Illustrating the financial consequences of outcome-based payment models from a payers perspective- the case of autologous gene therapy atidarsagene autotemcel (Libmeldy®)

Publication date

2024-08

Authors

Callenbach, Marcelien Heidrun ElisabethISNI 000000051251054X
Schoenmakers, Daphne
Vreman, RickISNI 0000000492512512
Vijgen, Sylvia
Timmers, Lonneke
Hollak, Carla E M
Mantel - Teeuwisse, AukjeISNI 0000000390595150
Goettsch, WimORCID 0000-0002-8022-7496ISNI 0000000395155859

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To illustrate the financial consequences of implementing different managed entry agreements (managed entry agreements for the Dutch healthcare system for autologous gene therapy atidarsagene autotemcel [Libmeldy]), while also providing a first systematic guidance on how to construct managed entry agreements to aid future reimbursement decision making and create patient access to high-cost, one-off potentially curative therapies. METHODS: Three payment models were compared: (1) an arbitrary 60% price discount, (2) an outcome-based spread payment with discounts, and (3) an outcome-based spread payment linked to a willingness to pay model with discounts. Financial consequences were estimated for full responders (A), patients responding according to the predicted clinical pathway presented in health technology assessment reports (B), and unstable responders (C). The associated costs for an average patient during the time frame of the payment agreement, the total budget impact, and associated benefits expressed in quality-adjusted life-years of the patient population were calculated. RESULTS: When patients responded according to the predicted clinical pathway presented in health technology assessment reports (scenario B), implementing outcome-based reimbursement models (models 2 and 3) had lower associated budget impacts while gaining similar benefits compared with the discount (scenario 1, €8.9 million to €6.6 million vs €9.2 million). In the case of unstable responders (scenario C), costs for payers are lower in the outcome-based scenarios (€4.1 million and €3.0 million, scenario 2C and 3C, respectively) compared with implementing the discount (€9.2 million, scenario 1C). CONCLUSIONS: Outcome-based models can mitigate the financial risk of reimbursing atidarsagene autotemcel. This can be considerably beneficial over simple discounts when clinical performance was similar to or worse than predicted.

Keywords

delayed payment, gene therapies, health technology assessment, managed entry agreements, orphan designated product, outcome-based reimbursement, pay-for-performance, pharmaceutical reimbursement, uncertainty, Health Policy, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Citation

Callenbach, M H E, Schoenmakers, D, Vreman, R A, Vijgen, S, Timmers, L, Hollak, C E M, Mantel-Teeuwisse, A K & Goettsch, W G 2024, 'Illustrating the financial consequences of outcome-based payment models from a payers perspective- the case of autologous gene therapy atidarsagene autotemcel (Libmeldy®)', Value in Health, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1046-1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.010