Sickle cell disease gene therapies are here, but how is society going to pay for them?
READ MORE
.webp)
READ MORE
On November 16th, the UK’s MHRA approved Casgevy (exagamglogene autotemcel) or exa-cel for sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia. And this month the FDA is expected to license exa-cel and lovo-cel (lovotibeglogene autotemcel), both of which attack SCD at its genetic root.
For these advanced gene therapies the challenge of access through Medicaid and other programs looms large. Medicaid will be the predominant payer for the 25,000 patients who could be eligible for these gene therapies. And it must figure out a budget-conscious way to pay for these potential one-time “cures.”
In April, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review issued a draft report on the cost-effectiveness of exa-cel and lovo-cel. ICER noted that the proportion of patients achieving treatment success was 97% for both therapies. Even at the placeholder price of nearly $2 million per dose, ICER says both treatments could be cost-effective. But ICER cautioned that a prerequisite is their durability over time and the establishment of value-based pricing agreements between payers and manufacturers.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is therefore pursuing a two-pronged approach to value-based pricing and reimbursement of cell and gene therapies such as exa-cel and lovo-cel.
Related Post: A Promising Sickle Cell Cure Is Almost Here. What About the Money to Pay for It?
First, a proposed rule would require manufacturers with the highest drug Medicaid spending per claim to turn over confidential information justifying their prices. CMS would post this information online, seek public comment, and compel manufacturers to “address” their pricing in a public forum.
Second, CMS is planning on “testing of payment models” based on outcomes-based agreements on behalf of all 50 state Medicaid programs, rather than having them done separately by individual states.
Innovative payment models such as these require the ability to analyze patient outcomes and negotiate prices based on those outcomes. Digital platforms, such as those offered by Lyfegen, are designed to implement value-based contracting models. This investment can yield operational efficiency, recovery of missed revenues, and provide critical access for patients to life-saving drug therapies.
Lyfegen offers solutions to identify the right drug pricing agreements, simulate and understand the financial impacts of those agreements, and automate the execution and adjudication of them—thus delivering a measurable reduction in administrative effort in rebate management and optimization.
READ MORE
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is leveraging third-party health technology assessments to inform its offer price in February 2024 for the 10 drugs it has selected for price negotiations. To illustrate, the drug cost watchdog the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review published a report on the blockbuster blood thinners Xarelto and Eliquis and submitted it to CMS. Xarelto and Eliquis are two of the 10 drugs set to face the first round of Medicare price negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act.
The ICER report modeled the comparative effectiveness of these products over generic warfarin in stroke prevention, myocardial infarction prevention and major bleeding episodes. This includes an assessment of the justifiable price premiums for the two branded products given several different cost-effectiveness thresholds. The table below shows ICER’s calculations of price premiums for Eliquis relative to the generic comparator warfarin and the branded comparator Pradaxa (dabigatran).
Drug manufacturers and payers impacted by the IRA will need to gather and evaluate this kind of information, as well as evidence from peer-reviewed articles and other sources. In turn, they must use the data to inform the price negotiation process for selected drugs but also competing products in the same therapeutic classes.
Launching soon, the Lyfegen Drug Pricing Simulator is a dynamic tool that gathers data inputs and runs real-time simulations that help users understand potential rebate, revenue, cash flow, and budget impacts for the different types and combinations of drug pricing models.
READ MORE
The Inflation Reduction Act authorizes Medicare for the first time to negotiate prices at the national level for a limited subset of single-source drugs. Recently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services selected the first 10 drugs to be negotiated. The 10 high-cost drugs in the table below represent 20% of total outpatient spend in the Medicare program from June 2022 through May 2023.
Prices will be negotiated over a one-year period with an offer and counteroffer process between CMS and drug manufacturers in which maximum fair prices will be established and posted in the fall of 2024 and implemented in January 2026.
Makers of drugs selected for negotiation should consider how payers in the Medicaid and commercial markets will leverage the published MFP information when negotiating rebates. Also, manufacturers of drugs competing with those selected for negotiation should consider how payers will leverage the published MFP information when making pricing, rebating and reimbursement decisions in the Medicid and commercial markets.
At the time a drug’s negotiated MFP price is posted, competitors may react to the published price by trying to undercut it, perhaps by offering even higher rebates, which in turn may cause the manufacturer of the selected drug to lower the net price of a drug a year prior to the MFP being implemented. Also, once MFPs are posted, payers will have publicly available information on the negotiated prices for the selected drugs as well as evidence used to inform the offer and counteroffers. This may then be utilized as leverage in negotiations for competing products in the same therapeutic classes.
The Lyfegen Rebate Analytics Platform is a cloud-based software that can manage all the complexities of drug rebate administration for payers and pharmaceutical companies affected by the IRA. The data-driven platform automates identifying, calculating, and tracking rebates in a timely manner, all of which help to ensure agreement compliance and reduce revenue leakage.
Learn more: lyfegen.com/products/ara
READ MORE
Prices for drugs in the U.S. continue to rise – faster than the rate of inflation – according to a Harvard study that shows nearly half of new drugs marketed now cost $150,000 or more annually. Insurers, along with consumers and regulators, are anxiously seeking ways to lower costs and to make sure patients get the treatments they need. One solution that is gaining interest is value-based pharmaceutical contracting, where costs are tied to results; the more effective a drug, the more a payer will allocate for that drug.
This model isn’t new and it has proven to be successful in Europe, where many value-based pharma contracting are showing positive results for payers, patients, and pharmaceutical companies. As a result, some companies that cater to the U.S. market are moving towards this model, although there are challenges.
Value-based contracting is especially applicable for the growing number of cell and gene therapies and other new ultra-expensive treatments. By allowing insurers and other payers to pay in installments that are dependent on patient outcomes, or even to receive refunds if the drug does not perform as expected, pharma companies are sharing the risk with payers. And there is great value in that shared risk. Payers, for example, are able to realize better patient outcomes when drugs proving to be ineffective can be replaced with more effective ones. At the same time, pharmaceutical firms are incentivized to ensure that the treatments they offer payers are truly effective ones, spurring better and more effective research.
In addition to making sure that prices reflect patient outcome, value-based contracting helps expand the amount of data associated with a treatment. With more data on the effectiveness of treatments recorded – and more tracking of patients over time – researchers will have more data to draw on when developing new treatments. That data can include details on all aspects of a patient's care and even factor in the patient's adherence to medication schedules. This data can also help pharma companies advance their research.Finally, healthcare providers benefit from value-based contracting because they will be able to get a more accurate picture of their patients' overall health situations, which will allow them to provide higher-quality care. Despite all of the advantages for all parties involved, value-based contracting has not yet been widely embraced by payers or pharma companies. A survey of 180 large employers, insurers, and unions with health benefit programs shows just 12% use value-based contracting for specialty drugs, which are usually the most expensive treatments, and fewer than 1% of organizations are using them for more common drugs.
