For cell and gene therapy companies to (re)enter the European market, value-based contracting will be imperative

Bluebird Bio – a biotechnology company that develops gene therapies for severe genetic disorders and cancer - has exited the European market. Evidently, this is because the company couldn’t strike deals with payers for its EMA-approved gene therapies, Zynteglo (betibeglogene autotemcel) and Skysona (elivaldogene autotemcel). Payer reluctance to reimburse cell and gene therapies should send shock waves throughout the cell and gene therapy industry. Partnering with Lyfegen may be the solution for pharma and payers alike, as its platform can put users on the right track towards successful implementation of value-based arrangements.

The high price tag of cell and gene therapies has been a topic of discussion for several years and remains an unresolved challenge. Practically all approved cell and gene therapies are priced at more than $350,000 per dose. Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec-xioi) is currently the most expensive therapy ever launched, with a $2.1 million price tag.

Ideally, gene therapies address the root causes of disease with a single curative dose. If they can replace a lifetime of expensive maintenance treatments this may lead to cost savings in the long run. Yet, the high upfront costs and uncertainty surrounding long-term efficacy and adverse events have caused payer push-back.

Payer concerns are further exacerbated due to there being hundreds of cell and gene therapies in the pipeline, across a wide range of therapeutic categories, from sickle cell anemia to HIV. Should many of these therapies be approved in the coming decade the budgetary impact on payers could become overwhelming.

Payers are trying to find alternative reimbursement approaches. Examples of innovative reimbursement models include installment plans, which spread out payments, analogous to a mortgage; and value-based payments. Here, the manufacturer is paid the total cost of the therapy upfront, or in installments. Then, if the patient experiences disease progression, manufacturers must provide a partial or full refund.

One publicly known example of such an arrangement involves the gene therapy Luxturna (voretigene neparvovec). This treatment holds the promise to restore “functional vision” to certain patients with inherited blindness. After the product was approved by the FDA in 2017, the sponsor, Spark Therapeutics, set the price at $425,000 per eye. The insurer Harvard Pilgrim signed a value-based contract with Spark Therapeutics. In the deal, Harvard Pilgrim pays for Luxturna, but is refunded certain undisclosed amounts if the treatment wears off over time.

In 2019, Bluebird Bio told investors that in preparation for the possible approval of LentiGlobin - which is named Zynteglo in Europe - it was seeking what it called “installment plan contracts.” Bluebird Bio proposed that insurers would pay installments over a period of up to five years. Furthermore, after an initial charge, Bluebird Bio would only get reimbursed if the one-time infusion benefits patients.

There are, however, significant challenges in implementing these kinds of frameworks. For example, in many countries, healthcare budgets have one-to-five-year terms, which don’t suit longer payment cycles spanning a patient’s lifetime. In addition, in the U.S. there is substantial churn at insurers, as beneficiaries frequently switch plans, which lowers the potential return on investment for payers. They’re saddled with very high upfront costs without necessarily experiencing the downstream long-term benefits and cost offsets.

Looking to the future, it’s not as if drug companies appear to want to lower their price points. If its gene therapy for patients with hemophilia A is approved by the FDA this year, BioMarin is considering pricing Valrox (valoctocogene roxaparvovec) between $2 and $3 million, which would make it the most expensive treatment in the world. CEO Jean-Jacques Bienaimé asserts that insurers have indicated in preliminary discussions that they are “comfortable” with the proposed price range. Well certainly if Valrox proves durable and cures hemophilia A, the $2 to $3 million price per unit would compare favorably to the lifetime cost of treatment for hemophilia A using existing therapies, which is around $25 million.

But, in my experience talking to payers, they are still wary about high upfront costs, particularly given the uncertainties surrounding efficacy and safety, and possible durability issues. Indeed, European payer reluctance to engage with Bluebird Bio with respect to its two products indicates the need for price concessions coupled with evidence generation to establish proof of efficacy, safety, and durability.

Moving forward, a dynamic pricing structure will likely be required, using a combination of installment plans and value-based arrangements. Moreover, in the U.S. context a solution to the churn problem must be found; perhaps through enhanced portability, so that when patients change insurers there’s mutual recognition of value-based contracts across payers.

Learn more about our platform by booking a demo today:

BOOK A DEMO

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 4 years, Cohen is an independent healthcare analyst and consultant on a variety of research, teaching, speaking, editing, and writing projects.

