Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28944729›Full record

ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2017

Using Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements to Address Uncertainty in Indication-Based Pricing.

Kai Yeung, Meng Li, Josh J Carlson

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
14.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. How Do Iranian Stakeholders Think About Pharmaceutical Managed Entry Agreements?Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Value-Based Pricing and Budget Impact Analysis for Multi-Indication Drugs: A Case Study of Immunotherapies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Managing high-priced biologic agents: challenges and potential solutions.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Potential Effect of the 21st Century Cures Act on Drug Development.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2018
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kai Yeung1 Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, and Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington, Seattle.
Meng Li2 Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington School of Pharmacy, Seattle.
Josh J Carlson2 Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, University of Washington School of Pharmacy, Seattle.
University of Washington · USKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe rise in pharmaceutical expenditures in recent years has increased health care payer interest in ensuring good value for the money. Indication-based pricing (IBP) sets separate, indication-specific prices paid to the manufacturer according to the expected efficacy of a drug in each of its indications. IBP allows payers to consistently pay for value across indications. While promising, a limitation of IBP as originally conceived is that efficacy estimates are typically based on clinical trial data, which may differ from real-world effectiveness. An outcomes guarantee is a type of performance-based risk-sharing arrangement that adjusts payments according to prospectively tracked outcomes. We suggest that an outcomes guarantee contract, which has been used by some payers, may be adapted to achieve indication-based prices supported by real-world effectiveness.

objectiveTo illustrate the potential of an outcomes guarantee to achieve indication-based prices aligned with real-world value, using a case study of trastuzumab for the treatment of metastatic breast and advanced gastric cancers.

methodsWe estimated costs and outcomes under traditional IBP (i.e., expected value IBP) and outcomes guarantee frameworks and calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing treatment with and without trastuzumab. Efficacy data came from pivotal trials, whereas effectiveness data came from observational studies. We adjusted trastuzumab prices in order to achieve target ICERs of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year under each framework and for each indication.

resultsTo achieve the ICER target under traditional IBP, the unit price of trastuzumab using efficacy evidence was adjusted for metastatic breast and advanced gastric cancers from an average sales price of $9.17 per mg to $3.50 per mg and $0.93 per mg, respectively. Under an outcomes guarantee, the unit price of trastuzumab using effectiveness evidence was adjusted for metastatic breast cancer and advanced gastric cancer to $8.66 per mg and $0.20 per mg, respectively.

conclusionsLike expected value IBP, outcomes guarantee contracts can also vary payment based on indication. In addition, an outcomes guarantee can also reduce uncertainty regarding effectiveness and better align payment with the actual value of a treatment. DISCLOSURES: No funding supported this study. Carlson reports consulting fees from Genentech, Pfizer, and Seattle Genetics. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by Carlson, Yeung, and Li. Yeung, Carlson, and Li collected and analyzed the data. The manuscript was written primarily by Yeung, along with Carlson and Li, and revised by all the authors.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCommerceCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug CostsFemaleHealth ExpendituresHumansObservational Studies as TopicQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRiskTrastuzumabUncertaintyTrastuzumab

Identifiers

PMID28944729
PMCPMC10398211
OpenAlexW2759410624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.