ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Price transparency of cancer medicines: a crucial step towards informed pricing negotiations in the European region.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The increasing cost of cancer medicines is a growing concern for hospitals in the European region, leading to cost reduction strategies, such as price negotiations. The objective of this study is to compare actual prices and discounts of cancer medicines at hospital level across the European region. Methods: To report prices and discounts without compromising the hospitals' anonymity, an anonymization pathway was developed. Pricing data of 15 cancer medicines in 2022 was collected through structured interviews with hospital staff and reference prices were derived from the IQVIA-MIDAS dataset. Descriptive analyses were used to demonstrate product and reference prices. Discounts were aggregated across countries and product types. Furthermore, the accuracy of the participants' perceptions of their prices compared to others within their country was assessed. Results: 23 hospitals from nine countries participated. To comply with the anonymization pathway, three countries were presented in general terms. The highest prices at hospital level were observed in France, followed by Serbia, Germany, Hungary and the Netherlands. Two Southern and one Northern European country had the lowest prices. When comparing them with their reference prices, Serbia reports the lowest discounts (-7%) and the Southern European countries the highest discounts (-38%). In addition, at least half of the hospitals had incorrect perceptions of their prices relative to others within their country, with some up to 22% higher than average. Discussion: Our study is one of few providing discounts and actual prices for 15 cancer medicines, revealing large price variations between and within countries. Additionally, reference prices often fail to provide an accurate indication of the actual price and hospitals have often misguided perceptions on their negotiation performance. Transparent, standardized reporting of prices and coordinated collaborations are essential to strengthen the bargaining power of hospitals and foster informed price negotiations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.