In a year marked by landmark legislative changes in support of value-based drug pricing, Medicare has recently received authorization to negotiate directly with drug manufacturers under the health provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Proponents of the law are hoping value-based pricing negotiations and inflation-based rate hike rebates for the country’s largest public healthcare payers will lower national drug costs and save U.S. taxpayers hundreds of billions over the next decade. Of course, pharmaceutical companies disagree.

In 2022, the pharmaceutical industry spent $187 million in lobbying funds fighting–unsuccessfully–to stop passage of a law that would grant Medicare negotiating authority for drug prices. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 brought to life a legislative fix patient advocates, physician groups, and Democratic legislators have been trying to enact for decades as a tool to help lower prescription drug costs.

When the Medicare Part D retail prescription drug program was created in 2003, Republican legislators added the “noninterference clause” to the law to prevent Medicare from negotiating drug prices. Private health plans run the Medicare Part D drug program, but they set formularies and conduct drug price negotiations without Medicare’s input. The IRA establishes Medicare’s voice in drug price negotiations with drug manufacturers under the Drug Price Negotiation Program set to begin in 2023.

Medicare will be authorized to negotiate directly with manufacturers to find Maximum Fair Prices (MFPs) for a limited number of drugs that have no generic or biosimilar competition. The law also limits price increases year-over-year for Medicare Part D and Part B units sold (not for commercial units sold). Outside of a few product exceptions, drug makers who increase their prices more than the rate of inflation will have to pay rebates to Medicare.

Which drug prices can Medicare negotiate?

According to the new law, each year the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will select from a list of qualified single-source drugs with the highest total Medicare spending. The list of negotiation-eligible drugs will consist of the 50 costliest drugs from Medicare’s Part D program and (after 2028) the 50 costliest drugs from Medicare Part B (for drugs physician-administered on an outpatient basis).

A timeline for the changes enacted by the new legislation gives pharmaceutical manufacturers and health insurers time to adjust. The first step of the Drug Price Negotiation Program gives Medicare the authority to negotiate the 10 most expensive Part D drugs, with the negotiated price starting in 2026. The program expands to 15 eligible Part D drugs by 2027. Beginning in 2028, some Part B drugs may also be included in the list of 15 products that can be negotiated. From 2029 forward, Medicare can negotiate pricing for up to 20 Part D and Part B drugs. In total, Medicare will be able to negotiate prices on up to 60 eligible drugs by 2029.

The drugs for price negotiations under the IRA must meet certain standards, including the following:

• The drug may not have a generic substitute.

• For small-molecule drugs, it must be at least 7 years since FDA approval was granted.

• For biologics, it must be at least 11 years since FDA approval was granted.

• New drug formulations or treatments for rare diseases are excluded.

• Treatments extracted or developed from human blood or plasma are not eligible for price negotiations.

• A drug is excluded if Medicare’s total expenditures for the drug are no more than 1% of total Part D expenditures.

• Most drugs developed by small biotechnology companies are excluded.

Not surprisingly, pharmaceutical companies see the passage of the IRA as an unfavorable development and view the Medicare negotiation process as price setting, not negotiations. The HHS and manufacturers are required to negotiate and agree on MFPs for negotiation-eligible drugs; negotiations are not optional. The drug manufacturer has 30 days to accept or counter the price offer Medicare makes. If a manufacturer refuses to cooperate with HHS or fails to negotiate in good faith, HHS can impose civil monetary penalties and an excise tax for non-compliance. It’s likely the pharma industry will challenge the law in court.

What analysts predict about industry impact and cost savings

In July 2022, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) published the latest estimate of the budgetary effects of the health provisions in the IRA. The CBO expects Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices will save $102 billion in public sector healthcare costs over 10 years. During the same period, the CBO estimates an additional $62 billion in savings will result from the cap on drug price hikes at the rate of inflation.

The CBO expects manufacturers will increase launch prices for their new products to counteract the IRA’s inflation-rebate provision which slows the growth of prices over time. The analysts predict this will lead to an increase in Medicaid spending because Medicaid’s rebate program, triggered by the higher launch prices, would not fully offset the price increases. The CBO says Medicare Part B may also be affected by higher launch prices since that program uses the market’s average sales price of a drug to determine its reimbursement rate.

Analysts from Moody’s Investors Service expect there will be both price reductions for some drugs and limited price growth for other drugs. Moody’s analysts warn manufacturers that show high Medicare spending–due to their high prices, not patient consumption–will feel the impact of these regulatory changes the most.

