IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/115720.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Value and price of multi-indication cancer drugs in the USA, Germany, France, England, Canada, Australia, and Scotland

Author

Listed:
  • Michaeli, Daniel Tobias
  • Mills, Mackenzie
  • Kanavos, Panos

Abstract

Purpose: Oncology drugs are often approved for multiple indications, for which their clinical benefit varies. Aligning a single price to this differing value remains a challenge. This study examines the clinical and economic value, price, and reimbursement of multi-indication cancer drugs across seven countries, representing different approaches to value assessment, pricing, and coverage decisions: the USA, Germany, France, England, Canada, Australia, and Scotland. Methods: Twenty-five multi-indication cancer drugs across 100 indications were identified with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval between 2009 and 2019. For each indication data on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) recommendations, disease prevalence, and drug prices were obtained. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, disease prevalence, list prices, and HTA outcomes were then compared across indications and regions. Results: First approved indications provide a higher clinical benefit whilst targeting a smaller patient group than indication extensions. Quality-adjusted life year gains were higher for first (0.99, 95% CI 0.05–3.25) compared to second (0.51, 95% CI 0.02–1.63, p

Suggested Citation

  • Michaeli, Daniel Tobias & Mills, Mackenzie & Kanavos, Panos, 2022. "Value and price of multi-indication cancer drugs in the USA, Germany, France, England, Canada, Australia, and Scotland," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115720, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:115720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/115720/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Tobias Michaeli & Hasan Basri Yagmur & Timur Achmadeev & Thomas Michaeli, 2022. "Value drivers of development stage biopharma companies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(8), pages 1287-1296, November.
    2. Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz;Renato Dellamano;Michele Pistollato;Adrian Towse, 2015. "Multi-indication Pricing: Pros, Cons and Applicability to the UK," Seminar Briefing 001653, Office of Health Economics.
    3. Margherita Neri;Adrian Towse;Martina Garau, 2018. "Multi-Indication Pricing (MIP): Practical Solutions and Steps to Move Forward," Briefing 002084, Office of Health Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Levaggi, Laura & Levaggi, Rosella, 2024. "Competition, value-based prices and incentives to research personalised drugs," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).

    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. Carlos Campillo-Artero & Jaume Puig-Junoy & José Luis Segú-Tolsa & Marta Trapero-Bertran, 2020. "Price Models for Multi-indication Drugs: A Systematic Review," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 47-56, February.
    2. Daniel Tobias Michaeli & Mackenzie Mills & Panos Kanavos, 2022. "Value and Price of Multi-indication Cancer Drugs in the USA, Germany, France, England, Canada, Australia, and Scotland," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 757-768, September.
    3. Daniel Tobias Michaeli & Thomas Michaeli & Sebastian Albers & Tobias Boch & Julia Caroline Michaeli, 2024. "Special FDA designations for drug development: orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(6), pages 979-997, August.
    4. Margherita Neri;Adrian Towse;Martina Garau, 2018. "Multi-Indication Pricing (MIP): Practical Solutions and Steps to Move Forward," Briefing 002084, Office of Health Economics.
    5. Ulf Persson & J. M. Norlin, 2018. "Multi-indication and Combination Pricing and Reimbursement of Pharmaceuticals: Opportunities for Improved Health Care through Faster Uptake of New Innovations," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 157-165, April.
    6. Jakub P. Hlávka & Jeffrey C. Yu & Dana P. Goldman & Darius N. Lakdawalla, 2021. "The economics of alternative payment models for pharmaceuticals," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(4), pages 559-569, June.
    7. Rosella Levaggi & Paolo Pertile, 2020. "Value-Based Pricing Alternatives for Personalised Drugs: Implications of Asymmetric Information and Competition," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 357-362, June.
    8. Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz & Néboa Zozaya & Bleric Alcalá & Álvaro Hidalgo-Vega, 2018. "Multi-Indication Pricing: Nice in Theory but Can it Work in Practice?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(12), pages 1407-1420, December.
    9. Varshney, Mayank & Jain, Amit, 2023. "Technology acquisition following inventor exit in the biopharmaceutical industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ehl:lserod:115720. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.