Alignment of health technology assessments and price negotiations for new drugs for rare disorders in Canada: Does it lead to improved patient access?

7Citations
Citations of this article
70Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

A previous assessment of submissions for rare disorder drugs made to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) found that, from 2012, all positive recommendations included criteria advocating a price reduction. Since 2016, CADTH and the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance (pCPA), which conducts drug price negotiations with manufacturers for all public drug programs, have aligned their processes. This analysis examined drugs for rare and ultra-rare disorders (DRDs and DURDs)—prevalence of ≤20 to >2 and ≤2 per 100,000, respectively—with a completed pCPA negotiation or no negotiation between 2014 and 2018, together with their reimbursement recommendations and listings in public drug programs. A positive recommendation led to a successful price negotiation for 81.8% and 78.6% of the DRD and DURD submissions and a negative recommendation to no negotiation for 100.0% and 66.7%. Less than half the recommendations for DURDs reported before 2016 mentioned the need for a substantial price reduction, but this increased to 80% in those reported from 2016 onwards. A successful price negotiation led to listing in the majority of the public drug programs and a negative recommendation usually led to no listing. The CADTH-pCPA alignment is working for the governments who own and fund public drug programs but has yet to lead to coverage for all appropriate patients in all provinces. There is still a way to go to ensure that patients with unmet needs can access high-cost innovative medicines that alleviate suffering, prevent premature death, and/ or significantly improve their quality of life.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rawson, N. S. B. (2020). Alignment of health technology assessments and price negotiations for new drugs for rare disorders in Canada: Does it lead to improved patient access? Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 27(1), e48–e64. https://doi.org/10.15586/jptcp.v27i1.658

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free