Next Article in Journal
Drug Pricing Reform in China: Analysis of Piloted Approaches and Potential Impact of the Reform
Previous Article in Journal
Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products: Current and Future Perspectives
 
 
Journal of Market Access & Health Policy (JMAHP) is published by MDPI from Volume 12 Issue 1 (2024). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Taylor & Francis.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Value of Innovation under Value-Based Pricing

by
Santiago G. Moreno
* and
Joshua A. Ray
Global Pricing and Market Access Department, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2016, 4(1), 30754; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3402/jmahp.v4.30754
Submission received: 16 December 2015 / Revised: 10 March 2016 / Accepted: 11 March 2016 / Published: 7 April 2016

Abstract

Objective: The role of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in incentivizing innovation is controversial. Critics of CEA argue that its use for pricing purposes disregards the ‘value of innovation’ reflected in new drug development, whereas supporters of CEA highlight that the value of innovation is already accounted for. Our objective in this article is to outline the limitations of the conventional CEA approach, while proposing an alternative method of evaluation that captures the value of innovation more accurately. Method: The adoption of a new drug benefits present and future patients (with cost implications) for as long as the drug is part of clinical practice. Incidence patients and off-patent prices are identified as two key missing features preventing the conventional CEA approach from capturing 1) benefit to future patients and 2) future savings from off-patent prices. The proposed CEA approach incorporates these two features to derive the total lifetime value of an innovative drug (i.e., the value of innovation). Results: The conventional CEA approach tends to underestimate the value of innovative drugs by disregarding the benefit to future patients and savings from off-patent prices. As a result, innovative drugs are underpriced, only allowing manufacturers to capture approximately 15% of the total value of innovation during the patent protection period. In addition to including the incidence population and off-patent price, the alternative approach proposes pricing new drugs by first negotiating the share of value of innovation to be appropriated by the manufacturer (>15%?) and payer (<85%?), in order to then identify the drug price that satisfies this condition. Conclusion: We argue for a modification to the conventional CEA approach that integrates the total lifetime value of innovative drugs into CEA, by taking into account off-patent pricing and future patients. The proposed approach derives a price that allows manufacturers to capture an agreed share of this value, thereby incentivizing innovation, while supporting health-care systems to pursue dynamic allocative efficiency. However, the long-term sustainability of health-care systems must be assessed before this proposal is adopted by policy makers.
Keywords: cost-effectiveness analysis; dynamic cost-effectiveness analysis; value-based pricing; innovation cost-effectiveness analysis; dynamic cost-effectiveness analysis; value-based pricing; innovation

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Moreno, S.G.; Ray, J.A. The Value of Innovation under Value-Based Pricing. J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2016, 4, 30754. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3402/jmahp.v4.30754

AMA Style

Moreno SG, Ray JA. The Value of Innovation under Value-Based Pricing. Journal of Market Access & Health Policy. 2016; 4(1):30754. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3402/jmahp.v4.30754

Chicago/Turabian Style

Moreno, Santiago G., and Joshua A. Ray. 2016. "The Value of Innovation under Value-Based Pricing" Journal of Market Access & Health Policy 4, no. 1: 30754. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3402/jmahp.v4.30754

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop