no additional discounts • Puts a ‘third person’ at the negotiating table with the ‘proper price’
    19. 19. Bach, Peter B., and Steven D. Pearson. "Payer and Policy Maker Steps to Support Value-Based Pricing for How market would respond to value- based prices
    20. 20. Comparison of four solutions Solution Effect on ‘options’ for doctors Type of alignment sought Relation to overall budget Competition Limits About market power Only indirect Outcomes based pricing None required Benefits to price (through real world observation) Only indirect Value Based Insurance Design None Patient OOP aligned with benefit None Value based pricing None, should lower OOP costs Overall price aligned with benefit Explicit
    21. 21. www.drugabacus.org
    22. 22. An example of DrugAbacus pricing: Blincyto (a drug for leukemia) The market price for Blincyto is $64,260 a month, but the suggested DrugAbacus price is just $12,612. 26
    23. 23. Indication specific pricing
    24. 24. Disintermediate prescribers
    25. 25. Figure 1: No change in proportion of cancer doctors in rural and urban settings from 2012 to 2016 (a time period that bridges the 2013 sequestration). Figure 2a: No effect of sequestration on migration of patients from doctors’ offices to hospitals For 12 week-treatment: Paclitaxel Abraxane Difference Cost to Medicare $201 $16,686 Current Doctor’s Profit: $12 $1,001 $989 Proposed Doctor’s Profit $72 $484 $412 With Sequester: Current Doctor’s Profit: $ 9 $717 $709 Proposed Doctor’s Profit $68 $216 $148 Figure 3: High variability in cost to Medicare and profits for physicians between paclitaxel and Abraxane, both indicated for breast cancer, with and without sequestration. Figure 2b: No effect of sequestration on percent of patients receiving care in both doctors’ offices and HOPD Figure 2c: No effect of sequestration on percent of patients where HOPD treatments were more expensive than treatments in doctors’ offices
    26. 26. Copayment central to new models, so what about copay assistance? Copay cards have corrosive effect on prices: Solutions –  Segregate coupons from cash payment  Central registry so all patients can find  Include for life cycle of prescription (don’t just end when OOP max is reached)  Incorporate into Medicaid Best Price determination
    27. 27. Thank you

    ×