ICER: Hero or Villain in the Story of Value-Based Drug Pricing?
READ MORE
.webp)
READ MORE
This influential player in the U.S. pharmaceutical sector is changing the dynamics of price negotiations between payers and drug manufacturers. But is ICER helping bring healthcare costs down or contributing to rising drug prices?
Who is ICER?
Over the last decade, a small, Boston-based independent, nonprofit research organization has become a powerful influence over the formulary exclusion decisions and drug prices commercial and government payers will pay. Founded in 2006, The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) was relatively unknown before 2014. But after gaining national recognition for an assessment about the cost-effectiveness of a Hepatitis C therapy regime, ICER quickly became a trusted source of data and pharmaceutical economics research.
ICER’s assessments are cited in national policy debate and in pharmaceutical price negotiations between insurers and drug manufacturers. According to ICER, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, some state Medicaid agencies and over 75% of private insurers, pharmacy benefit managers, and self-insuring organizations now use ICER’s drug pricing assessments and resources in their policy decision making.
What does ICER do?
ICER conducts clinical and economic assessments of drug treatments to calculate what it considers a drug’s fair market price. They consider a drug’s value and effectiveness for treating the illness for which it was designed, followed by a budget impact analysis to estimate how much the national health system could save with its suggested cost-effective pricing. Using this data, ICER analyses calculate a suggested drug price for payers where cost-effectiveness aligns with the value of the increased benefit to the patient’s health. ICER says it seeks feedback from all stakeholders—manufacturers, clinicians, payers, patients and families.
How is ICER affecting national drug prices?
A leading pharmaceutical economics expert, Dr. Adam J. Fein of Drug Channels Institute, reports that pharmaceutical list prices rose by up to 15% from 2010 to 2015. During the next five years, up to mid-2020—as ICER rose to national prominence—list price growth dropped to 4.2%.
In 2018, ICON, a leading healthcare industry consultant, conducted a survey about the influence of ICER’s work on drug pricing and national healthcare costs. The ICON survey revealed that ICER’s cost effectiveness metrics and price recommendations are affecting contract negotiations between drug manufacturers and payers and driving drug prices down.
Most payers are no longer willing to accept whatever price drug manufacturers decide to charge. Over a third of the payers in the ICON survey stated it was likely, or extremely likely, that they would ask for a rebate from the drug manufacturer to reduce the cost of a drug to match ICER’s suggested price. In response, manufacturers will increase their drug list price, then offset part of the price increase with larger rebates to payers—this is known as the gross-to-net bubble.
How is ICER affecting access to expensive drug treatments?
Out of the 90 participants ICON surveyed during a pharmaceutical industry webinar, 65% believed ICER had a moderate to significant impact on formulary decisions; ICON’s research also showed that payers who use ICER’s cost-effective pricing were more likely to use strict prior authorization requirements for some drugs to encourage clinicians and patients to use the most cost-effective drug treatments. Critics point to this as one of the harmful consequences of ICER’s work.
What do critics of ICER say?
Some patient advocate groups—with the support of pharmaceutical manufacturers—are concerned that by encouraging payers to exclude less cost-effective but still clinically effective treatments in their formularies, ICER is promoting payer discrimination against some patients who need expensive specialty medications, such as the elderly, people with disabilities, and those living with rare diseases.
Critics such as The Alliance for Aging Research point to data that show ICER’s impact on payer demands for higher rebates are causing increasing out-of-pocket costs for seniors using Part D Medicare benefits. Manufacturers raise their list prices, then meet payer demands for ICER’s suggested drug pricing using the gross-to-net bubble rebates. However, some payers still calculate the co-insurance percentages that patients pay for their prescriptions based on the manufacturer’s full, undiscounted list price.
Lyfegen can help implement value-based drug pricing agreements
Despite the debate about whether ICER is a help or a hinderance in the work of healthcare cost containment and better patient access, ICER’s influence will probably continue to grow as value-based contracts and risk-sharing agreements become more common. Lyfegen’s value-based contracting platform operationalizes and manages these complex drug pricing payment arrangements by seamlessly capturing and analyzing data.
Lyfegen’s software can help your organization implement any value-based contract, covering multiple therapeutic areas, with public or private payers. Contact us to learn more about our platform and to book a demo.
READ MORE
Families forced to hold a fundraiser because their child’s healthcare system won’t save his life.
Recently, the news has once again been covering a family that is struggling to cover the cost of the most expensive drug in America for their son, Devdan. The insurer refused coverage of the treatment for his rare disease, totaling $2.125 million.
Devdan was born with Spinal Muscle Atrophy (SMA). SMA damages the nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord, causing progressive muscle weakness and problems breathing, speaking, swallowing, and walking. Zolgensma’s onetime gene therapy treats SMA and has earned the title of the most expensive drug in America.
It is currently Devdan’s only hope for a normal life. In this case, to save their child’s health and future, the parent’s initiated a fundraiser through Ray of Hope Foundation.
Most of us probably don’t consider what or how hospitals pay for their supplies. When we pay our medical insurance premiums, we buy a plan and think we’re covered in case of a medical emergency. But what many families of children with rare disease have learned, that’s not always the case. Rare diseases aren’t funded the same way common medical conditions are paid for. There aren’t enough patients to warrant extensive research and treatment developments. Consequently, medical care is often unconventional. As a result of these novel treatments, patients with rare disease often receive Surprise Medical Billing or are denied coverage altogether.
Value Based Healthcare (VBHC) Saves Lives
Medications and treatments that deviate from the routine can be a financial disaster for hospitals, families, care providers, and health systems. And organizations with a strong commitment to value-based healthcare have seen sustainable gains. In this case, had Devdan’s medical facility operated under a value-based healthcare reimbursement model, this life-saving treatment would have been available and the critical care for this child could have begun without delay.
Calculating value-based reimbursements measures numerous points of quality and the overall health of a population. Unlike a fee-for-service model, value-based healthcare providers must report data to payers and demonstrate improvement. The VBHC model has many advantages, including improved patient satisfaction, a reduction in healthcare delivery costs, and better health for the patient populations being served.
Better management of financial challenges with Lyfegen
The VBHC model has many advantages, including improved patient satisfaction, a reduction in healthcare delivery costs, and better health for the patient populations being served. Luckily, Devdan’s Ray of Hope fundraising effort has achieved the needed target of $2.86M. More than 29’000 people came together to raise this enormous amount in such a short period of time to give Devdan a second chance at life.
This unfortunate scenario is common for those dealing with rare disease, and those in need of extraordinary medical care. Had Devdan’s insurance participated in a value-based program, the necessary medicine could have been provided for with no delay in treatment. As the health care market adjusts to the pandemic and prepares for the future, leaders must decide whether to accelerate their participation in value-based healthcare to meet the clinical and financial challenges that will remain for years to come.
To learn more about Lyfegen and request a free demo, contact us today.
READ MORE
Manufacturers, payers, and health systems disagree on how to assess the value of new, high-cost treatments such as cell and gene therapies. These stakeholders see a solution in outcome-based drug pricing agreements.
Girisha Fernando, CEO of Lyfegen, was recently invited to take part in a roundtable discussion about cell and gene therapies (CGTs), hosted by the global consulting firm, Oliver Wyman. Over 20 industry leaders, payers, and third-party solution providers were in attendance.
Oliver Wyman released a white paper that summarizes the insights, challenges, and opportunities uncovered during the discussion. A major area of concern among the participants is preparing and equipping payers and health systems with the means to assess the value and health benefits of new, high-cost CGTs.
Outcome-based contracting is the future for cell and gene therapies
According to marketresearch.com, the global CGTs market—valued just short of USD $5 billion in 2021—is forecast to reach almost USD $37 billion by 2027. In anticipation of an estimated total of 60 CGTs available on the market by the end of the decade, industry and health system stakeholders recognize the need to move towards contracting that includes an outcome-based drug pricing component.
Looking for Pharmaceutical Forecasting Software?
Get personalized advice and take the next step in enhancing your pharmaceutical planning with cutting-edge forecasting solutions.
The roundtable participants agreed that using outcome-based contracts (OBCs) for CGTs is a critical lever for ensuring patient access to innovative therapies. OBCs can reward manufacturers for new drug development while addressing the payers’ concerns about clinical effectiveness and management of financial risk.
Why outcome-based contracting is best for cell and gene therapies
The Oliver Wyman white paper lists a few reasons CGTs are well suited for value-based drug pricing through outcome-based contracting, including:
• A lack of real-world clinical evidence about the therapy when first introduced to market
• Uncertainty about the product’s value proposition
• High perceived cost versus the current standard of care
Fernando adds an additional perspective to the conversation: “Another underlying need for OBCs and underlying innovative payment models is the fact that the Pharma’s business model is changed with CGTs. Since they promise significant patient benefit, and in many cases even cure, this cure is being priced into one price. This contrasts with the previous pharma model of gaining continuous revenue by supplying continuous treatments over several cycles.”
Challenges to implementation of outcome-based contracts
At present, several challenges hinder the widespread adoption of outcome-based agreements. Oliver Wyman’s analyses point to difficulties such as agreement on a starting price, deciding how to measure patient outcomes, and choosing appropriate follow-up timelines.
Another one of the fundamental difficulties in executing OBCs is capturing quality real-world data. There was consensus among the roundtable participants about the need to collaborate to build innovative multi-stakeholder data infrastructure and systems that support real-world evidence collection about patient outcomes. Current attempts to build performance data gathering into existing data systems often lead to increased fragmentation of data across different systems that are not interoperable.
For many reasons, the real-world data that is available is often incomplete or of poor quality. All industry and health system stakeholders want to balance transparency with safeguarding proprietary information. Healthcare providers don’t see data collection as their priority; they must be incentivized or compensated for taking on this additional administrative burden. And patients asked to self-report outcomes want to feel in control of how and with whom they share their health outcomes.
Collecting quality patient data
Empowering patients as decision-makers in their care encourages them to report their treatment results. Regarding patient self-reporting of health outcomes, Fernando poses some additional considerations:
“Should patients receiving a CGT also have a “responsibility” in terms of data reporting etc. as health systems commit to curing these patients? This would be needed to track long-term outcomes of patients, as well as provide a positive effect on evidence & learnings.”
Fernando also sees more patient-centric opportunities for growth: “In addition to the CGT, what other kinds of services should be built around these patients to improve patient health outcomes?”
A supportive ecosystem for outcome-based contracts
The roundtable identified three key principles for advancing the data infrastructure and ecosystem needed for executing OBC: data ownership, data interoperability, and data access and security. They uplifted the role of third-party innovators and solution providers like Lyfegen, whose value-based contracting software addresses these difficult IT issues and simplifies the execution of complex pricing models. By facilitating the shift away from volume-based and fee-for-service healthcare to value-based healthcare, Lyfegen increases affordability and access to high-cost healthcare treatments like CGTs.
