IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/hecrev/v9y2019i1d10.1186_s13561-019-0244-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pre-approval incentives to promote adoption of personalized medicine: a theoretical approach

Author

Listed:
  • F. Antoñanzas

    (University of La Rioja)

  • C. A. Juárez-Castelló

    (University of La Rioja)

  • R. Rodríguez-Ibeas

    (University of La Rioja)

Abstract

Background Currently, personalised medicine is becoming more frequently used and many drug companies are including this strategy to gain market access for very specialized therapies. In this article, in order to understand the relationships between the health authority and the drug company when deciding upon the implementation of personalized medicines, we take a theoretical perspective to model it when the price and reimbursement policy follows a pay-for-performance scheme. During the development of a new drug, the firm must decide whether to generate additional knowledge by investing in additional resources to stratify the target population based on a biomarker or directly apply for marketing authorization for the new treatment without information on the characteristics of patients who could respond to it. In this context, we assume that the pricing policy is set by the health authority, and then we characterize the pricing and investment decisions contingent on the rate of response to the treatment. Results We find that the price when the firm carries out R&D leading to the personalized treatments is not necessarily higher than the price if the firm does not carry out the R&D investment. When the rate of response to the treatment is too low, then the new drug is not marketed. If the rate of response is too high, personalized medicine is not implemented. For intermediate values of the rate of response, the adoption of personalized medicine may occur if the investment costs are sufficiently low; otherwise, the treatment is given to all patients without additional information on their characteristics. The higher the quality of the genetic test (in terms of its sensitivity and specificity), the wider the interval for the values of the proportional responders for which personalized medicine may be implemented. Conclusions Our findings show that pre-approval incentives (prices) to promote the personalized treatments depend on the specific characteristics of the disease and the efficacy of the treatment. The model gives an intuitive idea about what to expect in terms of price incentives when the possibility of personalizing treatments becomes a strategic decision for the stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • F. Antoñanzas & C. A. Juárez-Castelló & R. Rodríguez-Ibeas, 2019. "Pre-approval incentives to promote adoption of personalized medicine: a theoretical approach," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:9:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-019-0244-8
    DOI: 10.1186/s13561-019-0244-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-019-0244-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s13561-019-0244-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meckley, Lisa M. & Neumann, Peter J., 2010. "Personalized medicine: Factors influencing reimbursement," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 91-100, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leopold, C. & Vogler, S. & Habl, C. & Mantel-Teeuwisse, A.K. & Espin, J., 2013. "Personalised medicine as a challenge for public pricing and reimbursement authorities – A survey among 27 European countries on the example of trastuzumab," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 313-322.
    2. Veronika Kalouguina & Joël Wagner, 2020. "Challenges and Solutions for Integrating and Financing Personalized Medicine in Healthcare Systems: A Systematic Literature Review," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Fernando Antoñanzas & Carmelo A. Juárez-Castelló & Roberto Rodríguez-Ibeas, 2016. "Implementing personalized medicine with asymmetric information on prevalence rates," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-8, December.
    4. F. Antoñanzas & C. Juárez-Castelló & R. Rodríguez-Ibeas, 2015. "Some economics on personalized and predictive medicine," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(9), pages 985-994, December.
    5. Tracy Merlin & Claude Farah & Camille Schubert & Andrew Mitchell & Janet E. Hiller & Philip Ryan, 2013. "Assessing Personalized Medicines in Australia," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(3), pages 333-342, April.
    6. Rositsa Koleva-Kolarova & James Buchanan & Heleen Vellekoop & Simone Huygens & Matthijs Versteegh & Maureen Rutten-van Mölken & László Szilberhorn & Tamás Zelei & Balázs Nagy & Sarah Wordsworth & Apos, 2022. "Financing and Reimbursement Models for Personalised Medicine: A Systematic Review to Identify Current Models and Future Options," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 501-524, July.
    7. Marta O. Soares & Simon Walker & Stephen J. Palmer & Mark J. Sculpher, 2018. "Establishing the Value of Diagnostic and Prognostic Tests in Health Technology Assessment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(4), pages 495-508, May.
    8. Degtiar, Irina, 2017. "A review of international coverage and pricing strategies for personalized medicine and orphan drugs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(12), pages 1240-1248.
    9. Holloway, Kelly & Miller, Fiona A., 2022. "The Consultant's intermediary role in the regulation of molecular diagnostics in the US," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    10. Fischer, Katharina E. & Leidl, Reiner & Rogowski, Wolf H., 2011. "A structured tool to analyse coverage decisions: Development and feasibility test in the field of cancer screening and prevention," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 290-299, August.
    11. Vokinger, Kerstin N. & Muehlematter, Urs Jakob, 2020. "Accessibility of cancer drugs in Switzerland: Time from approval to pricing decision between 2009 and 2018," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(3), pages 261-267.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:9:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-019-0244-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/13561 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.