scholarly journals Reconciling uncertainty of costs and outcomes with the need for access to orphan medicinal products: a comparative study of managed entry agreements across seven European countries

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Morel ◽  
Francis Arickx ◽  
Gustaf Befrits ◽  
Paolo Siviero ◽  
Caroline van der Meijden ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Entela Xoxi ◽  
Karen M Facey ◽  
Americo Cicchetti

Italy has a well-established prominent system of national registries to support managed entry agreements (MEAs), monitoring innovative medicinal products (MPs) with clinical as well as economic uncertainties to ensure appropriate use and best value for money. The technological architecture of the registries is funded by pharmaceutical companies, but fully governed by the national medicines agency (AIFA). A desktop analysis was undertaken of data over a 15-year timeframe of all AIFA indication-based registries and associated EMA information. The characteristics of registries were evaluated, comparing orphan MPs vs. all MPs exploring cancer and non-cancer indications. OMP (orphan medicinal product) registries’ type vs. AIFA innovation status and EMA approval was reviewed. Of the 283 registries, 182 are appropriateness registries (35.2% relate to OMPs, with an almost equal split of cancer vs. non-cancer for OMPs and MPs), 35 include financial-based agreements [20% OMPs (2 non-cancer, 5 cancer)], and 60 registries are payment by result agreements [23.3% OMPs (4 non-cancer, 10 cancer)]. Most OMPs (53/88) came through the normal regulatory route. With the strengthening of the system for evaluation of innovation, fewer outcomes-based registries have been instigated. AIFA has overcome many of the challenges experienced with MEA through developing an integrated national web-based data collection system: the challenge that remains for AIFA is to move from using the system for individual patient decisions about treatment to reviewing the wealth of data it now holds to optimize healthcare.


Health Policy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 123 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Nicod ◽  
Lieven Annemans ◽  
Anna Bucsics ◽  
Anne Lee ◽  
Sheela Upadhyaya ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Samuel Azuz ◽  
Max Newton ◽  
Dorthe Bartels ◽  
Birgitte Klindt Poulsen

Abstract Purpose The aim of this study was to describe the implementation and uptake of biosimilar trastuzumab in Denmark compared with other European countries. Methods European data for usage of trastuzumab was supplied by IQVIA™, using the MIDAS® dataset. A comparison was performed based on market share estimated in sales volume. A separate comparison was undertaken between countries with a full two-fold switch between different biosimilars. Data was collected spanning the time from first registered sales of biosimilar trastuzumab until the 1st quarter of 2020. Results Denmark had the fastest and most thorough uptake of biosimilar trastuzumab compared with other EU countries. After 3 months, the market share of biosimilar trastuzumab had increased to 90% while the second fastest country had a 50% market share after 3 months. Only two other countries had undergone a full second switch between biosimilars, Hungary and Norway. All of the three countries made near complete switches between biosimilars while only Denmark had reduced the use of biooriginator below 10%. Conclusion The implementation of biosimilar trastuzumab in Denmark was rapid and achieved high overall uptake compared with other EU countries. The switch from one biosimilar to another was also achieved quickly and thoroughly. We believe that the rapid dissemination of information and involvement of all stakeholders — administrators, pharmacies, prescribers, nurses, and patients — constitute the backbone of the Danish success. A similar strategy is recommend for biosimilar implementation in other countries.


Author(s):  
Virginia Ronco ◽  
Myriam Dilecce ◽  
Elena Lanati ◽  
Pier Luigi Canonico ◽  
Claudio Jommi

Abstract Background Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) represent an important cornerstone for innovation in healthcare. However, uncertainty on the value, the high average cost per patient and their one-shot nature has raised a debate on their assessment and appraisal process for pricing and reimbursement (P&R) purposes. This debate led experts providing for recommendations on this topic. Our primary objective is to investigate the ATMPs P&R process in the main five European countries and to understand if this process is consistent with published P&R expert recommendations. We also investigated the current ATMP pipelines to understand if future ATMPs will create challenges for their P&R process. Methods P&R framework for ATMPs in the European Major five (EU5) countries was investigated through a literature search on PubMed, institutional websites of National Health Authorities and grey literature. The ATMPs pipeline database was populated from a clinical trial database (clinicaltrials.gov), relying on inclusion and exclusion criteria retrieved from the literature. Results Reimbursement status of ATMPs is different across the EU5 countries, with the exception of CAR-Ts which are reimbursed in all countries. Standard P&R process in place for other medicinal products is extended to ATMPs, with the exception of some cases in Germany. List prices, where available, are high and, tend to be aligned across countries. Outcome-based Managed Entry Agreements (MEAs) have been extensively used for ATMPs. Extra-funds for hospitals managing ATMPs were provided only in Germany and, as additional fund per episode, in France. The accreditation process of hospitals for ATMPs management was in most countries managed by the national authorities. As far as ATMPs pipeline is concerned, ATMPs in development are mostly targeting non-rare diseases. Conclusions Expert recommendations for ATMPs P&R were partially applied: the role of outcome-based MEAs has increased and the selection process of the centres authorized to use these treatments has been enhanced; additional funding for ATMPs management to accredited centres has not been completely considered and annuity payment and broader perspective in cost considerations are far from being put in place. These recommendations should be considered for future P&R negotiations to pursue rational resource allocation and deal with budget constraints.


2005 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rashmi R Shah

The implementation of Community Regulation on orphan medicinal products in the European Union in April 2000 has resulted in a deluge of applications for designation of medicinal products as orphan for rare diseases. By April 2004, the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products had already given positive opinion on 63 per cent of the 316 applications considered by them. A significant number of these positive designations have already matured into full marketing authorisations. Three major reasons – failure to meet prevalence or significant benefit criteria or provide evidence of biological plausibility – have equally contributed to either the negative opinion on or the applicants withdrawing the remaining applications. In July 2004, the European Commission issued a communication setting out its position on certain matters relating to the implementation of the designation and market exclusivity provisions. The Commission, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) and the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (COMP) continue to be proactive and provide as much guidance and incentives as practical, engaging themselves with sponsors, patient groups and academia. As experience builds up and issues are clarified, there are expectations that the Community Regulation on orphan medicines will prove to be a spectacular success.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Christina Nicolodi

The European legislative framework on orphan medicinal products was implemented to stimulate the development of medicinal products against rare diseases and to ensure the patient’s adequate access to qualitative and specific treatment methods. Between 2000 and 2018 3210 orphan drug designation applications were submitted in Europe of which 2121 orphan designations have been issued by the European Commission. (1) Though the definitions for orphan medicinal products and the regulatory procedures are well defined, a high degree of regulatory knowledge is needed and strategic decisions on the development program must be considered at a very early stage of development: in fact, only 164 of the 2121 designated orphan development products have resulted in authorised orphan medicinal products since the orphan legislation was implemented. In this article, the requirements and procedures for the orphan designation application and maintenance at the time of marketing authorisation application are discussed in the context of the European Regulation.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yafa Shanneik ◽  
Chris Heinhold ◽  
Zahra Ali

AbstractThis article provides an introduction to the special issue onMapping Shia Muslim Communities in Europe.1 With six empirically rich case studies on Shia Muslim communities in various European countries, this issue intends: first, to illustrate the historical developments and emergence of the Shia presence in Europe; second, to highlight the local particularities of the various Shia communities within each nation state and demonstrate their transnational links; and third, to provide for the first time an empirical comparative study on the increasingly visible presence of Shia communities in Europe that fills an important gap in research on Muslims in Europe.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document