The Lyfegen Platform
Lyfegen’s software platform helps 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 in value-based contracts.
To learn more about the Lyfegen Platform and software solutions, contact us to book a demo.
READ MORE
Healthcare payers and insurance companies are under pressure to fight rising drug prices in the U.S. Payers have the difficult task of figuring out if a manufacturer’s proposed wholesale price for a new drug is justified. Value-based purchasing agreements facilitate the data sharing needed to determine a drug’s fair price.
U.S. drug expenditures are among the highest in the world
It’s well-documented that the U.S. spends more on prescription drugs than other high-income countries. After adjusting for rebates and discounts, U.S. drug prices are almost 200% of prices in other comparable countries, according to a 2021 Rand Corporation report.
High drug prices in the U.S. translate to a per capita expenditure almost double what consumers and payers in other developed countries are paying. Peterson-KFF’s Health System Tracker shows that in 2019, U.S. payers and consumers spent a yearly average of $1,126 per capita for prescription medications, with $963 covered by payers and $164 in patient out-of-pocket costs. In other high-income countries, average annual drug expenditures were $552 per capita, with $88 in yearly out-of-pocket costs for patients.
U.S. drug expenditures keep rising
The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists reports that in 2021 overall pharmaceutical expenditures in the U.S. grew by 7.7% over the previous year’s costs; and for 2022, they predict another 4-6% increase in drug spending.
According to the healthcare consulting firm IQVIA, a total of 6.3 billion prescriptions were filled in the U.S. in 2020. Around 90% of those prescriptions were filled using lower-priced generic drugs. Lower-priced generic and biosimilar drugs have helped slow the rise of the annual national drug expenditures, however these account for only around 20% of total drug costs.
Increased use of pharmaceuticals (especially generics), drug price hikes, and high-cost new drugs coming to the market are contributing to the rise in overall drug expenditures. In particular, new, brand-name specialty drugs for conditions such as diabetes, cancer, autoimmune, and other rare diseases are bringing up the average of drug prices.
The use of specialty drugs increased from 27% of total U.S. drug spending in 2010 to 53% in 2020, according to IQVIA. They forecast up to 55 new pharmaceutical products per year will be brought to market between 2020 and 2025. Pharmaceutical forecasting software can help you stay on top of these changes and plan effectively.
Payers will have to decide whether to cover the cost of these new products and at what price. New-to-market specialty drugs are excellent candidates for value-based purchasing agreements.
Value-based purchasing contracts provide the data that reveal if a drug is worth its price
Payers have the difficult task of figuring out if a manufacturer’s proposed wholesale price for a new drug is justified. They need to protect their bottom line by minimizing the risk of paying for ineffective, over-priced drugs. Private insurance plans, Medicaid, and the Veterans Administration often negotiate prices for new treatments with pharmaceutical companies without real-world data to demonstrate the drug’s clinical and cost-effectiveness compared to other treatments for the same health condition.
If their product is eligible, some pharmaceutical manufacturers conduct fast-track clinical trials for FDA approval using surrogate endpoint measures to show that a new drug is safe and more effective than a placebo. But these trials provide limited data and they aren’t the comprehensive comparative effectiveness review (CER) needed for determining the value and fair price for the drug. Independent research firms, such as the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), conduct CERs that provide insight into pricing for drug categories, but they don’t research every new drug coming onto the market.
Value-based purchasing agreements fill this knowledge gap by collecting the real-world evidence of a new drug’s clinical value. The data sharing among stakeholders that comes with these outcome-based contracts gives a fuller picture of the drug’s impact on patient health outcomes.
Value-based purchasing contracts strengthen stakeholder partnerships
While acknowledging that the future of healthcare is moving from fee-for-service to value-based healthcare, providers and payers have been slow to adopt value-based contracting. Operationalizing these agreements is complex. They consume large amounts of time and financial resources at start-up, not to mention the trust, cooperation, and commitment required from stakeholders.
It can be quite difficult to agree on a drug price that satisfies all stakeholders in terms of evidence-based clinical value and comparative competitor pricing. What and who determines a drug’s value? Value-based purchasing arrangements align the stakeholders’ metrics for measuring value to determine a fair price for a drug. Over time, this new level of transparency and cooperation can foster greater trust between contract partners and help break down the barriers blocking the transition out of fee-for-service to value-based healthcare.
The Lyfegen Platform
Manufacturers, payers, and providers all possess part of the data about a drug’s value in their databases. In the past, automated tools to safely collect, centralize, and analyze stakeholder data were non-existent. Thanks to innovations in artificial intelligence, new software platforms for value-based contracts can facilitate efficient coordination among the stakeholders to achieve a high level of secure data sharing.
Lyfegen’s software platform helps healthcare insurances, pharma and medtech companies implement and scale value-based purchasing 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 in value-based contracts. By enabling the shift away from volume-based and fee-for-service healthcare to value-based healthcare, Lyfegen increases access to healthcare treatments and their affordability.
READ MORE
How the U.S. Institute for Clinical and Economic Review is reshaping market access
In the U.S., comparative clinical effectiveness analyses are gaining traction as ways to inform coverage, pricing, and reimbursement of pharmaceuticals by both public and commercial payers. And, while use of cost-effectiveness data to inform coverage decisions is prohibited in the public sector (Medicare and Medicaid) it can be used in the commercial sector.
A recently released Xcenda analysis shows that 70% of U.S. commercial payers identified comparative clinical- and cost-effectiveness evidence in the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review’s (ICER) published reviews as the most important items in the reports with respect to informing coverage and reimbursement decisions.
Additionally, 50% of payers said that long-term cost-effectiveness – for example, cost-per-Quality-Adjusted-Life-Year – is “very impactful” in informing the decision-making process. And, as the figure below shows, 52% used results from an ICER assessment in pricing negotiations while 38% implemented a prior authorization protocol based on an ICER evaluation.
Source: Xcenda, International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) annual meeting presentation, May 2022
Further bolstering the Xcenda analysis, an Evidera study from late 2019 suggested that ICER can influence value-based benchmark prices. The use of value-based pricing is increasing in the U.S. And, where appropriate, ICER favors the use of value-based contracting to align price and value. In fact, in certain instances such as gene therapies, ICER believes that such treatments can only be viewed as being cost-effective if value-based contracting is applied. 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 value-based pricing arrangements.
To illustrate the impact ICER assessments can have with respect to pricing and reimbursement decisions, let’s consider ICER’s evaluation of PCSK9 inhibitors – indicated for individuals with inadequately treated levels of LDL-cholesterol. In 2016, two PCSK9 inhibitors were approved by the Food and Drug Administration: Alirocumab (Praluent) and evolocumab (Repatha). ICER reviewed the drugs’ clinical- and cost-effectiveness and suggested the list prices needed to be substantially reduced to make the treatments cost-effective.
What ensued was the establishment of several ICER-payer partnerships that led to formulary exclusions of these therapies and subsequent “price wars” as manufacturers of Praluent and Repatha drastically lowered their list prices to remain competitive.
Broadly, cardiovascular disease represents a competitive market with an established standard of care that includes numerous therapeutic options for most patients. Here, payers were able to leverage ICER’s assessment of the PCSK9 inhibitors in negotiations with drug manufacturers. In turn, this led, for example, to one manufacturer lowering the wholesale acquisition cost of Praluent to $5,850, down from $14,600.
In other therapeutic categories with much less competition, ICER’s impact is less clear-cut. For example, in a therapeutic area such as spinal muscular atrophy, characterized by low prevalence, high mortality rates, and lack of effective treatments, ICER’s cost-effectiveness analysis either did not influence payer coverage - as with the drug Spinraza (nusinersen) - or may have been leveraged by the manufacturer to push for wider acceptance among payers -as with Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec).
In 2019, ICER published its final recommendations on spinal muscular atrophy therapies. To meet an ICER-imposed cost-effectiveness threshold of up to $150,000 per life year gained, Spinraza would need to be priced at a maximum of $145,000 for the first year of treatment and $72,000 annually for subsequent years. This was considerably lower than Spinraza’s list price of $750,000 for the first year and $375,000 annually for subsequent years. ICER also recommended that Zolgensma could be priced at up to $2.1 million per treatment to be considered cost-effective, which turned out to be in line with its list price of $2.125 million at launch.
Interestingly, although ICER’s analysis found that Zolgensma was cost-effective while Spinraza was not, payer coverage for both drugs followed a similar trend over time, with payers restricting access in the initial periods immediately after launch and later relaxing these criteria.
The shift in coverage criteria could be due to an initial reflex response that payers have to restrict access to extremely expensive medications, followed by a loosening of criteria. Historically, this has been the case. Subsequently, after acknowledging the dramatic clinical benefits that Spinraza and Zolgensma have demonstrated in clinical trials for treating a disease with no other therapeutic options, payers relent, if you will. Also, in the case of Zolgensma, ICER’s evaluation may have led to a further easing of payer restrictions.
Of course, cost-effectiveness analyses, such as the ones published by ICER, must invariably be adapted for local use. Context matters, nationally, but also intra-nationally, in different jurisdictions and sub-markets. Further challenges include local or federal (national) regulations which may prevent the use of cost-effectiveness analyses under certain circumstances; stakeholders’ resistance to adopting such analyses or be bound by their findings; and the general lack of available (and appropriate) cost-effectiveness data.
Nevertheless, there is a consistent trend which points to the growing influence of ICER evaluations on payer decision making, specifically with respect to drug pricing and reimbursement. Clinical- and cost-effectiveness data can be used to determine whether to cover a technology, inform the use of prior authorization or other conditions of reimbursement, and serve as a benchmark for price negotiations with manufacturers.
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 n a variety of research, teaching, speaking, editing, and writing projects.
.jpg)
READ MORE
Basel, Switzerland / Boston, USA – December 11, 2024
Lyfegen, a global leader in drug rebate management technology, today announced the successful close of its additional CHF 5 million Series A funding round. The round was led by TX Ventures, a leading European fintech investor, with additional participation from aMoon, a global health-tech venture capital firm, and other institutional investors. This funding represents a significant milestone for Lyfegen, enabling the company to accelerate its global expansion and innovation efforts, with a focus on extending its reach beyond Europe into new markets worldwide.
Addressing Rising Drug Costs with Intelligent Drug Pricing and Rebate Solutions
The healthcare industry faces increasing challenges with rising drug costs and the complexity of managing growing volumes of rebate agreements. For payers and pharmaceutical companies, manual processes often lead to inefficiencies, compliance risks, and operational delays. Lyfegen is transforming this process with its fully automated platform that ensures secure, real-time tracking, compliance, and operational efficiency at scale.
Today, 50+ leading healthcare organizations across 8 geographical markets rely on Lyfegen’s solutions to streamline 4'000+ rebate agreements while tracking over $1 billion in pharmaceutical revenue and managing over $0.5 billion in rebates annually. These solutions enable healthcare organizations to improve pricing strategies, accelerate access to modern treatments, and better manage rebate complexities.
Learn more about Retrospective Payment System
Scaling Globally with a Leading Rebate Management Platform
Already used by healthcare payers and pharmaceutical companies in Europe, North America, and the Middle East, Lyfegen’s platform is poised for broader global deployment. By automating rebate management, the platform enables healthcare organizations to simplify complex agreements, save time, reduce errors, and enhance financial performance.
“The market for innovative and personalized treatments is expanding rapidly, but with that comes increasingly complex and costly pricing models,” says Girisha Fernando, CEO of Lyfegen. “Lyfegen’s automated solution simplifies this complexity, helping payers and pharmaceutical companies unlock the full potential of rebates while improving patient access to modern treatments. With this funding and our new partners, we’re ideally positioned to accelerate our growth and make a meaningful impact globally.”
Jens Schleuniger, Partner at TX Ventures, adds: “Lyfegen is at the forefront of innovation, offering payers and pharmaceutical companies a powerful solution to address the rising complexities of pharma rebates. We’re proud to lead this funding round and support Lyfegen’s mission to bring greater efficiency and cost savings to healthcare systems worldwide.”
About Lyfegen
Lyfegen is an independent provider of rebate management software designed for the healthcare industry. Lyfegen solutions are used by health insurances, governments, hospital payers, and pharmaceutical companies around the globe to dramatically reduce the administrative burden of managing complex drug pricing agreements and to optimize rebates and get better value from those agreements. Lyfegen maintains the world’s largest digital repository of innovative drug pricing models and public agreements and offers access to a robust drug pricing simulator designed to dynamically simulate complex drug pricing scenarios to understand the full financial impact. Headquartered in Basel, Switzerland, the company was founded in 2018 and has a market presence in Europe, North America, and the Middle East. Learn more at Lyfegen.com.
About TX Ventures
TX Ventures is one of Europe’s emerging leaders in early-stage fintech investing. The venture capital fund invests predominantly in B2B Fintech across Europe - preferably in seed to series A stage.
For more information about Lyfegen’s solutions or to schedule an interview, please contact:
marketing@lyfegen.com
READ MORE
In an industry often characterized by incremental changes, Girisha Fernando, the CEO and founder of Lyfegen, is making leaps. We sat down with Fernando to discuss the recent landmark partnership between Lyfegen and Newfoundland and Labrador Health Services—a collaboration that heralds a significant shift in the Canadian healthcare landscape.
Your partnership with Newfoundland and Labrador Health Services is quite a milestone. Can you share with us what this means for the current state of rebate management in Newfoundland?
Girisha Fernando (GF): Absolutely. This partnership is a transformative step for rebate management in Newfoundland. The current system, largely manual and complex, is ripe for innovation. With our digital platform, we're bringing a level of automation and accuracy that was previously unattainable. This means more efficient processing, less room for error, and a better allocation of resources, which is critical in healthcare.
That’s quite an advancement. And how does this impact the management of drug products, especially in areas like oncology?
GF: It’s a game-changer, especially for critical areas like oncology. Newfoundland and Labrador, as the first in Canada to use our platform, sets a precedent. The region, through the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, has been managing complex product listing agreements for drugs, including those for oncology. These agreements are vital for making treatments affordable. Our platform simplifies this, managing the various terms of these agreements efficiently, which is crucial for timely and affordable access to treatments.
It seems like a significant step forward for healthcare management. How does this align with the broader goals of Lyfegen?
GF: This partnership aligns perfectly with our goal to make healthcare more accessible and efficient. Automating the rebate process in Newfoundland and Labrador, especially for critical treatments in oncology, directly contributes to the sustainability and accessibility of healthcare treatments.
Looking to the future, what does this partnership mean for Lyfegen and healthcare systems globally?
GF: This is just the beginning. We're looking to extend our platform to healthcare systems around the world. Our aim is to make this technology a standard in healthcare management, fostering more efficient, sustainable, and equitable healthcare systems globally.
Read more about the partnership in the official press release.
READ MORE
New York, NY - March 29, 2023 - Lyfegen, a global healthtech SaaS company driving the world’s transition from volume to value-based healthcare for high-cost drugs, announced at the World EPA Congress the launch of its latest solution: the Model & Agreement Library. The purpose of the library is to help payers and pharma negotiate better drug prices while providing an in-depth view on current international drug pricing models and value-based agreements. The database library serves as the basis for successful drug pricing negotiations, resulting in accelerated access and drug prices better aligned to their value for the patient.
The shift towards value-based healthcare, rather than volume-based, has been steadily increasing over the years. This evolution has further reinforced Lyfegen's mission to remain at the forefront of analytics and digital automated solutions for the healthcare sector. Indoing so, Lyfegen’s solutions help to accelerate access and increase affordability of healthcare treatments.
