IPAY 2027 CMS药品价格谈判选择的15种药品成本效果分析

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Feng Xie, Ting Zhou, Yue Ma, Joshua T Cohen, Peter J Neumann
{"title":"IPAY 2027 CMS药品价格谈判选择的15种药品成本效果分析","authors":"Feng Xie, Ting Zhou, Yue Ma, Joshua T Cohen, Peter J Neumann","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for the 15 drugs selected for the Initial Price Applicability Year 2027 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified CEAs for the 15 drugs from the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. For each drug, we included all base-case incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and calculated median and interquartile ranges for positive ICERs for each drug-indication. We also performed the analyses on CEAs conducted in the US, which used a lifetime horizon, or were industry-sponsored. We present all costs in 2022 US dollars.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 drug-indications were included in the analysis. Most studies employed a non-societal perspective and were industry-sponsored. Median positive ICERs ranged from $1,800 (linagliptin) to $640,000 (acalabrutinib) with six drug-indications having a median ICER below $50,000 and 10 above $100,000. Among the 13 drug-indications with US-based CEAs, 11 had a median ICER near or above $100,000. Among CEAs with a lifetime horizon, seven drug-indications had a median ICER below $50,000 and five above $100,000. CEAs sponsored by industry had median ICERs above $100,000 for five drug indications. The median ICERs differed considerably between the two covered indications for semaglutide, linaclotide, and rifaximin.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As CMS continues to implement its drug price negotiation program, promoting greater transparency and consistency in how value is defined and applied to pricing decisions will be essential. CEA can serve as an important source of evidence, ensuring that negotiated prices more closely reflect the benefits drugs provide.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost Effectiveness of the 15 Drugs Selected for IPAY 2027 CMS Drug Price Negotiation.\",\"authors\":\"Feng Xie, Ting Zhou, Yue Ma, Joshua T Cohen, Peter J Neumann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for the 15 drugs selected for the Initial Price Applicability Year 2027 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified CEAs for the 15 drugs from the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. For each drug, we included all base-case incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and calculated median and interquartile ranges for positive ICERs for each drug-indication. We also performed the analyses on CEAs conducted in the US, which used a lifetime horizon, or were industry-sponsored. We present all costs in 2022 US dollars.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 drug-indications were included in the analysis. Most studies employed a non-societal perspective and were industry-sponsored. Median positive ICERs ranged from $1,800 (linagliptin) to $640,000 (acalabrutinib) with six drug-indications having a median ICER below $50,000 and 10 above $100,000. Among the 13 drug-indications with US-based CEAs, 11 had a median ICER near or above $100,000. Among CEAs with a lifetime horizon, seven drug-indications had a median ICER below $50,000 and five above $100,000. CEAs sponsored by industry had median ICERs above $100,000 for five drug indications. The median ICERs differed considerably between the two covered indications for semaglutide, linaclotide, and rifaximin.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As CMS continues to implement its drug price negotiation program, promoting greater transparency and consistency in how value is defined and applied to pricing decisions will be essential. CEA can serve as an important source of evidence, ensuring that negotiated prices more closely reflect the benefits drugs provide.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-10\",\"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.2025.08.019\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.019","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

摘要

目的:分析美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)为2027年初始价格适用年选择的15种药物已发表的成本-效果分析(CEAs)。方法:我们从塔夫茨成本-效果分析注册表中确定15种药物的cea。对于每种药物,我们纳入了所有基本病例增量成本效益比(ICERs),并计算了每种药物适应症ICERs阳性的中位数和四分位数范围。我们还对在美国进行的cea进行了分析,这些分析使用了生命周期,或者是由行业赞助的。我们以2022美元表示所有成本。结果:共纳入20个药物适应症。大多数研究采用非社会视角,由行业赞助。中位阳性ICERs从1800美元(利格列汀)到64万美元(阿卡拉布替尼)不等,有6种药物适应症的中位ICERs低于5万美元,10种高于10万美元。在美国CEAs的13种药物适应症中,11种的中位ICER接近或高于10万美元。在有生命周期的cea中,7个药物适应症的ICER中位数低于5万美元,5个高于10万美元。行业赞助的cea的5种药物适应症的ICERs中位数超过10万美元。西马鲁肽、利那洛肽和利福昔明这两种覆盖适应症的中位ICERs差异很大。结论:随着CMS继续实施其药品价格谈判计划,提高价值定义和定价决策的透明度和一致性将是至关重要的。CEA可以作为重要的证据来源,确保谈判价格更密切地反映药物提供的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost Effectiveness of the 15 Drugs Selected for IPAY 2027 CMS Drug Price Negotiation.

Objective: To analyze published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for the 15 drugs selected for the Initial Price Applicability Year 2027 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

Methods: We identified CEAs for the 15 drugs from the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. For each drug, we included all base-case incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and calculated median and interquartile ranges for positive ICERs for each drug-indication. We also performed the analyses on CEAs conducted in the US, which used a lifetime horizon, or were industry-sponsored. We present all costs in 2022 US dollars.

Results: A total of 20 drug-indications were included in the analysis. Most studies employed a non-societal perspective and were industry-sponsored. Median positive ICERs ranged from $1,800 (linagliptin) to $640,000 (acalabrutinib) with six drug-indications having a median ICER below $50,000 and 10 above $100,000. Among the 13 drug-indications with US-based CEAs, 11 had a median ICER near or above $100,000. Among CEAs with a lifetime horizon, seven drug-indications had a median ICER below $50,000 and five above $100,000. CEAs sponsored by industry had median ICERs above $100,000 for five drug indications. The median ICERs differed considerably between the two covered indications for semaglutide, linaclotide, and rifaximin.

Conclusion: As CMS continues to implement its drug price negotiation program, promoting greater transparency and consistency in how value is defined and applied to pricing decisions will be essential. CEA can serve as an important source of evidence, ensuring that negotiated prices more closely reflect the benefits drugs provide.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信