Funding Multi-indication Medicines: A Scoping Review of Health Technology Assessment and Reimbursement Frameworks

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Isaiah Luc, Mah Laka, Drew Carter, Tracy Merlin
{"title":"Funding Multi-indication Medicines: A Scoping Review of Health Technology Assessment and Reimbursement Frameworks","authors":"Isaiah Luc,&nbsp;Mah Laka,&nbsp;Drew Carter,&nbsp;Tracy Merlin","doi":"10.1007/s40258-025-01020-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Medicines with multiple indications pose efficiency problems for health technology assessment (HTA). Evaluating indications separately may result in years of duplicative evaluation work and ultimately delay patient access. The price of these medicines is also difficult to determine because the value may vary between the different indications.</p><h3>Objectives</h3><p>A scoping review was conducted to identify HTA and reimbursement frameworks for evaluating and pricing multi-indication medicines for reimbursement decisions and to explore whether there are elements in these frameworks that would have utility if implemented in jurisdictions with well-established HTA systems.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>PubMed, Embase and Scopus were systematically searched and a targeted search of HTA agency websites was conducted in September 2025. Documents were included in the review if they discussed HTA and reimbursement frameworks concerning multi-indication medicines in high-income countries.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Sixteen frameworks were identified, describing four main approaches: policy (3), pricing (6), HTA evaluation methods (4) and decision-making (3). Policy approaches included implementing conditional listing processes and streamlining the evaluation of multi-indication medicines. Pricing frameworks including indication-based pricing frameworks and volume-based agreements were reported most frequently.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>While pricing frameworks are commonly used in high-income countries, they do not help reduce duplication of effort in the evaluation and appraisal of these medicines. Policy change allowing for the streamlined incremental evaluation of each new indication may be helpful, although the methodological characteristics of a streamlined HTA have yet to be defined. Subscription-based approaches to purchasing medicines represent another option. Stakeholder engagement is needed to determine the merit and feasibility of different approaches.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"24 2","pages":"293 - 307"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12924833/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-025-01020-4","RegionNum":4,"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

Background

Medicines with multiple indications pose efficiency problems for health technology assessment (HTA). Evaluating indications separately may result in years of duplicative evaluation work and ultimately delay patient access. The price of these medicines is also difficult to determine because the value may vary between the different indications.

Objectives

A scoping review was conducted to identify HTA and reimbursement frameworks for evaluating and pricing multi-indication medicines for reimbursement decisions and to explore whether there are elements in these frameworks that would have utility if implemented in jurisdictions with well-established HTA systems.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Scopus were systematically searched and a targeted search of HTA agency websites was conducted in September 2025. Documents were included in the review if they discussed HTA and reimbursement frameworks concerning multi-indication medicines in high-income countries.

Results

Sixteen frameworks were identified, describing four main approaches: policy (3), pricing (6), HTA evaluation methods (4) and decision-making (3). Policy approaches included implementing conditional listing processes and streamlining the evaluation of multi-indication medicines. Pricing frameworks including indication-based pricing frameworks and volume-based agreements were reported most frequently.

Conclusions

While pricing frameworks are commonly used in high-income countries, they do not help reduce duplication of effort in the evaluation and appraisal of these medicines. Policy change allowing for the streamlined incremental evaluation of each new indication may be helpful, although the methodological characteristics of a streamlined HTA have yet to be defined. Subscription-based approaches to purchasing medicines represent another option. Stakeholder engagement is needed to determine the merit and feasibility of different approaches.

资助多适应症药物:卫生技术评估和报销框架的范围审查。
背景:多适应症药物给卫生技术评价(HTA)带来了效率问题。单独评估适应症可能会导致多年的重复评估工作,并最终延迟患者获得。这些药物的价格也难以确定,因为不同适应症的价值可能不同。目的:进行了范围审查,以确定用于评估和定价多适应症药物的报销决策的HTA和报销框架,并探讨这些框架中是否存在如果在具有完善HTA系统的司法管辖区实施将具有效用的要素。方法:系统检索PubMed、Embase和Scopus,并于2025年9月对HTA代理网站进行针对性检索。如果文件讨论高收入国家有关多指征药物的卫生保健服务和报销框架,则纳入审查。结果:共确定了16个框架,描述了四种主要方法:政策(3)、定价(6)、HTA评估方法(4)和决策(3)。政策方法包括实施有条件上市程序和简化多指征药物的评价。最常报告的定价框架包括基于指标的定价框架和基于数量的协议。结论:虽然高收入国家普遍使用定价框架,但它们无助于减少对这些药物进行评价和鉴定时的重复工作。允许对每个新适应症进行简化的增量评估的政策变化可能是有帮助的,尽管简化的HTA的方法特征尚未确定。基于订阅的药品购买方法是另一种选择。需要利益相关者的参与来确定不同方法的优点和可行性。
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
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书