“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 Girisha Fernando, CEO of Lyfegen. “That is why we are so 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.”
The Lyfegen Model & Agreement Library was developed as an accelerated negotiation resource for both manufacturers and payers – allowing them to save on time, money; and for the first time – an opportunity to learn at their own pace without incurring large research projects or hiring expensive external experts. Users of the library are now enabled to make informed decisions in determining the most suitable drug pricing models and agreements for their products.
The database holds over 2'500+ public value-based agreements and 18+ drug pricing models – spanning across 550 drugs,35 disease areas and 150 pharma companies. Its search capabilities are spread across product, country, drug manufacturer and payer – with all the knowledge, insights, current pricing and reimbursement activities shown in near real-timeacross the industry.
“Just an academic taxonomy of models is intellectually exciting but it's not really helping your typical customer”, said Jens Grüger, Director and Partner at Boston Consulting Group (BCG). “The Lyfegen Platform goes several steps further. Payers and pharma have a problem and they want a solution. The Lyfegen Model & Agreement Library is practical. It offers case examples.”
Looking for a Pharmaceutical Healthcare Solution?
Get personalized advice and take the next step in optimizing your healthcare strategy with innovative solutions designed for the pharmaceutical industry.
The Model & Agreement Library lets the user see the specifics of agreements reached between manufacturers and payers, including which disease areas and drug/device innovations were targeted. This market-leading database allows for one-to-one comparisons of agreements while heightening increased leverage during the negotiations process.
“I like having a palette of contracts that fall under different domains, like disease state, the way the drug is administered, or available evidence. There are different ways to make a contract attractive to us, to pharma, and to our physicians”, said Chester Good, Senior Medical Director Center for Value Based Pharmacy Initiatives at UPMC Health Plan.
This resource represents a breakthrough in the healthcare industry that facilitates the sharing of knowledge – a strong point of discussion that is becoming increasingly more important. Lyfegen is currently providing a limited time opportunity for industry professionals who are interested to try out the Model & Agreement Library with a complimentary 7-day trial.
READ MORE
Basel, Switzerland, October 27, 2021
Lyfegen announces that Swiss health insurance Sympany is using the Lyfegen Platform to implement & execute complex drug pricing models. Sympany applies the Lyfegen Platform to execute and efficiently manage all value and data-driven pricing models. Sympany gains efficiency and transparency in managing pricing models with the Lyfegen Platform. It offers many pricing models, including pay-for-performance, combination therapy and indication-based models.
The Lyfegen Software Platform digitalises all pricing models and automates the management and execution of these agreements between health insurances and pharmaceutical companies. This is done using real-world data and machine learning enabled algorithms. With the Lyfegen Platform, Sympany is also creating the basis for sustainably handling the increasing number of value-based healthcare agreements for drugs and personalized Cell and Gene therapies. These new pricing models allow health insurances to better manage their financial risk by only paying for drugs and therapies that benefit patients.
"The Lyfegen Platform helps Sympany execute complex pricing models efficiently, securely and transparently. We are pleased to extend our pioneering role in the health insurance industry by working with Lyfegen. This is another step for Sympany to provide our customers with the best possible access to therapies in a sustainable way," says Nico Camuto, Head of Benefits at Sympany, about the use of the Lyfegen Platform.
Girisha Fernando, CEO of Lyfegen, says: "We are very proud to support Sympany in strengthening its focus on value creation, efficiency and transparency amidst the growing complexity of pricing models. It is clear that the trend is increasingly towards complex pay-for-performance arrangements. Ultimately, our goal is to help patients receive their much-needed treatments while helping health insurances better manage risk and cost."
The Lyfegen Platform aims to help patients access innovative medicines and treatments by enabling innovative drug pricing agreements. The Platform collects and analyzes real-time pricing data, allowing health insurances and pharmaceutical companies to obtain relevant information on drug benefits and related financial planning.
About Sympany
Sympany is the refreshingly different insurance company that offers tailored protection and unbureaucratic assistance. Sympany is active in the health and accident insurance business for private individuals and companies, as well as in the property and liability insurance business, and is headquartered in Basel. The group of companies under the umbrella of Sympany Holding AG comprises the insurance companies Vivao Sympany AG, Moove Sympany AG, Kolping Krankenkasse AG, and Sympany Versicherungen AG, as well as the service company Sympany Services AG.
In 2020, profit amounted to CHF 68.8 million, of which Sympany allocated CHF 27.5 million to the surplus fund for the benefit of its policyholders. Total premium volume amounted to CHF 1,058 million. With 575 employees, the company serves around 257,100 private customers, of which around 204,500 are basic insurance policyholders under the KVG. In the corporate customer business, Sympany offers loss of earnings and accident insurance.
More about Sympany: https://www.sympany.ch
About Lyfegen
Lyfegen is an independent, global software analytics company providing a value and outcome-based agreement platform for Health Insurances, Pharma, MedTech & Hospitals around the globe. The secure Lyfegen Platform identifies and operationalizes value-based payment models cost-effectively and at scale using a variety of real-world data and machine learning. With Lyfegen’s patent-pending platform, Health Insurances & Hospitals can implement and scale value-based healthcare, improving access to treatments, patient health outcomes and affordability.
Lyfegen is based in the USA & Switzerland and has been founded by individuals with decades of experience in healthcare, pharma & technology to enable the shift away from volume-based and fee-for-service healthcare to value-based healthcare.