This apparent reluctance to adopt value-based contracting is surprising because payers who have leveraged this approach are finding that their pharma costs are falling.
But challenges do remain for both payers and insurance companies in adopting value-based contracting. In order to speed up the adoption of value-based contracting, there needs to be a willingness to change business culture and long-entrenched processes; an acknowledgement that value-based contracting can expand insights and opportunities for pharma companies, but more clear incentives are necessary; and more dialogue around industry standards and regulatory flexibility that take this contracting model into account.
Industries like insurance and pharma often have institutional, or legacy, systems and processes that no longer best serve the organization and market opportunity. Innovative new opportunities like value-based contracting likely requires change–changes to systems, to processes, and to people’s day-to-day operations. Some organizations find the implementation of value-based contracting models complicated because they require analyzing patient outcomes, negotiating prices based on those outcomes, and determining which drugs should be included in the program. All of these steps require access to–and analysis of–a great deal of data, which can be a significant investment. However, there are digital platforms that are designed to implement value-based contracting without overcomplicating the process–and the investment can yield operational efficiency, recovery of missed revenues, and, most importantly, provide critical access for patients to life-saving drug therapies.
Within the industry, there is an assumption among pharma companies that there is a limited return on their investment with value-based contracting, or even the possibility of lower revenues due to lower prices. But with the transparency that value-based contracting can bring to pharma companies through real-world data from patients taking their drugs, there comes expanded opportunities to understand drug performance and patient outcomes, both of which are valuable for future drug development and marketing. A KPMG report notes another important benefit of value-based contracting–for example, such agreements can enable pharma companies access to currently highly-regulated markets that they were unable to sell in before, thus serving as a competitive advantage. In order to keep pushing pharma companies in this direction, there need to be more clear incentives that can help them with access challenges.
As value-based contracting continues to be more commonplace, it is likely that there will be more standardization within the industry and regulatory parties. However, these changes should be happening now. For example, standards are needed regarding what factors should be included when evaluating the effectiveness or value of a drug. Furthermore, value is a dynamic concept and the definition changes depending upon the viewpoint–value for a payer is different from value for pharma is different from value for a patient. The industry also needs to sort out what happens in outcome-based contracts when patients switch insurers.
Regulations can also stand in the way. While Medicaid has adopted a value-based contracting model for a small selection of drugs, most others are not covered by that arrangement. Most drugs are subject to Medicaid's Best Price policy where prices aren't connected to effectiveness or results, thus perpetuating the disconnect between price and value. The good news is that CMS, the government agency responsible for Medicaid and Medicare services, plans to extend and expand the value-based contracting model already in effect as they continue working towards the goals of improving health outcomes and lowering costs.
Change can be challenging. But as drug prices rapidly rise, the need for change has never been greater. Value-based contracting is the innovative solution that leverages the right data, at the right time, and with the right level of transparency to reduce costs, recover lost revenues, ensure more effective outcomes, help patients get healthier, and provide valuable data insights for future drugs and treatments. It's time to start implementing them.
READ MORE
Advanced gene therapies that could “practically cure” patients suffering from sickle-cell disease (SCD) are just over the horizon. But they may not reach the people who need them most, many of whom are minorities with fewer financial resources and are reliant on Medicaid for their health coverage. Figuring out how to pay for their treatment looms as one of the biggest questions – both economic and ethical - facing US public health policymakers in the coming years.
Amid Medicaid’s efforts to cut spending, the dilemma of how to cover these drugs could end up increasing rancor and anger in the country – or it could spur budgetary creativity. While programs like Medicaid have traditionally filled the gap between availability and lack of affordability in treatment, the cost of SCD therapies developed by Vertex and CRISPR – estimated at nearly $2 million a dose – could quickly overwhelm even Medicaid's robust resources, especially in states that have higher rates of the disease. And this is just the beginning. As more ultra-expensive drug and cell therapies are developed for numerous conditions in the coming years, the question of how to pay for them looms large.
The American healthcare system has been long accused of discriminating against the poor and minorities – and that discrimination is likely to come into far greater focus when millions of the poorest Americans who could benefit from new therapies are unable to take advantage of them. Altogether, there are over 40,000 SCD patients on Medicare in any given year - about 60% of the estimated 100,000 victims of the disease in the US. Of the 74,817 hospitalized for sickle cell disease in 2023, 69,889 (93.4%) were African-American; on average, one of every 13 Black babies are born with sickle-cell trait (SCT), a forerunner of the disease. Even for SCD patients who can afford private insurance, the out-of-pocket cost for therapy is very burdensome. But for the poor and others who lack private health coverage, Medicaid is a singular life raft – the difference between life and a possibly very abrupt death.
Given the situation, it's likely that patient advocacy groups will make a strong bid for increased government funding. And given the issues of social justice and racism surrounding the historic lack of interest in SCD by the medical establishment, there's a good chance that funding will be forthcoming. But budgets are still budgets; if Medicaid is going to spend more on SCD therapies, it is going to have to cut other payments, especially given the strong pressure to cut Medicaid spending – both on the federal and state level, even in states where the incidence of SCD is high.
Related Post: Sickle cell disease gene therapies are here, but how is society going to pay for them?
This could be the time for Medicaid to follow in the footsteps of Medicare, and implement changes in the way it pays for treatments, specifically implementing models where payment is based on patient outcome. Indeed, Medicaid has proposed doing this, but it must move much faster if it wants to help those with SCD benefit from treatments expected to be approved by the end of the year.
Medicare recently adopted a limited form of results-based drug pricing for some of its most expensive drugs. The legislation initially covers ten high-priced drugs, with the list expanded to 20 by the end of the decade. Under the program, the government will pay a price closer to that demanded by the drug’s maker if a drug does in fact significantly reduce the costs of lifetime treatment. But if a drug does not have the desired result, the cost would be significantly lower. Experts are predicting significant savings for the government.
Medicaid, through CMS/CMMI, plans to do something similar - negotiate results--based contracts for gene-based therapies on behalf of all 50 state Medicaid programs. According to government data, the lifetime cost for treating SCD patients through 64 years of age is also close to $2 million. So Medicaid would be spending roughly the same amount on each patient receiving gene-based therapies, while reducing or eliminating costs for treatment of those over 64. These outcome-based contracts, also called value-based contracts, would allow drug-makers to be paid full price only if the treatment does end up working. These contracts could also allow Medicaid to pay in installments, rather than upfront. In addition, if treatment works faster or better than expected in some patients, there could be room in these contracts for drugmakers to be paid more, or paid earlier. Drug companies and science would also benefit from the extended real-world data involved in these contracts, which track the progress of treated patients for years.