Using the data from value-based drug purchasing arrangements

Proponents of Medicare’s authorization to negotiate drug prices believe the prescription drug provisions in the IRA are a suitable compromise that allows drug manufacturers to realize a reasonable profit while increasing the health benefits, accessibility, and affordability of prescription drugs for Medicare patients. Value-based purchasing arrangements will be an important tool at the core of this compromise.

Part of the criteria the HHS Secretary will consider when negotiating an MFP is the drug’s value to health outcomes and its cost-effectiveness compared with alternative treatments. Industry experts recognize that one of the best ways to gather insights into a drug’s performance is from the data collected in the implementation of value-based drug agreements. The data can either provide real-world evidence of a drug’s cost-effectiveness and benefit to patient health outcomes or reinforce the terms of a rebate for a drug’s underperformance.

Since negotiation-eligible drugs include those approved by the FDA at least 7 years ago, performance data may already be available from past value-based drug agreements for the first round of Medicare price negotiations. Manufacturers can prepare for future negotiations with Medicare by seeking value-based purchasing arrangements for their newer products as soon as possible after FDA approval.

The Lyfegen solution

Lyfegen, an independent global software analytics company, offers a contracting platform solution that helps health insurances, pharma, medtech, and hospitals implement value-based payment models with efficiency and transparency. Lyfegen’s Platform performs real-time, end-to-end, data collection and analysis through intelligent algorithms that can operationalize any value-based pharmaceutical purchasing arrangement and provide deep insights into a drug’s performance.

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.

To learn more about our services and the Lyfegen Platform, book a demo.

BOOK A DEMO

Biosimilars are launching soon in several categories, including auto-immune disorders and ophthalmology

2023 will likely be a pivotal year for biosimilars, as Humira-referenced adalimumab products launch in the U.S. Worldwide, Humira has been a massive blockbuster for AbbVie, but also a drain on payer budgets. Once Humira-referenced biosimilars were marketed in Europe, they took off in many countries, as payers sought to reduce financial exposure with heavily discounted products. Steep discounts and tender offers, in which the best bid gets the lion’s share of the market, have helped boost uptake of biosimilars. Additionally, European payers have bought into the value proposition that biosimilars are cost-effective.

Besides auto-immune disorders, biosimilars are entering new therapeutic areas such as ophthalmology. Together with Samsung Bioepis, Biogen is launching Byooviz (ranibizumab) this month. Byooviz is a biosimilar referencing Lucentis. Approved by the FDA in September of last year, the drug will soon become the first ophthalmology biosimilar in the U.S. Byooviz’s approved indications include wet age-related macular degeneration, macular edema following retinal vein occlusion, and myopic choroidal neovascularization. Byooviz is being offered at a list price of $1,130 per single-use vial, which is a 40% discount off the wholesale acquisition cost of Roche’s originator, Lucentis. It’s expected that the price of Lucentis will also drop.

But, selling biosimilars like Byooviz to payers and clinics isn’t as simple as discounting the price. As with any new biosimilar, detailing Byooviz’s launch – demonstrating its value - will be an elaborate endeavor, which involves engaging doctors, payers, and patient advocacy groups to facilitate access and appropriate physician and patient support. Biogen, for instance, has said it will be educating ophthalmologists about the science and value of biosimilars, as well as the regulatory framework for its approval.

In the U.S., policymakers firmly believe that safe, effective, and lower-cost biosimilars must be made available to all who need them. However, biosimilars have sometimes been excluded from formularies owing to rebate schemes. In this context, higher-priced originator medications are sometimes preferred by some U.S. payers as rebates are larger for those products. Indeed, perverse financial incentives in the U.S. have been a limiting factor with respect to increasing adoption of biosimilars.

Nevertheless, with employers and patients demanding more pass-through of rebates and the role of cost-effectiveness and value-based pricing gradually becoming more important to payers, it’s expected that biosimilars will ascend in market share across all therapeutic categories where they are available.

Indeed, after a painfully slow start from 2015 to 2019, the U.S. has finally been experiencing a sustained uptick in the uptake of biosimilars in the past few years. Robust biosimilar penetration is now apparent across several therapeutic classes. In addition to the filgrastims and pegfilgrastims, there’s been erosion of the originator biologic market share in the trastuzumab, rituximab, and bevacizumab classes.

Biosimilar usage can be bolstered by value-based contracts in which financial incentives of key stakeholders – payers, drug manufacturers, and healthcare providers - are aligned. For example, payers can institute capitated contracts with healthcare providers which hold those who prescribe originator biologics and biosimilars accountable in part for the total cost of care. 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 purchasing agreements. The Lyfegen platform identifies and operationalizes value-based payment models in a cost-effective manner.

