Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39289915›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2024

A Comparative Analysis of International Drug Price Negotiation Frameworks: An Interview Study of Key Stakeholders.

Iselin Dahlen Syversen, Kevin Schulman, Aaron S Kesselheim, William B Feldman

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Iselin Dahlen SyversenBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.
Kevin SchulmanStanford University School of Medicine.
Aaron S KesselheimBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.ORCID 0000-0002-8867-2666
William B FeldmanBrigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.ORCID 0000-0003-3467-5869

Funding

Improving COPD Outcomes: Using Real-World Data to Analyze Treatment Effectiveness, Safety, and AdherenceK08HL163246 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI William Brand Feldman · 2023 to 2026
$643k
Commonwealth FundNHLBI NIH HHS K08 HL163246
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policy Points Health care systems around the world rely on a range of methods to ensure the affordability of prescription drugs, including negotiating prices soon after drug approval and relying on formal clinical assessments that compare newly approved therapies with existing alternatives. The negotiation framework established under the Inflation Reduction Act is far more limited than other frameworks explored in this study. Adding elements from these frameworks could lead to more effective price negotiation in the United States. CONTEXT: In 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which allowed Medicare, for the first time, to begin negotiating the prices for certain high-cost brand-name prescription drugs. Many other industrialized countries negotiate drug prices, and we sought to compare and contrast key features of the negotiation process across several health systems. We focused, in particular, on the criteria for selecting drugs for price negotiation, procedures for negotiation, factors that influence negotiated prices, and how prices are implemented.

methodsWe included four G7 countries in our analysis (Canada, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom [England]), two Benelux countries (Belgium and the Netherlands), and one Scandinavian country (Norway) with long-established frameworks for drug price negotiation. We also analyzed the Veterans Affairs Health System in the United States. For each system, we gathered relevant legislation, government publications, and guidelines to understand negotiation frameworks, and we reached out to key drug price negotiators in each system to conduct semistructured interviews. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded, and data were analyzed based on an internal assessment tool that we developed.

findingsAll eight systems negotiate the prices of brand-name prescription drugs soon after approval and rely on formal clinical assessments that compare newly approved drugs with existing therapies. Systems in our study differed on characteristics such as whether the body performing clinical assessments is separate from the negotiating authority, how added health benefit is assessed, whether explicit willingness-to-pay thresholds are employed, and how specific approaches for priority disease areas are taken.

conclusionsHigh-income countries around the world adopt different approaches to conducting price negotiations on brand-name drugs but coalesce around a set of practices that will largely be absent from the current Medicare negotiation framework. US policymakers might consider adding some of these characteristics in the future to improve negotiation outcomes.

Indexed as

Drug CostsNegotiatingCanadaFranceGermanyHumansInternationalityPrescription DrugsUnited KingdomUnited StatesPrescription DrugsCanadadrug price negotiationEuropean UnionInflation Reduction Actpharmaceutical pricesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39289915
PMCPMC11654763

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.