Protecting the patient in value-based pricing schemes.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Laura Levaggi, Rosella Levaggi
{"title":"Protecting the patient in value-based pricing schemes.","authors":"Laura Levaggi, Rosella Levaggi","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2026.2719624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Heterogeneity in patients' responses across and within patient groups is redesigning research and pricing policies, since a uniform price may not be able to capture differences in health benefits across indications. However, pricing mechanisms may create strategic behaviors that may reduce drug availability for some groups of patients.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In this narrative review we define a common framework to compare different forms of pricing policies that are currently used in the presence of heterogeneity in indication and patients' characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When heterogeneity derives from verifiable differences, Indication-value-Based Prices (IBP) may increase ex-post effectiveness, but they may reduce access. Furthermore, IBPs may be difficult to implement in practice. When uncertainty depends also on unverifiable patients' characteristics, performance-based price schemes are sub-optimal because they increase/reduce access according to how generous they are. Real-world evidence shows that operational complexity, high administrative costs, and information asymmetry frequently reduce their benefits.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Personalized medicine opens new treatment possibilities but poses new challenges as concerns price strategies. Performance-based prices, which are the natural candidates to reimburse drugs, may reduce or delay drug availability across patients' groups. Regulators should enforce transparency, and designing multi-indication pricing architectures such as blended agreements that protect patient access.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2026.2719624","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Heterogeneity in patients' responses across and within patient groups is redesigning research and pricing policies, since a uniform price may not be able to capture differences in health benefits across indications. However, pricing mechanisms may create strategic behaviors that may reduce drug availability for some groups of patients.

Method: In this narrative review we define a common framework to compare different forms of pricing policies that are currently used in the presence of heterogeneity in indication and patients' characteristics.

Results: When heterogeneity derives from verifiable differences, Indication-value-Based Prices (IBP) may increase ex-post effectiveness, but they may reduce access. Furthermore, IBPs may be difficult to implement in practice. When uncertainty depends also on unverifiable patients' characteristics, performance-based price schemes are sub-optimal because they increase/reduce access according to how generous they are. Real-world evidence shows that operational complexity, high administrative costs, and information asymmetry frequently reduce their benefits.

Conclusions: Personalized medicine opens new treatment possibilities but poses new challenges as concerns price strategies. Performance-based prices, which are the natural candidates to reimburse drugs, may reduce or delay drug availability across patients' groups. Regulators should enforce transparency, and designing multi-indication pricing architectures such as blended agreements that protect patient access.

在基于价值的定价方案中保护患者。
背景:患者组间和组内患者反应的异质性正在重新设计研究和定价政策,因为统一的价格可能无法反映不同适应症之间健康益处的差异。然而,定价机制可能会产生战略行为,可能会减少某些患者群体的药物供应。方法:在这篇叙述性综述中,我们定义了一个共同的框架来比较目前在适应证和患者特征存在异质性的情况下使用的不同形式的定价政策。结果:当异质性来自可验证的差异时,基于适应症价值的价格(IBP)可能更优,即使它们可能会减少获取。然而,ibp在实践中可能难以实现。当不确定性还取决于无法核实的患者特征时,基于绩效的价格方案是次优的,因为它们根据患者的慷慨程度来增加/减少获取。现实世界的证据表明,操作复杂性、高管理成本和信息不对称经常会降低它们的收益。结论:个性化医疗开辟了新的治疗可能性,但在价格策略方面提出了新的挑战。基于性能的价格是报销药物的自然选择,可能会减少或延迟患者群体的药物可获得性。监管机构应加强透明度,并设计多适应症定价架构,如保护患者获取的混合协议。
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
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
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