Undoubtedly, payers who are less reliant on rebate arrangements and therefore more cost- and value-conscious will be able to achieve a decrease in overall costs, as lower-priced biosimilars introduce market competition within therapeutic classes. In turn, this sparks steeper discounts across all drugs, including originator products.

What may further ameliorate the adoption of biosimilars Is the granting of therapeutic interchangeability designation to certain products. To illustrate, on July 28th, 2021, the FDA approved the first interchangeable biosimilar product, Semglee (long-acting insulin glargine), which implies that it can be automatically substituted at the pharmacy counter. This has ushered in more competition, specifically in the insulin glargine class. Furthermore, one of the six biosimilars referencing Humira (adalimumab), Cyltezo, is now approved as therapeutically interchangeable and may be automatically substituted for its reference product Humira. All six approved biosimilars, including Cyltezo, are slated to enter the U.S. market at different points in 2023.

When determining the cost-effectiveness and budgetary impact of biosimilars, payers must consider dynamics, such as the distinguishing between the initiation of treatment-naïve patients on a biosimilar and therapeutic switching practices, as well as price competition with alternative therapies, and the effect of originator companies who can introduce biobetters, or improvements – often in terms of formulation and dosing – on their original product. Lyfegen can assist with evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of biosimilars and biobetters.

Armed with information about biosimilar and originator biologic clinical efficacy, patient preference, and treatment costs - which Lyfegen can provide - payers will be positioned to make appropriate coverage decisions.

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.

BOOK A DEMO

Pharmaceutical regulating authorities in the U.S. and Europe are under increasing pressure to approve new treatments as quickly as possible. Expedited approval programs were created to speed up patients’ access to innovative treatments that meet unmet health needs or treat life-threatening diseases. But concerns about post-approval follow-up persist. Value-based drug pricing arrangements are a solution that generates real-world data and evidence of a drug’s safety and benefit to health outcomes.

Global health authorities must consider the risks of bringing a new drug to market quickly with limited data about a product’s safety and effectiveness–these risks versus the potential benefits of a new drug that addresses an unmet medical need, alleviates a public health emergency, or saves a patient’s life. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) are the ones weighing those risks and benefits and guarding the safety of pharmaceutical products and medical devices.

The usual approval process for pharmaceutical products is similar for both agencies. It includes pre-clinical testing, three clinical trials, and a final approval before manufacturers can sell their drugs to patients. Drugs that show potential and meet certain criteria may qualify for an expedited approval process.

Expedited drug approval programs

Both the European and U.S. agencies have developed expedited approval programs to speed up the process of drug development and approval when a treatment shows the potential to meet an unmet medical need or treat a life-threatening condition. A new drug may qualify for consideration under more than one expedited approval program.

FDA programs:

• Priority-review designation (PR) – started in 1992, ensures the submission application will be reviewed within 6 months instead of the usual 12 months

• Accelerated approval (AA) – started in 1992, allows drugs to be approved using a surrogate endpoint instead of the outcomes of a clinical trial

• Fast-track designation (FTD) – started in 1997, a process to expedite the development and review of drugs designed to treat unmet medical needs and serious, life-threatening conditions

• Breakthrough-therapy designation (BTD) – started in 2012, speeds the development and review of drugs with the potential for better health outcomes compared to the results of current treatments on the market

EMA programs:

• Accelerated assessment – started in 2004, a review of the application to be completed in 150 days instead of 210 days if there are no major objections from the authorizing agency

• Exceptional circumstances authorization – started in 2005, eligible for drugs that treat extremely rare diseases and where it is not possible to conduct large clinical trials

• Conditional marketing authorization (CMA) – started in 2006, accelerates approval of drugs designed to meet an unmet medical need or serious, life-threatening disease

• Priority medicines scheme (PRIME) – started in 2016, reviewers are appointed earlier than usual in the development process, mostly used for orphan medicines

Comparing FDA and EMA use of expedited approvals

A study published in 2020 in The BMJ (British Medical Journal) compares the use of expedited approval programs by the FDA and the EMA. The focus of the study included approvals of new medicines from 2007 to 2017. During that time, the FDA approved 320 new drugs, and the EMA approved 268.

The study shows that, as of April 2020, there was an overlap of 75% (239) of new drugs which were approved by both the FDA and the EMA. Most of the drugs approved by both agencies were developed to treat cancer, digestive and metabolic disorders, or blood and cardiovascular disorders.

