Dataset Information

Policies to Encourage the Use of Biosimilars in European Countries and Their Potential Impact on Pharmaceutical Expenditure.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Biosimilar medicines are considered promising alternatives to new biologicals with high price tags. The extent of savings resulting from biosimilar use depends on their price and uptake, which are largely shaped by pricing, reimbursement, and demand-side policies. This article informs about different policy measures employed by European countries to design the biologicals market and explores potential savings from the increased use of biosimilar medicines in Germany. Methods: Policy measures that target the price and uptake of biosimilar medicines were identified based on a prefilled questionnaire survey with public authorities in 16 European countries, who were the members of the Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Information network (July 2020). Potential savings that could have been generated in Germany if different measures identified in the surveyed countries had been implemented were calculated for six publicly funded biological molecules. Price data of the Pharma Price Information service and German consumption data for 2018 were used for the calculation of five scenarios. Results: Several countries use a price link policy, setting the biosimilar price as a percentage of the price of the reference biological. Also lowering the price of the reference biological upon market entry of a biosimilar is less frequently used. While tendering of biosimilar medicines in the inpatient setting is the norm, it is rarely employed for biosimilars in outpatient use. Reference price systems and INN prescribing of medicines are the commonly used policy measures in the off-patent market, but some countries define exemptions for biologicals. Substituting biosimilars at the pharmacy level is rather an exception. Potential savings in Germany ranged from 5% (simple price link) to 55% (prices at the level of other countries) for the six studied molecules. Conclusion: Despite some differences, there are discernible tendencies across European countries with regard to their applications of certain policy measures targeting the price and uptake of biosimilar medicines. The potential for savings of some of these policies was clearly demonstrated. Monitoring and evaluation of these rather recent measures is key for obtaining a more comprehensive picture of their impact.

SUBMITTER: Vogler S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8267415 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionEconomic evaluations of tobacco control policies targeting adolescents are scarce. Few take into account real-world, large-scale implementation costs; few compare cost-effectiveness of different policies across different countries. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of five tobacco control policies (nonschool bans, including bans on sales to minors, bans on smoking in public places, bans on advertising at points-of-sale, school smoke-free bans, and school education programs), implemented in 2016 in Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Portugal.MethodsCost-effectiveness estimates were calculated per country and per policy, from the State perspective. Costs were collected by combining quantitative questionnaires with semi-structured interviews on how policies were implemented in each setting, in real practice. Short-term effectiveness was based on the literature, and long-term effectiveness was modeled using the DYNAMO-HIA tool. Discount rates of 3.5% were used for costs and effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses considered 1%-50% short-term effectiveness estimates, highest cost estimates, and undiscounted effectiveness.FindingsNonschool bans cost up to €253.23 per healthy life year, school smoking bans up to €91.87 per healthy life year, and school education programs up to €481.35 per healthy life year. Cost-effectiveness depended on the costs of implementation, short-term effectiveness, initial smoking rates, dimension of the target population, and weight of smoking in overall mortality and morbidity.ConclusionsAll five policies were highly cost-effective in all countries according to the World Health Organization thresholds for public health interventions. Cost-effectiveness was preserved even when using the highest costs and most conservative effectiveness estimates.ImplicationsEconomic evaluations using real-world data on tobacco control policies implemented at a large scale are scarce, especially considering nonschool bans targeting adolescents. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of five tobacco control policies implemented in 2016 in Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Portugal. This study shows that all five policies were highly cost-effective considering the World Health Organization threshold, even when considering the highest costs and most conservative effectiveness estimates.

Project description:PurposeNon-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been the cornerstone of COVID-19 pandemic control, but evidence on their effectiveness varies according to the methods and approaches taken to empirical analysis. We analysed the impact of NPIs on incident SARS-CoV-2 across 32 European countries (March-December 2020) using two NPI trackers: the Corona Virus Pandemic Policy Monitor - COV-PPM, and the Oxford Covid-19 Government Response Tracker - OxCGRT.MethodsNPIs were summarized through principal component analysis into three sets, stratified by two waves (C1-C3, weeks 5-25, and C4-C6, weeks 35-52). Longitudinal, multi-level mixed-effects negative binomial regression models were fitted to estimate incidence rate ratios for cases and deaths considering different time-lags and reverse causation (i.e. changing incidence causing NPIs), stratified by waves and geographical regions (Western, Eastern, Northern, Southern, Others).ResultsDuring the first wave, restrictions on movement/mobility, public transport, public events, and public spaces (C1) and healthcare system improvements, border closures and restrictions to public institutions (C2) were associated with a reduction in SARS-CoV-2 incidence after 28 and 35-days. Mask policies (C3) were associated with a reduction in SARS-CoV-2 incidence (except after 35-days). During wave 1, C1 and C2 were associated with a decrease in deaths after 49-days and C3 after 21, 28 and 35-days. During wave 2, restrictions on movement/mobility, public transport and healthcare system improvements (C5) were also associated with a decrease in SARS-CoV-2 cases and deaths across all countries.ConclusionIn the absence of pre-existing immunity, vaccines or treatment options, our results suggest that the observed implementation of different categories of NPIs, showed varied associations with SARS-CoV-2 incidence and deaths across regions, and varied associations across waves. These relationships were consistent across components of NPIs derived from two policy trackers (CoV-PPM and OxCGRT).

