Should Canada adopt managed access agreements in Canada for expensive drugs?

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Melanie McPhail, Tania Bubela
{"title":"Should Canada adopt managed access agreements in Canada for expensive drugs?","authors":"Melanie McPhail,&nbsp;Tania Bubela","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsad014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drugs are increasingly authorized based on less mature evidence, leaving payors faced with significant clinical and cost-effectiveness uncertainties. As a result, payors must often choose between reimbursing a drug that may not turn out to be cost-effective (or may even be unsafe) or delaying the reimbursement of a drug that is cost-effective and offers clinical benefit to patients. Novel reimbursement decision models and frameworks, such as managed access agreements (MAAs), may address this decision challenge. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the legal limitations, considerations, and implications for adopting MAAs in Canadian jurisdictions. We begin with an overview of current drug reimbursement processes in Canada, terminology and definitions of the different types of MAAs, and select international experiences with MAAs. We discuss the legal barriers to MAA governance frameworks, design and implementation considerations, and legal and policy implications of MAAs. Finally, we provide recommendations to guide policy development for implementing MAAs in Canada, based on existing literature, international experience, and our legal analysis. We conclude that legal and policy barriers likely prevent the adoption of a pan-Canadian MAA governance framework. More feasible is a quasi-federal or provincial approach, building on existing infrastructure.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"10 1","pages":"lsad014"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10271214/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Drugs are increasingly authorized based on less mature evidence, leaving payors faced with significant clinical and cost-effectiveness uncertainties. As a result, payors must often choose between reimbursing a drug that may not turn out to be cost-effective (or may even be unsafe) or delaying the reimbursement of a drug that is cost-effective and offers clinical benefit to patients. Novel reimbursement decision models and frameworks, such as managed access agreements (MAAs), may address this decision challenge. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the legal limitations, considerations, and implications for adopting MAAs in Canadian jurisdictions. We begin with an overview of current drug reimbursement processes in Canada, terminology and definitions of the different types of MAAs, and select international experiences with MAAs. We discuss the legal barriers to MAA governance frameworks, design and implementation considerations, and legal and policy implications of MAAs. Finally, we provide recommendations to guide policy development for implementing MAAs in Canada, based on existing literature, international experience, and our legal analysis. We conclude that legal and policy barriers likely prevent the adoption of a pan-Canadian MAA governance framework. More feasible is a quasi-federal or provincial approach, building on existing infrastructure.

加拿大是否应该在加拿大对昂贵药物采用管理准入协议?
越来越多的药物是基于不太成熟的证据获得批准的,这使得付款人面临着重大的临床和成本效益不确定性。因此,付款人经常必须在报销可能不具有成本效益(甚至可能不安全)的药物或延迟报销具有成本效益并为患者提供临床益处的药物之间做出选择。新的报销决策模型和框架,如管理访问协议(MAAs),可以解决这一决策挑战。在这里,我们全面概述了在加拿大司法管辖区采用maa的法律限制、考虑因素和影响。我们首先概述了加拿大当前的药品报销流程,不同类型MAAs的术语和定义,并选择了MAAs的国际经验。我们将讨论MAA治理框架的法律障碍、设计和实现方面的考虑,以及MAA的法律和政策含义。最后,基于现有文献、国际经验和我们的法律分析,我们提出了指导加拿大实施MAAs的政策制定的建议。我们的结论是,法律和政策障碍可能会阻碍采用泛加拿大MAA治理框架。更可行的办法是在现有基础设施的基础上,采取准联邦或省级的方式。
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
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
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