Out of the 320 drugs the FDA approved, 57% (181) of the new drugs qualified for at least one of the FDA’s accelerated approval programs. Out of the 268 drugs approved by the EMA, only 15% (39) qualified for one of the EMA’s expedited approvals.

A different study of global drug approval programs, covering January 2007 to May 2020, focused on expedited approvals for 128 new cancer drugs. The EMA approved 73% (94) out of the 128 new drugs and qualified 46% of them through expedited approval. The FDA expedited 91% (117) of the new cancer drugs through at least one accelerated approval program. (In 2019, all the cancer drugs the FDA approved during the year qualified for expedited approval.)

Of the six jurisdictions in the study, the FDA was the first to approve 80% (102) of the new cancer drugs. In Europe, delays in submissions of regulatory applications slowed many of the approvals. The EMA’s approvals of the same 102 drugs took an additional median time of 9.7 months.

Post-approval confirmatory trials

The expedited approval process in both Europe and the U.S. relies on post-market, real-world clinical data to confirm the safety and effectiveness of a drug. After the FDA or EMA grants expedited approval and the drug is on the market, the manufacturer is required to conduct confirmatory trials to gather enough real-world evidence to transition the drug from an expedited approval to a regular approval. Both the FDA and the EMA carry a backlog of confirmatory trials that were not completed on time.

An NPR (National Public Radio) analysis of FDA and National Institutes of Health data showed there are around 200 drugs with expedited approvals currently on the U.S. market. Many drugs, especially cancer treatments, have more than one accelerated approval to cover expanded uses. Close to half of these drugs transitioned to standard approvals after confirmatory trials, and another 9% were withdrawn.

The 30 years of data NPR reviewed also revealed that 42% of confirmatory trials didn’t start within the first year after the drug was made available to patients. Some confirmatory trials were delayed by three or more years, and even up to ten years.

The EMA also appears to have a substantial percentage of manufacturers who are slow to transition expedited approvals to standard approvals. In 2016, only about half of the drugs that received expedited approvals from the EMA had converted to standard approvals. Manufacturers who switched to standard approvals took an average of 4 years to complete the conversion process.

Gathering real-world evidence through value-based drug pricing arrangements

Both healthcare payers and drug manufacturers benefit from value-based drug purchasing arrangements for drug treatments that come to market under expedited approval programs.

For manufacturers, the real-world evidence generated by a value-based agreement may be quite helpful for a few reasons. First, the data could satisfy the requirements for post-approval confirmatory trials. Second, manufacturers can show with real-world evidence that their treatment offers better benefits to patient outcomes as compared to competitors’ products. Third, manufacturers can use the data supporting the real-world effectiveness of their product to negotiate and justify their drug’s list price and preferential position on a payer’s formulary.

While payers want the expedited approval process to bring treatments for unmet needs to patients as quickly as possible, they may still have unanswered questions post-approval about a new drug’s benefits. Under a value-based arrangement, payers can collect and analyze real-world evidence to address their uncertainty and concerns about a drug’s safety, benefit to patient health outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.

Value-based pricing agreements between payers and manufacturers allow both parties to share the financial risk of a drug not performing as expected. And if a drug underperforms, real-world data from the value-based agreement can reinforce the terms of a manufacturer’s rebate. Therefore, manufacturers willing to share risk and enter value-based drug purchasing arrangements with payers have a competitive advantage.

The Lyfegen Solution

Lyfegen is an independent, global analytics company that offers a value-based contracting platform for healthcare insurances, pharma, and medtech companies wanting to participate in value-based drug pricing agreements. Lyfegen’s software platform includes three-fold functionality to implement value-based, data-driven agreements with greater efficiency and transparency: data ingestion, agreement execution, and insights generation. The Lyfegen Platform collects real-world data and uses intelligent algorithms to provide valuable information about drug performance and cost.

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.

To learn more about our services and the Lyfegen Platform, book a demo.

BOOK A DEMO

In a year marked by landmark legislative changes in support of value-based drug pricing, Medicare has recently received authorization to negotiate directly with drug manufacturers under the health provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Proponents of the law are hoping value-based pricing negotiations and inflation-based rate hike rebates for the country’s largest public healthcare payers will lower national drug costs and save U.S. taxpayers hundreds of billions over the next decade. Of course, pharmaceutical companies disagree.

In 2022, the pharmaceutical industry spent $187 million in lobbying funds fighting–unsuccessfully–to stop passage of a law that would grant Medicare negotiating authority for drug prices. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 brought to life a legislative fix patient advocates, physician groups, and Democratic legislators have been trying to enact for decades as a tool to help lower prescription drug costs.

