Financial Impacts of Paying for Gene Therapy for Sickle Cell Disease Under Alternate Prices and Financing Mechanisms.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Anirban Basu
{"title":"Financial Impacts of Paying for Gene Therapy for Sickle Cell Disease Under Alternate Prices and Financing Mechanisms.","authors":"Anirban Basu","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.10.3848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To understand the role of alternative prices and financing mechanisms on a payer's budget impact and the manufacturers' risks and returns for gene therapies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This paper uses fundamental economic principles to interpret the implications of alternative pricing mechanisms in terms of the manufacturer's appropriation share of the value and how alternate financing mechanisms alter it. It demonstrates these concepts by studying the financial impacts for a payer and the manufacturer across alternative pricing and financing mechanisms that could be used by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to pay for gene therapy for sickle cell disease (SCD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Unlike value-based and manufacturer-set monopoly prices, an effective monopoly price can be derived to guarantee monopoly profits for manufacturers during their exclusivity period, thereby providing a high appropriation share and substantially lowering price and budget impact for a payer. For SCD gene therapy, the 10-year budget impact for CMS would range from $8.6 Billion-$12.8 Billion under a value-based price, $10.2 Billion-$15.2 Billion under a monopoly price, but reduce to $7.7 Billion under an effective monopoly price. The latter price would still fetch over 50% of the total surplus to the manufacturer while mitigating their risk of sales volume.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>I show that significant budget impacts for funding gene therapy are not mitigated across alternative financing mechanisms at any given price. The price determines most of the budget impact. The option of a patent buyout may help negotiate down prices to effective monopoly prices.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.10.3848","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To understand the role of alternative prices and financing mechanisms on a payer's budget impact and the manufacturers' risks and returns for gene therapies.

Methods: This paper uses fundamental economic principles to interpret the implications of alternative pricing mechanisms in terms of the manufacturer's appropriation share of the value and how alternate financing mechanisms alter it. It demonstrates these concepts by studying the financial impacts for a payer and the manufacturer across alternative pricing and financing mechanisms that could be used by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to pay for gene therapy for sickle cell disease (SCD).

Results: Unlike value-based and manufacturer-set monopoly prices, an effective monopoly price can be derived to guarantee monopoly profits for manufacturers during their exclusivity period, thereby providing a high appropriation share and substantially lowering price and budget impact for a payer. For SCD gene therapy, the 10-year budget impact for CMS would range from $8.6 Billion-$12.8 Billion under a value-based price, $10.2 Billion-$15.2 Billion under a monopoly price, but reduce to $7.7 Billion under an effective monopoly price. The latter price would still fetch over 50% of the total surplus to the manufacturer while mitigating their risk of sales volume.

Conclusion: I show that significant budget impacts for funding gene therapy are not mitigated across alternative financing mechanisms at any given price. The price determines most of the budget impact. The option of a patent buyout may help negotiate down prices to effective monopoly prices.

在替代价格和融资机制下支付镰状细胞病基因治疗费用的财务影响。
目的了解替代价格和融资机制对支付方预算影响的作用,以及基因疗法制造商的风险和收益:本文利用基本经济学原理,从生产商的价值分配份额以及替代融资机制如何改变价值分配份额的角度来解释替代定价机制的影响。本文通过研究美国医疗保险与医疗补助服务中心(CMS)在支付镰状细胞病(SCD)基因治疗费用时可能采用的替代定价和融资机制对支付方和制造商的财务影响来证明这些概念:与基于价值的垄断价格和制造商设定的垄断价格不同,有效的垄断价格可以保证制造商在独占期的垄断利润,从而提供高额的拨款份额,并大大降低对支付方的价格和预算影响。就 SCD 基因疗法而言,在基于价值的价格下,对 CMS 的 10 年预算影响将从 86 亿美元到 128 亿美元不等,在垄断价格下将从 102 亿美元到 152 亿美元不等,但在有效垄断价格下将降至 77 亿美元。后一种价格仍可为制造商带来超过 50%的总盈余,同时降低其销售量风险:我的研究表明,在任何给定的价格下,其他融资机制都无法减轻基因治疗对预算的重大影响。价格决定了大部分预算影响。选择专利买断可能有助于通过谈判将价格降至有效垄断价格。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信