Integrating Price Benchmarks and Comparative Clinical Effectiveness to Inform the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

By September 2024, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will publicly report the negotiated prices (Maximum Fair Prices) for the first 10 drugs selected for price negotiation. We estimate initial price offers based on net prices, statutorily defined ceilings, and comparative effectiveness data for the 10 drugs and their therapeutic alternatives. We utilized net prices and other price benchmarks for the 10 drugs and their therapeutic alternatives. We searched for data on comparative clinical effectiveness for the primary indications. We outlined a range of plausible initial price offers based on CMS guidance and our interpretation of regulatory intent. For ibrutinib and ustekinumab, statutorily defined ceiling prices will likely determine the initial price offers. The integration of net pricing and clinical evidence from comparator branded products will inform the initial price offers for apixaban, empagliflozin, etanercept, and insulin aspart. Rivaroxaban and sacubitril/valsartan have therapeutic alternatives that are generics; therefore, CMS may apply a discount to current net prices. To achieve savings in the negotiation of dapagliflozin and sitagliptin, CMS will have to leverage additional negotiation factors because statutory defined ceilings and net prices of therapeutic alternatives are similar or higher. This analysis sheds light on important price benchmarks and clinical evidence factors for the determination of the initial price offers. Although we were not able to simulate the offer and counter-offer process, our findings provide a transparent and systematic way to produce initial offers that are consistent with CMS guidance.

Sullivan SD ，Wouters OJ ，Cousin EM ，Kirihennedige AS ，Hernandez I ... -  《-》

Price benchmarks of drugs selected for Medicare price negotiation and their therapeutic alternatives.

Hernandez I ，Cousin EM ，Wouters OJ ，Gabriel N ，Cameron T ，Sullivan SD ... -  《-》

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

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. 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. We 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. All 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. High-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.

Syversen ID ，Schulman K ，Kesselheim AS ，Feldman WB ... -  《-》

Simulated Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

Rome BN ，Nagar S ，Egilman AC ，Wang J ，Feldman WB ，Kesselheim AS ... -  《-》

Informing the United States Medicare Drug Price Negotiation for Apixaban and Rivaroxaban: Methodological Considerations for Value Assessments Many Years After Launch.

Richardson M ，Wright AC ，Tice JA ，Rind DM ，Seidner M ，Emond S ，Pearson SD ... -  《-》