When the Medicare Part D retail prescription drug program was created in 2003, Republican legislators added the “noninterference clause” to the law to prevent Medicare from negotiating drug prices. Private health plans run the Medicare Part D drug program, but they set formularies and conduct drug price negotiations without Medicare’s input. The IRA establishes Medicare’s voice in drug price negotiations with drug manufacturers under the Drug Price Negotiation Program set to begin in 2023.

Medicare will be authorized to negotiate directly with manufacturers to find Maximum Fair Prices (MFPs) for a limited number of drugs that have no generic or biosimilar competition. The law also limits price increases year-over-year for Medicare Part D and Part B units sold (not for commercial units sold). Outside of a few product exceptions, drug makers who increase their prices more than the rate of inflation will have to pay rebates to Medicare.

Which drug prices can Medicare negotiate?

According to the new law, each year the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will select from a list of qualified single-source drugs with the highest total Medicare spending. The list of negotiation-eligible drugs will consist of the 50 costliest drugs from Medicare’s Part D program and (after 2028) the 50 costliest drugs from Medicare Part B (for drugs physician-administered on an outpatient basis).

A timeline for the changes enacted by the new legislation gives pharmaceutical manufacturers and health insurers time to adjust. The first step of the Drug Price Negotiation Program gives Medicare the authority to negotiate the 10 most expensive Part D drugs, with the negotiated price starting in 2026. The program expands to 15 eligible Part D drugs by 2027. Beginning in 2028, some Part B drugs may also be included in the list of 15 products that can be negotiated. From 2029 forward, Medicare can negotiate pricing for up to 20 Part D and Part B drugs. In total, Medicare will be able to negotiate prices on up to 60 eligible drugs by 2029.

The drugs for price negotiations under the IRA must meet certain standards, including the following:

·      The drug may not have a generic substitute.

·      For small-molecule drugs, it must be at least 7 years since FDA approval was granted.

·      For biologics, it must be at least 11 years since FDA approval was granted.

·      New drug formulations or treatments for rare diseases are excluded.

·      Treatments extracted or developed from human blood or plasma are not eligible for price negotiations.

·      A drug is excluded if Medicare’s total expenditures for the drug are no more than 1% of total Part D expenditures.

·      Most drugs developed by small biotechnology companies are excluded.

Not surprisingly, pharmaceutical companies see the passage of the IRA as an unfavorable development and view the Medicare negotiation process as price setting, not negotiations. The HHS and manufacturers are required to negotiate and agree on MFPs for negotiation-eligible drugs; negotiations are not optional. The drug manufacturer has 30 days to accept or counter the price offer Medicare makes. If a manufacturer refuses to cooperate with HHS or fails to negotiate in good faith, HHS can impose civil monetary penalties and an excise tax for non-compliance. It’s likely the pharma industry will challenge the law in court.

What analysts predict about industry impact and cost savings

In July 2022, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) published the latest estimate of the budgetary effects of the health provisions in the IRA. The CBO expects Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices will save $102 billion in public sector healthcare costs over 10 years. During the same period, the CBO estimates an additional $62 billion in savings will result from the cap on drug price hikes at the rate of inflation.

The CBO expects manufacturers will increase launch prices for their new products to counteract the IRA’s inflation-rebate provision which slows the growth of prices over time. The analysts predict this will lead to an increase in Medicaid spending because Medicaid’s rebate program, triggered by the higher launch prices, would not fully offset the price increases. The CBO says Medicare Part B may also be affected by higher launch prices since that program uses the market’s average sales price of a drug to determine its reimbursement rate.

Analysts from Moody’s Investors Service expect there will be both price reductions for some drugs and limited price growth for other drugs. Moody’s analysts warn manufacturers that show high Medicare spending–due to their high prices, not patient consumption–will feel the impact of these regulatory changes the most.

Using the data from value-based drug purchasing arrangements

Proponents of Medicare’s authorization to negotiate drug prices believe the prescription drug provisions in the IRA are a suitable compromise that allows drug manufacturers to realize a reasonable profit while increasing the health benefits, accessibility, and affordability of prescription drugs for Medicare patients. Value-based purchasing arrangements will be an important tool at the core of this compromise.

Part of the criteria the HHS Secretary will consider when negotiating an MFP is the drug’s value to health outcomes and its cost-effectiveness compared with alternative treatments. Industry experts recognize that one of the best ways to gather insights into a drug’s performance is from the data collected in the implementation of value-based drug agreements. The data can either provide real-world evidence of a drug’s cost-effectiveness and benefit to patient health outcomes or reinforce the terms of a rebate for a drug’s underperformance.

Since negotiation-eligible drugs include those approved by the FDA at least 7 years ago, performance data may already be available from past value-based drug agreements for the first round of Medicare price negotiations. Manufacturers can prepare for future negotiations with Medicare by seeking value-based purchasing arrangements for their newer products as soon as possible after FDA approval.

‍

The Lyfegen solution

Lyfegen, an independent global software analytics company, offers a contracting platform solution that helps health insurances, pharma, medtech, and hospitals implement value-based payment models with efficiency and transparency. Lyfegen’s Platform performs real-time, end-to-end, data collection and analysis through intelligent algorithms that can operationalize any value-based pharmaceutical purchasing arrangement and provide deep insights into a drug’s performance.

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.

To learn more about our services and the Lyfegen Platform.

‍

BOOK A DEMO

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 

‍

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.

‍

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 THE OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE

BOOK A DEMO

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.

‍

Learn more and start your free trial now

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 THE OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE

BOOK A DEMO

Each year, the NAMD (National Association of Medicaid Directors) Conference in Washington D.C. brings together the nation's Medicaid directors, leaders in the industry, and key decision-makers for a one-of-a-kind conference. With the global public health emergency, the Medicaid system and the work of Medicaid directors and their staff has never been more important. While COVID-19 has disrupted health care at all levels, it has shown the importance of more innovative payment models and the need for broader access to treatments. The shift towards value-based healthcare has become one of Medicaid’s hottest topics, with CMA and Lyfegen joining forces to present the latest value-based contracting technology at this year’s NAMD Conference.

We sat down for a brief interview with CMA’s President, Ken Romanski, and Lyfegen’s CEO, Girisha Fernando, to gain more insights into the importance of this partnership:

Thanks for joining us, Ken and Girisha. Can you tell us why this partnership is an important milestone, both for CMA and Lyfegen?

Ken: Our partnership with Lyfegen is a key milestone for CMA as we expand and complement our portfolio of technology-based solutions with extremely high-value business analytics products. Our utmost priority is to support Medicaid programs by lowering costs, while at the same time improving health outcomes for vulnerable citizens.

Girisha: This partnership sets the basis to create enormous value for our state healthcare payers and pharma. By partnering together, we enable our customers to implement value-based pharmacy agreements, actively managing the budget impact of new treatments and aligning existing formulary spending with value for beneficiaries.

For Lyfegen, this is a market entry into the U.S. – why CMA?

Girisha: CMA’s experience and technical expertise are unique. CMA is a highly recognized technology partner for State Healthcare Payers across the nation, with over 20 years of experience. Lyfegen has made a conscious decision to combine its capabilities with CMA to enable our customers to leverage the potential of value-based agreements for their pharmacy programs.

What is the value of this partnership for healthcare payers?

Ken: CMA is very excited to work with Lyfegen and our clients to deliver tens of millions of dollars in savings per year by leveraging our experience in Medicaid data management to implement this robust value-based analytics platform.

Girisha: Our customers benefit from the combined years of experience and unique expertise in data and value-based healthcare solutions. We focus on providing the first proven, scalable, highly secure value-based agreement platform for State Medicaid that allows our customers on average to avoid 54 million dollars in treatment costs that do not work and gain 7 million dollars in efficiency due to the fully automated end-to-end process. We are extremely excited to present all aspects of our partnership and present the value and opportunities our platform can bring to State Medicaid programs at NAMD.

Join CMA and Lyfegen at NAMD and understand first-hand how they can support you to realize savings for your pharmacy programs, improving patient health outcomes with their unique value-based agreement platform.

Book an appointment at NAMD

                    Fünf Männer aus der Region wollen die Gesundheitsbranche aufmischen. Im 2018 wurden sie von der Plattform «Innovation Basel» für ihre visionäre Idee nominiert: Eine digitale Plattform, die eine Kombination aus Blockchain und Cloud verwendet, um faire Medikamentenpreise zwischen Herstellern und Versicherungen auszuhandeln. Was heisst das aber und was ist dabei so visionär?            

                    (Bild: zVg) Das Lyfegen Team: Diese fünf Männer haben eine Vision und eine Mission. Die Idee liess Girisha Fernando nicht mehr los: Der 29-jährige Basler wollte nach neun Jahren bei der Roche im Market Access, Pricing und IT unbedingt «etwas noch Spannenderes, Revolutionäres machen», wodurch Patienten im Dschungel des Gesundheitswesens geholfen wird. Aber es sollte dabei auch für Pharmaunternehmen und Versicherer eine Win-Win-Situation entstehen.          

         Zusammen mit seinen Mitstreitern Leon Rebolledo, Michel Mohler und Nico Mros gründete er 2018 «Lyfegen» und entwickelte eine bahnbrechende Idee: Eine auf Blockchain und Cloud basierte Software Lösung, die es Versicherern und Herstellern von Medikamenten erlaubt faire Preise anhand deren Wirksamkeit für den einzelnen Patienten auszuhandeln.                      

            Faire Preise bedeuten unter anderem auch, dass die Vergütung dieser Medikamente auf der Wirkung des Medikaments basiert. Wenn ein Medikament bei einem Patienten besser wirkt, dann wird ein Preis A bezahlt. Wenn ein Medikament bei einem anderen nicht so gut anschlägt, dann wird Preis B vom Versicherer an den Hersteller fällig oder sogar nichts bezahlt. Unser Tool ermöglicht genau diese faire, wirkungsorientierte Preisgestaltung, was sich auch Value-based Healthcare nennt. So ein Tool gibt es auf der ganzen Welt bisher nicht.             Name Surname
Position, Copmany          

                 Fachleute sprechen hierbei von «Wertbasierter Gesundheitsversorgung». Dieses Thema ist aktueller denn je, auch in der Schweiz, in der steigende Behandlungs- und Medikamentenpreise zu höheren Kosten für die Bevölkerung führen. Es müssen neue, nachhaltige Modelle eingeführt werden, um die Kostenexplosion im Gesundheitswesen aufzuhalten.          

         Transparenz bei Preisgestaltung und Wirkungsgrad          

Warum aber ist so ein Tool wertvoll? «Weil unser Tool Daten sicher sammelt, analysiert und dann den jeweiligen Partnern, sei es ein Versicherer oder ein Hersteller wie Pharmaunternehmen, die Daten anonym, automatisiert und gleichzeitig zuspielt.» Dies geschieht mit Hilfe der Blockchain (eine dezentralisierte Form der Datenverarbeitung und -sicherung, die beispielsweise Geldeinheiten, Wertpapiere, Besitz- oder Grundrechte verwaltet, siehe Erklärung in der Infobox), ganz ohne Kryptowährung, betonen die fünf innovativen Köpfe.

                     (Bilder: PEXELS) Im Gesundheitswesen explodieren die Kosten. Eine revolutionäre Idee könnte dieser Entwicklung entgegen wirken.            

            Die Idee hat schon für viel Wirbel in der «Szene» gesorgt. Und sie gehen mit ihrer Idee aufs Ganze: «Wir haben schon 750’000 CHF von einer Gruppe von Basler Business Angels erhalten», sagen die Lyfegen-Gründer. Diese Business Angels seien selbst erfolgreiche Unternehmer. Namen dürfe man leider keine bekannt geben. Zudem müsse man zu 100 Prozent hinter einer Innovation, einer Vision oder einer Idee stehen, die der Gesellschaft helfen könne, betonen sie. Fernando: «Ich bin fest davon überzeugt, dass nicht nur unsere Lösung, sondern auch die Denkprozesse, die wir bei unseren Kunden anregen, die Implementierung einer wertbasierten Gesundheitsversorgung vorantreibt. Konzept und Lösung sind innovativ.»                        

               Vertrauen und Transparenz zwischen Ärzten und Patienten ist immens wichtig. Darauf basiert auch das Konzept des Value-based Healthcare.      

      Zwar sei man bei Lyfegen sehr technisch veranlagt, jedoch steht der Kundennutzen und der so genannten «Impact» für alle Parteien im Vordergrund. Also auch für die Versicherten und für das gesamte Gesundheitswesen. «Unsere Lösung trägt dazu bei, Patienten Zugang zu innovativen Behandlungen und der bestmöglichen Gesundheitsversorgung zu ermöglichen. Wir wollen Leben retten. Punkt», betont CTO Leon Reborello. Girisha Fernando kann aus eigener Erfahrung berichten: «Mein Grossvater hatte Prostatakrebs und die Ärzte sagten, dass es Medikamente gibt um seine Lebensdauer zu verlängern. Aber die Versicherung wollte aus Kostengründen nicht für das Medikament bezahlen. Dies muss aufhören – durch wertbasierte Vergütung würden die besten und innovativsten Medikamente für Patienten und Ärzte zugänglich. Mit unserer Lösung tragen wir dazu bei, dies zu verwirklichen.»