But this model is likely to come too late for many with SCD: CMS/CMMI will only be running a pilot negotiation program in 2026 at the earliest. This means that it's very possible that Medicaid will have to, at least temporarily, ignore very promising gene-based therapies that could help hundreds of thousands of people because it can't pay for them.
Meanwhile, the public pressure and demand for widespread implementation of SCD gene therapies is likely to be very high. Lives are at stake; as is correcting a historic injustice. So how will officials deal with an increase in public pressure to pay for therapies? One possibility is to appeal to the private sector for help. Infact, the NIH will be partnering with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to provide some $200 million to increase the development of affordable gene therapies for SCD and HIV by providing funding to researchers to develop lower-cost therapies, and assistance to those who need treatment. Another option could be transferring unused state Medicaid allocations for SCD from states with very low incidence rates, like Idaho, to states with higher incidence rates, like Mississippi.
Regardless of the solution Medicaid adopts, there's no question that a storm has been raging for years over who gets what in the American healthcare system – and that storm is likely to strengthen as gene-based therapies for SCD become available. Given the history of how the establishment has dealt with that disease – and the people who are its biggest victims – it's likely that changes to how Medicaid pays for expensive therapies will come sooner rather than later. These changes must happen, or inequality in the American health system will only become worse as the pipeline of life-changing gene and cell therapies grows.
READ MORE
Die Vertragssoftware von Lyfegen wird von Kostenträgern im Gesundheitswesen und führenden Pharmaunternehmen eingesetzt, darunter Novartis, Roche, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) und Johnson & Johnson.
NEW YORK/BASEL, 20. September 2022 /PRNewswire/ – Lyfegen, ein globales Healthtech-SaaS-Unternehmen, das den Übergang von volume-zu value-based Healthcare für hochpreisige Medikamente vorantreibt, gab heute eine überzeichnete Serie-A-Finanzierungsrunde über 8 Millionen Dollar bekannt, die vom Investmentfonds aMoon mit zusätzlicher Beteiligung von APEX Ventures und weiteren Investoren angeführt wurde.
Derzeit sind weniger als 2 % der Krankenversicherten, die Spezialarzneimittel benötigen, für 51 % der Arzneimittelausgaben verantwortlich. Die Kosten für Spezialarzneimittel in den USA laufen aus dem Ruder: Sie stiegen allein von 2020 bis 2021 um 12 % – und es gibt keine Anzeichen für eine Verlangsamung, denn es kommen immer mehr Zell- und Gentherapien auf den Markt. Infolgedessen wird Value-Based Contracting, die Nutzung wertorientierter Verträge, für die Kostenträger des Gesundheitswesens zu der entscheidenden Alternative, um nur für Medikamente zu zahlen, die tatsächlich wirken.
Bis 2025 werden die Nettoausgaben für Medikamente in den USA voraussichtlich bis zu 400 Milliarden US-Dollar betragen. Darüber hinaus kommen regelmässig neue Medikamente auf den Markt. Es fällt Pharmaunternehmen immer schwerer, sich mit den Kostenträgern auf kommerzielle Bedingungen zu einigen. Damit steigt die Gefahr, dass Patienten keinen Zugang zu lebensrettenden Therapien erhalten. Lyfegen hilft Regulierungsbehörden, Pharmaunternehmen und Kostenträgern bei der Einführung wertorientierter Zahlungsmodelle, indem sie den gesamten Prozess der Datenerfassung, Anonymisierung und Vertragsverhandlungen für alle Parteien digitalisiert. So kann die Preisgestaltung und Kostenerstattung für Medikamente vereinfacht werden.
„Wir freuen uns, diese Finanzierungsrunde bekannt zu geben und dieses Vertrauensvotum von aMoon, APEX und weiteren Investoren zu haben, die den Wandel im Gesundheitswesen verstehen und unser Bestreben um den Ausbau der Lyfegen-Plattform unterstützen", sagte Girisha Fernando, CEO und Gründer von Lyfegen. „Wir arbeiten derzeit mit führenden staatlichen Kostenträgern, Krankenversicherungen in Europa, den USA und dem Nahen Osten sowie mit einigen der weltweit grössten Pharmaunternehmen zusammen. Wir beabsichtigen nun, unsere Präsenz in den USA weiter auszubauen und Partnerschaften mit privaten und öffentlichen Krankenversicherungen einzugehen. Die Abkehr von der volumenbasierten Gesundheitsversorgung war noch nie so notwendig wie heute, und wir freuen uns, dass wir eine wichtige Rolle bei der Umstellung auf Value-Based Contracting spielen können."
„Lyfegen adressiert einen bedeutenden Marktbedarf in einer Branche, die sich dramatisch und schnell verändert, und wir sind begeistert, dass wir mit unserer Investition dazu beitragen können, ihre Anstrengungen zu unterstützen", erläuterte Moshic Mor, General Partner bei aMoon und ehemaliger Partner bei Greylock and Greylock Israel. „In Zeiten von Budgetdruck und Rezession im Gesundheitswesen braucht die Welt Lösungen wie die von Lyfegen mehr denn je. Wir sind stolz mit diesem erfahrenen Führungsteam zusammenzuarbeiten, das weiterhin den Zugang zu neuen Medikamenten verbessert, während es die wertorientierte Gesundheitsversorgung immer mehr zum Mainstream macht."
Informationen zu Lyfegen
Lyfegen ist ein unabhängiges, globales Softwareanalyseunternehmen, das eine wert- und ergebnisbasierte Vertragsplattform für Krankenversicherungen, Pharma- und Medizintechnikunternehmen sowie Krankenhäuser auf der ganzen Welt bietet. Die sichere Plattform identifiziert und operationalisiert wertbasierte Zahlungsmodelle kostengünstig und macht diese mit einer Vielzahl von realen Daten und maschinellem Lernen skalierbar. Mit der zum Patent angemeldeten Plattform von Lyfegen können Krankenversicherungen und Krankenhäuser eine wertorientierte Gesundheitsversorgung einführen und skalieren und so den Zugang zu Behandlungen, die Gesundheitsergebnisse der Patienten und die Kostenersparnis verbessern.
Lyfegen hat seinen Sitz in den USA und der Schweiz und wurde von Persönlichkeiten mit jahrzehntelanger Erfahrung im Gesundheitswesen, in der Pharmaindustrie und im Technologiebereich gegründet, um den Übergang von der volumenbasierten und kostenpflichtigen Gesundheitsversorgung zur wertorientierten Gesundheitsversorgung zu ermöglichen. Weitere Informationen finden Sie auf www.lyfegen.com.
Verwandte Links:
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lyfegenhealth
Pressekontakt: yael@gkpr.com
Ansprechpartner für Investoren: investors@lyfegen.com
Read the Exclusive article with AXIOS
Read the Press Release on PR Newswire
READ MORE
We are thrilled to welcome Ina Hasani to our team at Lyfegen as Director of Sales & Business Development for Canada. Ina brings nearly a decade of experience in the life sciences sector, specializing in healthcare strategy, market access, and health economics. We sat down with Ina to learn more about her background, her vision for transforming healthcare in Canada, and what excites her most about joining Lyfegen.