Contact Press: press@lyfegen.com
Contact Investors: investors@lyfegen.com
READ MORE
Basel, Switzerland, August 3rd, 2021
Lyfegen announces that its value-based healthcare contracting platform has been implemented together with Johnson & Johnson Medical Devices Companies Switzerland (Johnson & Johnson) and a leading Swiss Hospital.
Through this new value-based healthcare approach, Lyfegen and its partners drive the shift towards what matters most to patients: improved patient health outcomes and more efficient use of financial and human resources, enabling a sustainable post-COVID-19 healthcare environment.
The shift towards a value-based healthcare in Switzerland and globally can only be achieved through the support of innovative technologies. Lyfegen’s platform is a key enabler for this transition. The platform digitalises and automates the execution of value-based healthcare agreements, paving the way for the resource-efficient scaling of such novel agreements.
“COVID-19 has shown us the urgent need for a more sustainable healthcare system. With the implementation of value-based healthcare agreements on the Lyfegen platform, we are extremely proud to help Johnson & Johnson and hospitals to accelerate the transition to value-based healthcare and improve patient health outcomes at reduced cost.” says Lyfegen’s CEO, Girisha Fernando.
Lyfegen's compliant, secure and patent-protected value-based healthcare contracting platform automates the collection and analysis of patient-level data. Users receive transparency on actionable health outcomes and agreement performance. Lyfegen’s contribution to this partnership is a blueprint for the scaling of value-based healthcare models across hospitals, health insurances, medical device & pharma companies globally. The partnership marks another important milestone for Lyfegen, as the company continues to grow and has recently opened its next investment round.
READ MORE
Join in from anywhere in the world for two hours of incredibly interesting presentations by industry experts all around the topic of value-based healthcare.
At this DayOne Experts event, organized in close collaboration with Deloitte, industry experts will give an overview of where the pay-for-performance discussion in healthcare stands; possible solutions; and show how value-based healthcare could, should, and will impact the industry.
During the webinar, which will include deep dive sessions, we will seek answers to some of the most pressing questions: “How to define the value of a health outcome; how to capture it? Check out san diego boudoir photographer. In which areas of intervention is the value-based healthcare approach feasible; where would it be desirable? To what extent will value-based healthcare create new opportunities and accelerate innovation?”
READ MORE
To guarantee our users happiness when working with our software, we are welcoming a brand-new quality specialist at Lyfegen: Liubov Buzila has joined the team and will keep an eagle eye on our platform to ensure everything runs like clockwork.
We sat down with Liubov to learn about her experience, her goals and her aspirations.
Hello Liubov, and welcome to Lyfegen! Please tell us a little about yourself: Where are you from, and what’s your educational and professional background?
I’m Ukrainian, but I moved to Romania two years ago and currently live in the city of Iași. I have a bachelor’s degree in applied linguistic, and my first job as a QA engineer was five years ago during my fourth year at university. I have worked in this field ever since.
What excites you about being a QA engineer?
Being a QA engineer is always challenging, and that’s what I love about it. Every day I deal with a lot of things that force me to think outside of the box. A tester is not only a person who has to find problems in the system, but also a person who takes responsibility for the system’s quality; this is what makes me super excited about my work – I enjoy improving our software for the better.
Why did you decide to join Lyfegen?
I am always striving to learn something new, and Lyfegen’s startup spirit is a great fit for that. I have tested products in different fields, but I have never worked in the healthcare industry before. Personally, I think it’s a great opportunity to see how the system works from a new perspective and to gain new experience.
What is something you want to learn or improve this year?
QA is a field where you are constantly learning something new, starting with technologies used in the product and ending by gaining new soft skills as part of an amazing team. The healthcare industry is new territory for me; I’m looking forward to exploring it and gaining expertise.
How will your know-how help to improve our customers’ experience of the Lyfegen platform?
My main goal is to improve the quality of the Lyfegen platform and deliver a highly reliable and convenient product to our customers. The rule is very simple: less bugs, happier customers!
Let’s get personal: What are your favorite things to do in your free time?
I love to cook! Whenever I get any free time, I find new recipes and try to impress my family. I also like listening to music. Music is the thing that helps me to relax and forget about my troubles. And, of course, I like travelling – I have been to 20 countries already, and I look forward to exploring more.
Is there anything else you are looking forward to outside of work this year?
Nothing specific, just enjoying my free time and travelling.
We are happy to have you with us, Liubov!
READ MORE
Last week Lyfegen announced exciting news! Out of hundreds of start-ups, Lyfegen is among the top 10 selected to join one of Europe’s most innovative acceleration programs: InnoPeaks by Groupe Mutuel.
The news is taken with much excitement by Lyfegen’s co-founder, Michel Mohler, who briefly explains why being selected for this three month program by one of Switzerland’s leading health insurance companies is a great achievement for Lyfegen.
Hi Michel, can you give us a little more insights on the InnoPeaks program?
InnoPeaks is a business-focused acceleration program that focuses on challenging, enabling, growing, and scaling a business through workshops, mentorship, networking, and implementing proof of concepts. Groupe Mutuel, one of Switzerland’s leading health insurances, organizes this program. Their specific goal is to drive innovation in the two topics which support their core business: healthtech and insuretech.
Lyfegen is amongst only 10 startups that have been selected out of hundreds. What is Groupe Mutuel’s interest in having you on board?
