Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Sep 28:7:305.
doi: 10.3389/fphar.2016.00305. eCollection 2016.

Payers' Views of the Changes Arising through the Possible Adoption of Adaptive Pathways

Affiliations

Payers' Views of the Changes Arising through the Possible Adoption of Adaptive Pathways

Michael Ermisch et al. Front Pharmacol. .

Abstract

Payers are a major stakeholder in any considerations and initiatives concerning adaptive licensing of new medicinal products, also referred to as Medicines Adaptive Pathways to patients (MAPPs). Firstly, the scope and necessity of MAPPs need further scrutiny, especially with regard to the definition of unmet need. Conditional approval pathways already exist for new medicines for seriously debilitating or life-threatening diseases and only a limited number of new medicines are innovative. Secondly, MAPPs will result in new medicines on the market with limited evidence about their effectiveness and safety. Additional data are to be collected after approval. Consequently, adaptive pathways may increase the risk of exposing patients to ineffective or unsafe medicines. We have already seen medicines approved conventionally that subsequently proved ineffective or unsafe amongst a wider, more co-morbid population as well as medicines that could have been considered for approval under MAPPs but subsequently proved ineffective or unsafe in Phase III trials and were never licensed. Thirdly, MAPPs also put high demands on payers. Routine collection of patient level data is difficult with high transaction costs. It is not clear who will fund these. Other challenges for payers include shifts in the risk governance framework, implications for evaluation and HTA, increased complexity of setting prices, difficulty with ensuring equity in the allocation of resources, definition of responsibility and liability and implementation of stratified use. Exit strategies also need to be agreed in advance, including price reductions, rebates, or reimbursement withdrawals when price premiums are not justified. These issues and concerns will be discussed in detail including potential ways forward.

Keywords: EMA; Europe; adaptive pathways; marketing authorization; payers.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Adamski J., Godman B., Ofierska-Sujkowska G., Osinska B., Herholz H., Wendykowska K., et al. (2010). Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers. BMC Health Services Res. 10:153. 10.1186/1472-6963-10-153 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Annemans L., Cleemput I., Hulstaert F., Simoens S. (2012). Comparative effectiveness research and measuring the level of pharmaceutical innovation in the EU. J. Comp. Effectiv. Res. 1, 19–29. 10.2217/cer.11.1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arrowsmith J. (2011). Trial watch: phase III and submission failures: 2007-2010. Nat. Rev. Drug Disc. 10:87. 10.1038/nrd3375 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baird L. G., Banken R., Eichler H. G., Kristensen F. B., Lee D. K., Lim J. C., et al. (2014). Accelerated access to innovative medicines for patients in need. Clin. Pharmacol. Therap. 96, 559–571. 10.1038/clpt.2014.145 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Banzi R., Gerardi C., Bertele V., Garattini S. (2015). Approvals of drugs with uncertain benefit-risk profiles in Europe. Eur. J. Inter. Med. 26, 572–584. 10.1016/j.ejim.2015.08.008 - DOI - PubMed