Can you tell us a bit about your background and what led you to your role as Director, Sales &Business Development for Canada at Lyfegen?
I have spent close to a decade in the life sciences sector, working with companies like Novartis and Pfizer, where I gained deep expertise in healthcare strategy, market access, and health economics. My passion has always been focused on improving patient outcomes and the healthcare system. This led me to Lyfegen, a company at the forefront of transforming healthcare through innovative solutions. The opportunity to work with payers and drug manufacturers to ensure better and sustainable access to innovative treatments for patients was a natural fit for me, both professionally and personally.
What are the biggest challenges facing the healthcare market in Canada, particularly in terms of drug pricing and access?
The Canadian healthcare system is highly complex! The biggest challenge that we are facing is how to accelerate access to innovative therapies without compromising the sustainability of the healthcare system. Payors, including both public and private insurers, are struggling to balance their budgets with the rising costs of therapies, particularly for specialty drugs. Outcome based agreements are a potential solution to enable timely access to breakthrough therapies. However, payors and pharmaceuticals don’t have the infrastructure in place to efficiently implement and operationalize such agreements.
What opportunities do you see for growth in Lyfegen’s sales efforts in Canada? How can we better support health insurers and government bodies?
There is tremendous potential for growth. Currently, payors and pharmaceuticals adjudicate their product listing agreements (PLAs) manually through Excel spreadsheets. It is resource intensive, leaves room for errors and is a barrier to potential innovative contracting. In addition, as Canada increasingly looks towards value-based healthcare models, Lyfegen is an enabler by providing the digital infrastructure for payor and manufacturers.
From your perspective, what key actions need to be taken in the next 12 months to drive success for Lyfegen in the Canadian market?
In the next 12 months, we need to focus on deepening our relationships with key stakeholders and demonstrate the value of our digital solutions for payors, manufacturers, healthcare system and, ultimately, the patients.
How do you see your role influencing the implementation of value-based solutions in Canada, and what impact do you hope to have?
Lyfegen has extensive experience in OBA implementation and operationalization in many countries. In my role, I hope to bridge the gap from theory to practice in the implementation of value-based healthcare in Canada.
In your opinion, what’s the most important aspect of building strong client relationships in the healthcare industry? How do you approach this in your role?
Trust and communication are at the core of any strong client relationship in healthcare. Given the complexity and sensitivity of the industry, clients need to know that you understand their unique challenges and are committed to solving them. In my role, I prioritize open and ongoing communication, ensuring that clients feel heard and that their feedback is integrated into our solutions. I also work hard to build trust by delivering results and being transparent about what we can achieve together.
Looking ahead, what excites you most about the future of sales and business development at Lyfegen in Canada?
I’m excited about the potential to be a catalyst for significant change in the Canadian healthcare landscape. Lyfegen is in a unique position to lead this transformation. The combination of increasing demand for cost-effective healthcare solutions and our innovative approach makes this an incredibly exciting time to be in sales and business development.
Outside of work, what are some of your favorite things to do in your free time?
Outside of work, I enjoy spending quality time with my family and friends. I also prioritize my health by being active on a daily basis. I also enjoy learning. Now that I have completed my MBA, I’m on a mission to learn Spanish.
We are excited to see Ina grow and thrive in her role at Lyfegen. Welcome to the team, Ina!
READ MORE
Once upon a time, In a whimsical forest, there lived a smart and creative blue bird. This bird, known for its brilliance in the world of tiny forest biotech, had concocted a magical potion.
This potion was a wonder, a gene therapy to cure the forest creatures of a troublesome disease called sickle cell. Perched thoughtfully on a branch, the blue bird faced a whimsical yet vital challenge. The potion, potent in its healing, needed to be more than just a marvel of science – it had to be reachable and affordable for all in the forest. Additionally, this magical creation was still unnamed, a name that should echo its life-affirming qualities and the journey from a mere idea to a beacon of hope in the forest.
Amidst this puzzlement, the blue bird heard tales of the wise owls of Lyfegen, far beyond the forest. These owls were not just wise; they were masters of a different kind of magic – the magic of numbers and agreements that made health solutions reachable to all. Intrigued, the blue bird fluttered over to learn more.
As it learned about Lyfegen's remarkable ability to navigate the complex world of potion pricing and access, inspiration struck. "Ah-ha!" chirped blue bird, "If Lyfegen can make health solutions accessible, why not name my potion in honor of their work? Lyfgenia – a name that sings of life, hope, and the ingenuity of Lyfegen!"
And so, the potion was christened Lyfgenia, a nod to the owls of Lyfegen whose wisdom ensured that such medical marvels reached every nook and cranny of the forest without burdening its inhabitants.
With its new name, Lyfgenia became more than just a potion; it symbolized a harmonious blend of medical genius and financial savvy. The blue bird turned Lyfgenia into a symbol of hope and healing in the whimsical world of the forest.
Disclaimer: "A Fable of the Blue Bird and Lyfegen's Wise Owls" is a work of fiction, created solely for entertainment and illustrative purposes. This fable does not represent any real-life strategies, decisions, or actions of these entities, nor should it be interpreted as an endorsement or representation of their values, capabilities, or business practices.
Using Lyfegen's solutions can streamline the financial management of advanced therapies like Lyfgenia, leading to more effective pricing strategies and improved access for patients. Learn more about how our solutions enable value-based contracting for gene therapies: lyfegen.com
READ MORE
Amid the buzz of innovation at Lyfegen, we sat down with Simon, our newest team member, whose journey has brought a fresh perspective to our mission.
Quick introduction – tell us a bit about yourself!
I'm based out of the UK. I studied Law at University but soon realized that a career as a Solicitor wasn’t my calling. Post-university, I ventured into Software Sales, initially focusing on Cloud Solutions and then transitioning into the Life Sciences realm. Most of my career has been dedicated to building startups and introducing new ideas and products to the market.
What excites you about your job?
What really thrills me about joining Lyfegen is the potential impact I can have on those needing life-saving treatments. The core goal of the pharma industry is to enhance the health and wellbeing of society, and at Lyfegen, we're crafting solutions that make medications more accessible, allowing us to treat more people. It's also incredibly rewarding to collaborate with some of the world's leading pharma companies, supporting them as they launch new assets.
Why did you decide to join Lyfegen?
It was the founders' vision that drew me to Lyfegen. Their passion was evident right from our initial conversations. Joining Lyfegen is an incredible opportunity for me to contribute my experience to another startup, and together, we can continue to thrive on this exciting journey.
What is something you want to learn or improve in the next 12 months?