Project description:BackgroundDespite the benefits biosimilars offer in terms of cost savings and patient access, healthcare professionals and patients have been reluctant to use them. Next to insufficient understanding of and trust in biosimilars, healthcare professionals and patients have questions about switching and the nocebo effect when using biosimilars in clinical practice. In addition, clear motivation to use biosimilars may be lacking among these stakeholders.ObjectiveThis study aims to provide recommendations on how to improve biosimilar use on both a clinical and a practical level based on insights from healthcare professionals (physicians, hospital pharmacists, nurses), patients (or their representatives), and regulators across Europe.MethodsWe conducted 44 semi-structured interviews with experts from five stakeholder groups across Europe: physicians, hospital pharmacists, nurses, regulators, and patients/representatives. Interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and transcripts analysed according to the thematic framework method.ResultsBased on the insights and considerations of the experts interviewed, we identified a number of recommendations to improve the use of biosimilars in clinical practice. Regarding switch implementation, the experts voiced support for the following actions: (1) disseminate evidence from and experience with (multiple) switching; (2) provide clear, one-voice regulatory guidance about the interchangeability of biosimilars and their reference product; (3) apply a multi-stakeholder implementation and communication protocol to guide switching in clinical practice; (4) apply a pragmatic approach when taking switch decisions; and (5) avoid mandated switching, allowing stakeholder communication and alignment. When discussing approaches to increase the willingness of stakeholders to use biosimilars, we concluded that actions should be centred on (1) communicating the benefits provided by biosimilars and the introduction of market competition, (2) increasing awareness among stakeholders about medicine prices and their societal responsibility to use medicines in a cost-effective manner, (3) transparent reporting about the allocation of savings, (4) sharing biosimilar usage data among hospitals and prescribers to allow peer-to-peer benchmarking, and (5) applying a balanced combination of tangible and non-tangible incentives that can be tailored to offset the time and effort expended by stakeholders when switching to a biosimilar.ConclusionsThis study proposes a number of strategic, practical, and overarching recommendations to support healthcare professionals and inform decision makers to improve the clinical use of biosimilars and the willingness of stakeholders to use them. The proposed solutions to fully realise the potential of biosimilars for healthcare systems and patients include developing practical switch guidance, being transparent about the gains from biosimilar use (and how savings are allocated), and developing a combination of non-tangible and tangible incentives for involved stakeholders.

Project description:BackgroundIncome-related inequality measures such as the concentration index are often used to describe the unequal distribution of health, health care access, or expenditure in a single measure. This study demonstrates the use of such measures to evaluate the distributional impact of changes in health insurance coverage. We use the example of Medicare Part D in the United States, which increased access to prescription medications for Medicare beneficiaries from 2006.MethodsUsing pooled cross-sectional samples from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey for 1997-2011, we estimated income-related inequality in drug expenditures over time using the concentration and generalised concentration indices. A difference-in-differences analysis investigated the change in inequality in drug expenditures, as measured using the concentration index and generalised concentration index, between the elderly (over 65 years) and near-elderly (54-63 years) pre- and post-implementation of Medicare Part D.ResultsMedicare Part D increased public drug expenditure while out-of-pocket and private spending fell. Public drug expenditures favoured the poor during all study periods, but the degree of pro-poorness declined in the years immediately following the implementation of Part D, with the poor gaining less than the rich in both relative and absolute terms. Part D also appeared to result in a fall in the pro-richness of private insurance drug expenditure in absolute terms but have minimal distributional impact on out-of-pocket expenditure. These effects appeared to be short lived, with a return to the prevailing trends in both concentration and generalised concentration indices several years following the start of Part D.ConclusionsThe implementation of Medicare Part D significantly reduced the degree of pro-poorness in public drug expenditure. The poor gained less of the increased public drug expenditure than the rich in both relative and absolute terms. This study demonstrates how income-related inequality measures can be used to estimate the impact of health system changes on inequalities in health expenditure and provides a guide for future evaluations.

Dataset Information

Policies to Encourage the Use of Biosimilars in European Countries and Their Potential Impact on Pharmaceutical Expenditure.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets