The fact that you have certain drugs that treat numerous cancers, and that they may treat 1 cancer different or better than another, would suggest that we should probably have differential pricing models, said A. Mark Fendrick, MD, director of the Center for Value-Based Insurance Design at the University of Michigan.
The fact that you have certain drugs that treat numerous cancers, and that they may treat 1 cancer different or better than another, would suggest that we should probably have differential pricing models, said A. Mark Fendrick, MD, director of the Center for Value-Based Insurance Design at the University of Michigan.
Transcript (slightly modified)
The issue of indication-based pricing is 1 response to tremendous pressure about what we’re doing with cost for drugs, particularly in cancer. So, we want to try to get to a situation where we’re actually paying appropriate amounts for drugs that work well. It’s not unique to cancer, but the fact that you have certain drugs that treat numerous cancers, and that it may treat 1 cancer different or better than another, would suggest that we should probably have differential pricing models. So, we’ve advocated for indication-based pricings for drugs for quite some time, only based on really hard, clinical evidence. I think, while it’s very complicated and understanding it might be difficult to move forward, but if people can understand that there are many parameters that you determine a value-based price or an indication-based price. The 3 that come to the top of my mind for me are:
If you put just those 3 variables together, you understand that now you have a Rubik’s cube, making it so hard, as opposed as 1 price for everything. Now we’re saying we might price it based on what you’re using it for, how well it works, and whether there are alternatives, which is why we would say don’t move ahead with indication-based pricing, or value-based pricing, but understand that there are a lot of variables that need to be considered before we go too far or too fast.
Standard Criteria for Loss of Ambulation Needed in DMD
April 19th 2024A recent study suggests the differences between ambulation definitions for patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) can impact the identification of ambulant vs nonambulant individuals, and standard criteria across settings are needed.
Read More
Early Involvement Critical in Treating Immunotherapy-Induced Overlap Syndrome
April 19th 2024A series of case studies reveals the importance of early diagnosis and involvement of special teams of clinicians when dealing with potential cases of overlap syndrome, which encompasses myocarditis, myasthenia gravis, and immune checkpoint inhibitor–related myositis.
Read More
Oncology Onward: A Conversation With Penn Medicine's Dr Justin Bekelman
December 19th 2023Justin Bekelman, MD, director of the Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, sat with our hosts Emeline Aviki, MD, MBA, and Stephen Schleicher, MD, MBA, for our final episode of 2023 to discuss the importance of collaboration between academic medicine and community oncology and testing innovative cancer care delivery in these settings.
Listen
Government agencies have created an online portal for the public to report potential anticompetitive practices in health care; there are changes coming to the “boxed warning” section for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies (CAR T) to highlight T-cell blood cancer risk; questions about the safety of obesity medications during pregnancy have arisen in women on them who previously struggled with fertility issues.
Read More