Over the next year, I aim to deepen my understanding of the market access space within the pharma industry. Launching assets is intricate, with many layers involved, and there's a wealth of knowledge I'm eager to absorb. It's fascinating to learn about the different approaches of various companies and how they navigate the market.
How will your know-how help improve our customers’ experience of Lyfegen solutions?
With my background in launching new solutions for startups, I'm well-acquainted with the challenges that can arise. We can be proactive in addressing these before they occur. As Lyfegen is growing rapidly, it’s crucial that we adapt while maintaining our high standards and always remembering that our customers are our biggest priority. My experience with Global enterprises has also given me insight into the ongoing support they need and the importance of fostering great relationships based on trust and understanding.
Let’s get personal: What are your favorite things to do in your free time?
In my free time, I love to travel as much as I can, exploring different cultures and places, with my next plans to delve into more of Asia. When I'm in the UK, I spend time with my German Shepherd, Max, or playing water polo.
Is there anything else you are looking forward to outside of work in the next few months?
As we near the end of Q4, it's a busy period, but I'm looking forward to a well-deserved break over Christmas with friends and family, indulging in good food. It's the perfect time to recharge and gear up for a significant 2024 for Lyfegen, where we'll continue to serve our customers, engage with new ones, and grow as a company.
Our conversation with Simon ends on a high note, filled with anticipation for the contributions he will bring to Lyfegen. In the words of Girisha Fernando, our CEO, "we are very excited about Simon joining us. His experience is a valuable addition to our team, and we are confident he'll make a significant contribution to our mission. It's a pleasure to welcome him to Lyfegen."
Here’s to new beginnings and transformative journeys!
Welcome to our crew, Simon.
Amid the buzz of innovation at Lyfegen, we sat down with Simon, our newest team member, whose journey has brought a fresh...
Read More
READ MORE
At this years World Evidence, Pricing and Access event, Girisha Fernando, the CEO of Lyfegen, expressed excitement as he spoke about the company’s latest launched offering - the Lyfegen Model & Agreement Library. This unique learning resource is a true game-changer that builds upon the company’s existing product. It expands our horizons by allowing payers and market access & pricing professionals to explore over 2’500 real-life public agreements, and 18 drug pricing models from around the world. The library provides an unparalleled understanding of drug reimbursement models that help users make better informed choices like never before.
Selecting a drug reimbursement model is very complex, as manufacturers want quick market access, while payers may have many concerns, such as a drug’s efficacy and affordability. Fernando emphasized that the library bridges the gap by assisting payers and market access professionals in finding specific models that address each stakeholder’s concerns, and key real-life agreement examples, resulting in better-informed decision-making, and ultimately more efficient reimbursement processes.
“Because of rising healthcare costs and the increase of medical innovations, the thirst for knowledge and need for value-based healthcare capabilities has surged among healthcare payers and pharma companies across the world”, said Fernando, “That is why we are excited about launching the world’s largest database of real-world value-based agreements. It gives payers and pharma a unique insight into how to structure value-based agreements.”
But that’s not all – Fernando explained that the database is constantly evolving, being updated weekly with new public agreements, allowing stakeholders to be up to date on public agreements.
Overall, it is clear that the Lyfegen Model & Agreement Library is an invaluable groundbreaking tool, that is becoming indispensable in increasing the knowledge on drug and Cell & Gene Therapy reimbursement.
READ MORE
He’s analytical, a techie and has a fantastic gift for music! Yes, we are talking about the latest addition to our team, our very own “Technical Business Analyst” and Ukrainian superstar: Pavlo Lupandin!
Just last month we announced the arrival of our Lead Developer, Daniel, and now more great news follows as Lyfegen continues to lay focus on the technical team: we have our very own Technical Business Analyst, Pavlo!
“Pavlo’s sharpness and problem-solving skills just made it clear that we needed him in our team! His drive and commitment will bring great value to our patients, our customers and Lyfegen as we continue to sharpen our platform” says Lyfegen’s CEO, Girisha Fernando.
We are proud to have him as part of the team and sat down with him to give you a little more insight behind the musical talent and witty “Technical Business Analyst”:
Hi Pavlo! Tell us a little about yourself: where are you from and what is your work experience background?
Hello! I was born in the east of Ukraine, got the Master’s Degree in Economics in Kyiv, worked at one of the Big 4 companies for 3 years as an Auditor, following one year in the role of Business Analyst. After this experience, I found myself being a fresh ACCA Member, who wanted to dive into something not that accounting related. Business analysis has proven to be an interesting area where I can develop further capitalizing on my previous experience.
It’s interesting, that back in my audit days I’ve had some big healthcare-related projects. Who knew that it was only the beginning of working in this promising domain…
This is your first experience in the Health Tech industry – what triggered this move?
Pace of development. The Healthcare & IT industries are developing in overwhelming waves, and to ride the peak of those waves is a challenge – formidable, but a tempting one. As soon as this opportunity presented itself, I decided to chase it. We’ll see, where this decision will bring me in a couple of years.
You are joining Lyfegen as Technical Business Analyst. In simple terms: what will you be working on?
I would be occupied mainly with gathering, documenting and communicating the requirements of our customers. Ever heard of different communication barriers? Those I would try to eliminate, trying to grasp the very core of what has to be done for the maximum customer satisfaction and making sure the development team implements requirements as close as possible to the ideal.
What are your next personal goals with Lyfegen?
There are several of them. First, I strive for development as a professional, and I think Lyfegen will provide me with opportunities to do that. Second, I want to embrace that spirit of a high-growth startup – after working for a massive and complex company, the flexibility and freedom of Lyfegen is a breath of fresh air. And finally, I want to know new talented people. I already know, that the Lyfegen team has a great diversity, and I can’t wait to learn some interesting things from people of other countries and cultures.
What motivated you to join?
Purpose and value. As simple as that. I can see the purpose and value of what I’m doing. Obviously, we are at the beginning of this journey, and it’s a bit early to speak about “value-based pricing for everybody” or “pay only for what is really working” but…the concept is huge, and it will become the question of life and death for some patients. And I’ll do my best to make it as close to life as possible.
Enough about work! What passions do you have outside of Lyfegen?
Oh, you don’t want to hear a full list, I assure you. Let me try to sum it up quickly…Music, videogames and tabletop games – I play them all. A small collection of musical instruments – some of them are quite exotic, especially for my home country (banjo and djembe, for example). A bigger collection of tabletop games in different genres – the Lyfegen team can definitely expect a session or two in the nearest future. And a vast collection of videogames on different platforms…without much details let’s just agree there are a lot.
There are some other hobbies of mine, but I’d prefer to keep a couple of surprises up my sleeve!
We are proud to have the Lyfegen team continue to grow with such fantastic team-members!
READ MORE
When was the last time you used a business software or platform with a seamless user experience? Was it fun? Was it visually appealing? Probably not.
In this article, we consider the benefits of drastically improving the user experience of contracting software with examples of companies that have taken this step and inspired Lyfegen.
Contracting Software
Contracting software has usually been perceived as boring and unsophisticated, until recently. It takes careful application of innovation, user empathy, and design thinking to create unique, memorable experiences. Contracting software should focus on providing a pleasant user experience, especially when it is about patients. It takes away a whole lot of burden from the users while providing the most value.
There are new innovative designs of forms, pages, and workflows that keep users engaged and satisfied. Enjoyable contracting software should provide the most value while reducing the negative impacts.
Why great user experience is paramount to user satisfaction
Lyfegen takes cues from consumer web applications where innovation thrives. In 2020, Lyfegen conducted a big user experience review, where our product team needed to get to the bottom of what can make using the platform more enjoyable. “Why can't my business software look and feel enjoyable?" At Lyfegen we think that it can and it should. Every software should look and feel enjoyable.
We learned how users interact with the approval workflow using real-world data and feedback from customers. With these learnings, we further optimize the user experience and address issues or concerns that appear consistently. Users will bring expectations raised by consumer apps to their business applications. In response, we raise the bar to make work software equally appealing.
Lyfegen makes the whole process a breeze by rewarding customers with an amazing design experience, stepping up the game by making value-based contracting fun.
Some successful real-world examples
In consumer web applications, there are so many companies that are making drastic changes from the old design patterns to newer more innovative designs. These brands took the bold step of doing things differently while still providing the desired results. These are also the ones that Lyfegen took inspiration from.
Airbnb.com enables contracts between guests and hosts.
- Big beautiful imagery. People, smiles, quirky architecture.
- Emotional scenes that make you want to be there: cottage in the woods, hut on the beach, or a comfy townhouse.
But also clever UX: Forms disguised as slick toolbars. Generous date pickers that are easy to click
Mobile.de enables contracts between car buyers and sellers.
- Sensible defaults bootstrap your car search with a single click.
- Common search patterns detected from thousands of users turn into quick search shortcuts such as "City car" and "Family car.”
- Kickstarting a search avoids having to fill many form fields.
Upwork.com enables contracts between job seekers (talent) and hiring clients.
- The contracting path is optimized for speed. Both parties want to get the work under way quickly.
- Templates bootstrap and automate repetitive tasks. Why write every contract from scratch when you can extract best practices into a common library. Hint! This is what the Model Library will do in the Lyfegen Platform, watch out for a future blog post.
Lyfegen Platform mechanisms that bring speed and joy
The Lyfegen Platform enables contracts with pharmaceutical companies, healthcare payers and healthcare providers. At Lyfegen we understand that great user experience is paramount to user satisfaction. Hence, the reason why we pay critical attention to existing problems and proffer appropriate solutions to them is to create experiences that have the most long-lasting impact on the users.
What do we do differently to make these contracts fluid and useful?
- Forms: We use sensible defaults to make filling forms faster. Quick date pickers with popular date ranges (“Last month”, “This week”) help when scheduling is a big part of your work. Progressive disclosure reduces information overflow on forms – show only what the user needs to fill in right now to complete the task.
- Approvals: What is a modern way to do contract approvals? Chat threads! Users are familiar with chats from WhatsApp, Facebook and many other tools. A chat thread can be attached to virtually any item on the platform: agreements, claims, cases and refunds. The chat stays with the item so users don't lose context of what happened to the item.
- Tasks: How does the user know what they should be focusing on today? On the Home screen, the My tasks widget, email notifications, and the Recent Activity widget collect essential platform activity. You can see instantly what needs your attention today.
- Collaboration: @-mentions and chat threads offer quick resolution to questions. Tag a colleague and ask a question. They get a notification and provide an answer in the same thread. Problem resolved, move on! Chat works particularly well when conversation heats up and many users talk concurrently in real time.
- Interactive insights. Showing KPIs and key results on a dashboard is common practice. In fact, a dashboard is the favorite starting screen for many users. But charts really come alive when you interact with them. Have you used a mortgage calculator on a bank website? We also let users model alternative scenarios and see projections. “What will happen in my agreement next year if we continue like this?”
In conclusion, these are only a few examples of usage patterns that make contracting software modern and enjoyable. There is more room for improvement and the possibilities are endless. It requires the expertise which we at Lyfegen provide. Through our platform, we create brand new experiences in value-based contracting. Care to know more about contracting software? make sure to keep an eye out for our future posts.
READ MORE
Signs point to a greater role for indication-specific pricing in Medicare and Medicaid
Indication-specific pricing is a differential pricing method used by payers. Conceptually, it’s based on the idea that certain drugs with multiple indications have differential relative clinical benefit for each indication, or for each distinct patient subpopulation. The rationale behind indication-specific pricing is that the comparative clinical value of a drug can vary widely across indications, accordingly, so should the price if price and value are to align.
The figure below shows the difference between a uniform price – in this case, the price for indication A; green line – applied to all indications versus indication-based pricing.
Figure: Indication-specific pricing
Source: Institute for Clinical and Economic Review
The standard pricing model for pharmaceuticals constitutes a single price across all indications; in this instance, the price for indication A. It’s straightforward, as there is only one price. Besides, it’s the model stakeholders in the healthcare system have been accustomed to for decades. Moving to indication-specific pricing implies different prices for the four indications A, B, C, and D.
The most straightforward approach to indication-specific pricing by payers for a drug approved for, say, two different indications is to simply treat it as two different drugs. This would require two types of packaging, unique sets of National Drug Codes, for instance, for each of the packages, and for injectable drugs, two different Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) J codes.
Indication-specific pricing is appealing because it supports value-based healthcare by aligning price and value. But it’s not an easy task for both drug manufacturers and payers to set indication-specific prices, as this requires patient stratification, and ultimately anchoring of prices to certain measures of cost-effectiveness, such as the cost per Quality-Adjusted-Life-Year (QALY).
Thus far, the use of indication-specific pricing has been limited in the U.S. to several pilot programs. Specifically, the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) Express Scripts employs indication-specific pricing in number of different classes of cancer drugs, and the PBM CVS Caremark does this for several auto-immune diseases.
According to the PBMs, indication-specific pricing can provide a justification for higher prices for secondary indications that provide greater clinical benefits. In the context of value being assessed, this may help address payer resistance to expanding coverage to include supplemental indications. Partnering with Lyfegen may be the solution for manufacturers and payers alike, as its platform can put users on the right track towards successful implementation of indication-specific pricing arrangements. The Lyfegen platform identifies and operationalizes value-based indication-specific models in a cost-effective manner.
Indication specific pricing could alter prices for the biologic Avastin (bevacizumab), for example, when used for cervical cancer and colon cancer, respectively, depending on the willingness to pay threshold, which in turn may be based on different cost per QALY estimates.