Lyfegen, being one of Switzerland’s most innovative start-ups, is solving a crucial challenge healthcare – improving health outcomes for patients. We do this with our ground-breaking technology, working together with health insurances to give patients faster access to the medicine they need. Considering high-cost, personalized and potentially curative drugs, the prices of drugs need to become dynamic and depend on how well they work for patients. This also known as value-based contracting. Until recently, we have seen mostly Pharma Companies advocating for such pricing models. Engaging with a leading health insurance with our platform, we will achieve to bring such models to life in Switzerland, for Swiss patients.
What does Lyfegen want to achieve by being part of this program?
Switzerland's Federal Council (“Bundesrat”) addresses value-based contracting as one of the key solutions to achieve a more sustainable Swiss healthcare system. Our goal is to speak and learn from other startups, talk to decision makers at Groupe Mutuel, exchange thoughts and inspire Groupe Mutuel. As a result, we want to understand the perspective of health insurances and engage in a proof of concept.
We look forward to evolving with InnoPeaks, Groupe Mutuel and the other Start-ups. The team will be live-covering the InnoPeaks accelerator program in October, so stay tuned for more!
READ MORE
At Lyfegen, we live by the highest quality standards, continuously improving as we move forward with facilitating value-based healthcare agreements for a fast & sustainable access to innovative therapies.
What is ISO 9001:2015?
The ISO 9001:2015 standard provides guidance and tools for companies and organizations who want to ensure that their products and services consistently meet customer’s requirements with quality being consistently improved.
This standard sets out the criteria for a quality management system used by many organization, large and small. Using ISO 9001:2015 helps ensure that customers get consistent, high quality products and services.
What this mean for Lyfegen?
At Lyfegen, we live by the highest quality standards, continuously improving our solutions & processes, as we move forward with the operationalisation of value-& data driven contracts for a fast & sustainable access to innovative therapies. In turn, this will benefit patients worldwide!
We are audited yearly by a third-party to keep our ISO status up to date.
Want to discover our solutions?
READ MORE
“I am responsible for building the right products, and for building the products right.” Says Antti Hietala. Welcome to the Lyfegen Team!
As we embark on a new year, the great news start rolling in: Lyfegen welcomes its newest star, Antti Hietala, who takes on the key role of Product Owner.
As Antti arrives for his first day, Lyfegen’s CEO Girisha Fernando gives us his thoughts:
“Antti's excellent skills to think ahead and pull together industry, customer and technical perspectives to building a solid and ever-evolving product roadmap fills me with excitement, and will strengthen Lyfegen’s value for our customers even further. We are delighted to welcome Antti, a proud family man with values aligned with Lyfegen's values.”
We sat down with the ski-loving Product Owner to get a little more insight to who he is and what he will be doing at Lyfegen.
Hi Antti, tell us a little about yourself: where are you from and what is your professional background?
I come from the Arctic Circle. I grew up under the northern lights in a small town in northern Finland. I studied linguistics and computer science. My passion for content and technology led me to a career in technical writing. I wrote documentation for newspaper advertising systems and for financial asset management software.
Prior to joining Lyfegen I was the lead Product Manager at Magnolia where I built a content management solution. I’m a certified Scrum Product Owner and have worked with Product Managers and user experience designers in the past.
Why did you decide to join Lyfegen?
Lyfegen is my first venture into healthcare technology and it has an important mission: helping patients access innovative therapies by driving value-based healthcare. Removing obstacles that keep patients from getting the treatment or drugs they need is a high-level motivator. I’m also optimistic in our ability to make a big difference in the user experience of health technology and software.
I wanted to apply my product owner skills to an industry that is completely different from where I have worked before. Some say that it’s good to step out of your comfort zone and learn something completely new. The healthcare field is an exciting new challenge for me. I am thankful to the Lyfegen team for their confidence and trust that solid product management skills are universal and that I will apply them for a meaningful purpose.
You are joining Lyfegen as a Product Owner! In simple terms: what will you be working on?
I’m excited about joining Lyfegen! The team is packed with motivated and genuinely passionate people. We are on a path to build the most innovative contracting platform in the healthcare industry.
As Product Owner (PO) I am responsible for building the right products, and for building the products right. Concretely, this means talking to customers to understand their needs. I will define the product together with the Lyfegen team, translate the customer needs into features in our platform, together with our tech team.
My role has a strong outward-facing component. It’s critical for me to be in close contact with customers in order validate decisions quickly and build the right thing. My goal is to make our software valuable for our customers.
What are your next personal goals with Lyfegen?
Learning more about the healthcare and pharmaceutical industry is my first personal goal. There are so many new terms and abbreviations coming my way every day. It’s like the field has a language of its own.
On the product side, I’m very focused on optimizing the product-market fit. This means, finding the key features that really fulfill user needs and then amplifying those features in the product. I want to see users become fans! That’s a sign of a great product-market fit to me.
Enough about work! What passions do you have outside of Lyfegen?
I love to ski in the winter. I’m lucky to live in beautiful Switzerland where the Alps provide ample opportunity to hit the slopes. In the summer I do fly fishing in the Black Forest region of southern Germany or in Alsace, France. I’m also an avid pizza chef, forever improving my home-pizza game with the ultimate goal of authentic Neapolitan pie.
We are proud to welcome Antti to the Lyfegen team!
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
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.
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.
Sign up & be the first to know about INNOVATIONS
* By sending this message, you agree to our privacy policy.