Also, there are differences in the comparative value of the cancer drug Herceptin (trastuzumab) when used in different indications (metastatic versus adjuvant HER-2 positive breast cancer). A possible solution to this problem is for Herceptin to have two prices, one for its metastatic indication, and another for its adjuvant indication.
When Novartis won its groundbreaking CAR-T approval, Kymriah (tisagenlecleucel) in 2018, both the drugmaker and U.S. policymakers at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) touted performance-based and indication-specific pricing as ways to help finance the $475,000 therapy. Unfortunately, the CMS backed away from a plan to implement a value-based contract for Kymriah. This decision may be revisited, as the pipeline is filled with cell and gene therapies that have large upfront costs for CMS, which must somehow be managed.
Moreover, given the many value-based experiments state Medicaid agencies are currently involved in – from value-based formularies to subscription models for the purchase of hepatitis C medications – this could spur more use of indication-specific pricing in Medicaid.
New “best price” rules in Medicaid went into effect July 1, 2022. The reason for changes in best price rules is to induce more use of value-based contract arrangements, including indication-specific pricing. Newly established protocols allow for the reporting of multiple best prices.
Specifically, to facilitate the broad adoption of these types of contracts, the novel best price rule allows drug manufacturers to report a range of best prices to the extent they may be determined by varying discounts under value-based pricing arrangements, along with the regular best price under any non-value-based pricing arrangements.
Here, value-based pricing arrangements are outcomes-based contracts which vary rebates based on patient outcomes. This can be stratified by indication. In this context, lower discounts may be offered for patients with better-than-expected outcomes in certain indications, and higher discounts for poorer outcomes and lower-than-expected clinical effectiveness of a drug in one or more indications.
About the author
Cohen is a health economist with more than 25 years of experience analyzing, publishing, and presenting on drug and diagnostic pricing and reimbursement, as well as healthcare policy reform initiatives. For 21 years, Cohen was an academic at Tufts University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Amsterdam. Currently, and for the past five years, Cohen is an independent healthcare analyst and consultant on a variety of research, teaching, speaking, editing, and writing projects.
READ MORE
The transition to value-based care is happening at a slower pace than policymakers and healthcare industry leaders had hoped. Stakeholders are struggling to negotiate and then operationalize these complex agreements.
The adoption of value-based drug pricing agreements is not widespread in the U.S., despite the stated strong interest from policymakers and the healthcare industry in tying the price of drugs to their benefit to patient outcomes and value to the health system. Outside of the government Medicare and Medicaid programs, the fee-for-service, volume-based payment model still accounted for almost 56% of commercial health payer contracts as of 2018.
Many value-based pharmaceutical arrangements are not disclosed publicly, making it difficult to know how many are implemented in the U.S. each year. According to the trade group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), there were 73 publicly disclosed value-based drug contracts at the end of 2019. A study published the same year in the American Journal of Managed Care (AJMC) suggested that, because of the confidentiality surrounding most agreements, analysts are underestimating the number of value-based pricing arrangements in effect and their impact on the U.S. pharmaceutical market.
In this article, we will highlight some concerns a payer and manufacturer considering a value-based drug pricing arrangement may each face, and give some insight into why these agreements aren't more widely accepted.
Payers modeling risk
A 2019 survey by the National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC) and the Duke-Margolis Center for Health policy showed that for payers, top deal-breakers in negotiations for value-based pricing arrangements were disagreements over incentive mechanisms for participation and financial terms. From the payer’s standpoint, a new, high-cost drug–especially one that addresses unmet needs or rare and orphan diseases–is worth the risk if it brings innovative, effective treatment for patients who may have no other options. But payers want to share that risk with the manufacturer when there’s the potential for a substantial impact on the payer’s budget.
Based on publicly available information, oncology, hematology, cardiology, and endocrinology drug treatments are common subjects of value-based pricing arrangements. These treatments have well-defined patient populations, easy-to-see impact measures, endpoints, and cures that make them more appealing to payers. It’s much more difficult to objectively measure the patient health outcomes for treatments covering pain management or mental health.
Payers also prefer treatments that show clinical results in a few months, not years. Tracking a patient’s health to confirm a drug’s value becomes more difficult when a drug takes years to show evidence of long-term benefits. For example, a longer-term benefit of treatment may be the avoidance of hospitalization. In the U.S., patients may leave a payer’s plan at any time, so this future cost may not be captured in the data collection under a current agreement.
Related Post: Value-based pricing vs best price? Medicaid's best price problem
Manufacturers sharing risk
When considering coverage of a new drug, payers might question the results of clinical trials, especially if there is limited real-world data because of an expedited FDA approval. So manufacturers must continue to create opportunities to generate real-world evidence that convinces payers of their drug’s value. And they must be ready and willing to share in the risk that a drug may not meet expectations in phase 4 confirmatory trials.
When a new drug has strong competition in the market, manufacturers need real-world evidence to differentiate their product and show their treatment brings better clinical outcomes and value than other options available. Value-based drug pricing agreements are an opportunity to fill that knowledge gap. Pharmaceutical companies not willing to do them to get that real-world evidence may lose out to those who are ready to take on innovative pharmaceutical agreements.
Contract partners building data-gathering and analytics capacity
In the 2019 NPC survey, manufacturers cited data collection challenges and disagreements on outcome measures among their top deal breakers.
Choosing the right contract model to fit the product and the capabilities of the contract partners is the first step. This means researching publicly available value-based drug pricing arrangements to learn the rewards and pitfalls of various contract models. All the contract partners must agree on the key metrics to be measured and how the data will be used to determine a drug’s value to patient health outcomes.
For the data-sharing component of value-based pricing arrangements, contract partners must develop a relationship that includes trust, cooperation, and an unusual level of transparency. Sometimes this relationship is best fostered and protected by the support services of a neutral third party, especially when one or both of the contract partners doesn’t have the technical capacity or administrative staff to operationalize a value-based drug pricing agreement.
The Lyfegen Solution
Value-based drug pricing arrangements are hard, but Lyfegen can make them easier. If your organization is considering a value-based pricing agreement, start by researching real-world examples of drug pricing arrangements in Lyfegen’s Models and Agreements Library. With a collection of more than 20 drug pricing models and over 1000 value-based agreements in use worldwide, the Lyfegen Library can help you discern what pricing arrangement is appropriate for your goals, your current operational capabilities, and your contract partners.
Lyfegen’s value-based contracting software can then operationalize the contract model you choose. We help healthcare insurances, pharma, and medtech companies implement and scale value-based drug pricing contracts with greater efficiency and transparency. The Lyfegen Platform collects real-world data and uses intelligent algorithms to provide valuable insights on drug performance and cost.
By enabling the shift away from volume-based, fee-for-service healthcare to value-based healthcare, Lyfegen increases access to healthcare treatments and their affordability.
To learn more about Lyfegen’s software solutions, contact us to book a demo.
READ MORE
With the right tools, healthcare providers can collect real-world evidence about a drug’s value and benefit. How do we convince them to share the data through value-based purchasing arrangements?
In the U.S., lawmakers, payers, and the public are putting pressure on healthcare providers to help transform the healthcare system in the U.S. Despite resistance from healthcare providers to abandon traditional fee-for-service models, the U.S. healthcare industry continues trending towards the adoption of value-based payment models. This transformation includes the ambitious but necessary goals of producing better public health outcomes, decreasing health disparities, increasing affordability for patients, and decreasing the cost of healthcare overall.
At the heart of value-based pharmaceutical pricing is collecting the right data to measure and assess the benefit of a treatment. Real-world evidence is needed to determine a drug’s contribution to health outcomes. As workers on the front lines, healthcare providers are in an excellent position to collect data on a drug’s performance. With this information, decision-makers can arrive at a drug price that reflects its true value to patient health outcomes.
Patients are having trouble paying for their prescriptions
A 2019 Kaiser Family Foundation Health Tracking Poll revealed three out of ten patients surveyed—ages 50 to 64 years old—stated they had difficulty paying for their medications. Drug prices, price increases, and copays and deductibles are preventing some patients from starting, or continuing, the treatments they need.
In the U.S., hospital system clinicians and independent physician practices are expected to choose the best treatments for their patients without consideration of the patient’s insurance coverage status. Providers often have little to no idea of the costs their patients will bear without insurance, after insurance deductibles and copays are met, or after a drug maker’s patient assistance program intervenes.
A patient’s cost-related nonadherence may include not filling prescriptions, skipping doses, taking a lower dose than prescribed, and experimenting with non-prescription, over-the-counter treatments; these strategies affect patient health outcomes.
When patients are already struggling to cover prescription costs, they can’t afford to waste money on low-quality treatments that are ineffective or of little benefit to their health outcomes. Providers also don’t want to waste time with treatments that don’t produce better health outcomes. Therefore, most healthcare providers are open to exploring value-based pharmaceutical purchasing agreements that can allow access to newer, more effective treatments that patients can afford.
The benefits of value-based purchasing arrangements for healthcare providers and patients
Healthcare providers willing to enter value-based pharmaceutical purchasing arrangements are rewarded with many benefits, including:
• Improved quality of care and better health outcomes for patients
Providers in value-based purchasing arrangements gather real-world evidence of the effectiveness of a drug. They collect data that reveal which treatments are the most clinically effective and which add little or no value to patient health outcomes. This could lead to new insights into best practices and new clinical guidelines and protocols.
• Increased access to innovative, more effective treatments
Under value-based purchasing arrangements, providers and patients can gain access to brand new, high-cost prescription drugs. Real-world data gathered during contract implementation reveal the new drug’s benefit to health outcomes. Value-based purchasing can also encourage providers to try other lower-cost treatment options like biosimilars and new generics.
• Greater operational efficiency and reduced overall cost of healthcare
Identifying and eliminating low-value treatments through value-based arrangements reduces the waste of resources and time for both providers and patients. The provider’s clinical operations can become more efficient and cost-effective, with positive effects on revenue and patient satisfaction.
Healthcare providers have concerns about value-based purchasing arrangements
Despite the upside, providers are wary; value-based purchasing arrangements are complex. They require careful consideration of what metrics are to be measured. Stakeholder partners must navigate a new level of transparency and data sharing. And naturally, each partner in the agreement wants to include as many protective contingencies clauses as they can think of.
Providers want to be sure implementation of the agreement doesn’t become an untenable administrative burden for their staff. There are concerns about the technology upgrades needed to collect, protect, and analyze the data generated by value-based purchasing agreements. Will there be interoperability issues with the existing electronic medical records system? How will the data be interpreted and presented to provide actionable insights?
The safest and easiest way to overcome these barriers and get help to operationalize value-based purchasing agreements is to use a vendor partner with a customizable software solution.
The Lyfegen software solution
Lyfegen created a software solution that addresses these concerns about shifting from fee-for-service payment models to value-based purchasing arrangements. We help healthcare providers, insurances, pharma, and medtech companies implement and scale value-based contracts for specialty drugs with greater efficiency and transparency.
The Lyfegen Platform collects real-world data and uses intelligent algorithms to provide valuable insights on drug performance and cost in value-based contracts. In supporting the transition from volume-based to value-based purchasing arrangements, Lyfegen increases affordability and access to health treatments for patients.
To learn more about Lyfegen’s value-based contracting platform, book a demo.
READ MORE
Lyfegen is building the leading contracting software solution to support value-based drug pricing arrangements. This mission requires a hands-on team to optimize all our processes. With Anca Marin joining our team as the new business analyst, we are set up for success.
We sat down with Anca to learn about her experience, her goals, and her aspirations.
Hello Anca, and welcome to Lyfegen! Please tell us a little about yourself: Where are you from, and what’s your educational and professional background?
Hello, my name is Anca. I am based in Bucharest, Romania. I graduated with a bachelor’s degree in accounting and later earned a master’s degree in business management. Before joining Lyfegen, I worked in finance for three and a half years in various industries, such banking, insurance, and ICT.
What excites you about being a business analyst?
The novelty – I believe it is a role where you never get bored as there is always a new situation, idea, or feature to build up, and it is exactly the challenge I want.
Why did you decide to join Lyfegen?
I find meaning and desire in making a change for the better. I also enjoy the work culture and the idea of being part of an innovative company while making a real impact.
What is something you want to learn or improve this year?
This is my first role as a business analyst. Therefore, this year, I want to focus on growing my knowledge and skills as a business analyst, as well as in software development and the healthcare industry.
How will your know-how help to improve our customers’ experience of the Lyfegen platform?
Given my previous roles, I would say that I was usually the one handling challenging and complex situations when dealing with customers. Through these experiences, I learned to find ways to deliver the best results for customers, and I will continue to do so. I also describe myself as being super detail-oriented – and details always make the difference.
Let’s get personal: What are your favorite things to do in your free time?
Besides my full-time job at Lyfegen, I am also a handball goalkeeper. I have been playing since I was 11 years old, and I usually go to two to three training sessions a week. However, I like sports in general, so if I am not on the handball court, I am probably playing other sports, like basketball or tennis.
I also like traveling and nature and activities away from the big cities, such as hiking, backpacking, and camping.
Is there anything else you are looking forward to outside of work this year?
Outside of work, my plans for this year are to get a motorcycle, take trips to the mountains, and make great memories!
We are proud to have you with us, Anca!
Sign up & be the first to know about INNOVATIONS
* By sending this message, you agree to our privacy policy.
