30.10.2024

Italy’s Healthcare Reform: Key Takeaways for Pharma, Payers, and Market Access Strategies

Introduction

Italy’s recent healthcare reform introduces a transformative approach to tackling longstanding challenges such as healthcare workforce shortages, regional disparities, and the modernization of infrastructure. As Italy prepares for these changes, pharmaceutical companies, payers, and other stakeholders will need to adapt their strategies for market access and contracting. Lyfegen’s Agreements Library and Drug Contracting Simulator provide essential tools to navigate these evolving demands with precision and efficiency.

Key Takeaways for Pharma and Payers

1. Workforce Expansion and Regional Equity

• What’s Changing: The reform aims to attract healthcare professionals to underserved regions and improve patient access across Italy.

• Impact: Pharma and payers will likely see more consistent healthcare delivery across Italy, leading to greater access to therapies. This broader market reach emphasizes the need for adaptable, data-driven contracting models.

2. Updated Training and Enhanced Medical Infrastructure

• What’s Changing: Italy’s healthcare workforce will benefit from enhanced training and infrastructure improvements, which could accelerate the adoption of innovative therapies.

• Impact: Pharma companies may experience streamlined pathways for introducing new treatments, while payers will benefit from a more robust healthcare system capable of supporting outcome-based agreements.

3. Digital Transformation and Outcome-Based Metrics

• What’s Changing: Emphasis on digital health infrastructure and outcome-based measures will create a more transparent and efficient healthcare environment, particularly for high-cost therapies.

• Impact: This focus on measurable outcomes provides pharma and payers with an opportunity to adopt innovative contracts based on real-world evidence, ensuring alignment with healthcare goals while managing financial risk.

How Lyfegen’s Solutions Can Support Your Strategy

1. Agreements Library: The world’s largest digital repository of drug pricing agreements, the Agreements Library offers over 6,000 public agreements and 20 unique pricing models from 33 countries. With data on more than 550 drugs and access to historical pricing trends, pharma and payers can confidently explore and tailor pricing agreements to the specific demands of Italy’s regions, ensuring that new market strategies meet regulatory requirements and regional healthcare needs.

2. Drug Contracting Simulator: The Drug Contracting Simulator enables teams to create simulations for various pricing models, from value-based to outcome-based. With the ability to run real-world scenarios and compare results, stakeholders can craft business cases that reflect real-world complexities and financial outcomes. This empowers teams to make informed contracting decisions, achieve faster negotiations, and support Italy’s focus on sustainable, transparent healthcare.

Conclusion

Italy’s healthcare reform marks a critical step toward a more equitable and efficient healthcare system. For pharmaceutical companies, payers, and other healthcare players, this shift opens doors to new contracting possibilities and requires a deep understanding of innovative market access models. Lyfegen’s Agreements Library and Drug Contracting Simulator offer the tools needed to stay competitive, adapt to regulatory shifts, and deliver patient-centric solutions that align with Italy’s healthcare goals.

Book your demo today to see how the right tools can transform your approach under this new reform: https://www.lyfegen.com/demo

Sources

• Anaao Assomed. (2023). Healthcare reform in Italy: Key changes and impacts on the medical workforce. Retrieved from https://www.anaao.it/content.php?cont=41425

• Quotidiano Sanità. (2023). Italy’s healthcare reform: Implications for science and pharmaceuticals. Retrieved from https://www.quotidianosanita.it/scienza-e-farmaci/articolo.php?articolo_id=125281

Related blogs

How Gene Therapies Are Reshaping Patient Outcomes and Payer Expectations

READ MORE

How Gene Therapies Are Reshaping Patient Outcomes and Payer Expectations

Gene therapies are redefining modern healthcare, offering the potential to address the root causes of genetic disorders through targeted treatment rather than symptom management. For patients, this represents a profound improvement in quality of life, while for payers and pharmaceutical companies, gene therapies introduce new challenges in contract structuring, reimbursement, and financial planning. In this blog, we’ll explore how gene therapies are reshaping patient outcomes, impacting payer expectations, and how Lyfegen’s solutions, such as the Agreements Library and Drug Contracting Simulator, are enabling pharma and payers to navigate this evolving landscape.

A New Horizon for Patient Outcomes with Gene Therapies

Gene therapies bring transformative potential to patient care by addressing the underlying genetic causes of diseases. Unlike traditional therapies that require ongoing treatment, many gene therapies promise long-lasting effects from a single intervention. This shift enables patients to move away from chronic management, experiencing a better quality of life, fewer medical interventions, and improved long-term health.

Why It Matters: For patients with rare genetic conditions, gene therapies offer a new chance at health. However, the high upfront costs and uncertain long-term efficacy make it challenging for payers to determine optimal reimbursement models. Balancing patient access with financial sustainability is crucial as healthcare systems adjust to the realities of high-cost gene therapies.


Payer and Pharma Contracting: Managing Uncertainty with Precision

With the high cost of gene therapies, payers and pharmaceutical companies face increased pressure to implement contracts that account for uncertain outcomes and long-term impact. Traditional pricing models often fall short in accommodating these complexities. Today, payers need new contracting frameworks that incorporate clinical and financial outcomes over extended timeframes, while pharma companies seek efficient ways to communicate the value and manage the financial implications of these therapies.

Shifting Expectations in Payer-Pharma Relations: To mitigate risk, payers and pharma companies are exploring innovative drug contracting models that tie payment to therapeutic outcomes. However, implementing such models requires robust data, effective scenario planning, and tools that support transparent, collaborative processes across stakeholders.

Lyfegen’s Role in Optimizing Drug Contracting for Gene Therapies

To address the complexities of gene therapy contracts, Lyfegen offers tailored tools that support payers and pharma companies through every stage of the contracting process. Our Agreements Library and Drug Contracting Simulator streamline research, analysis, and contract execution, allowing stakeholders to engage in informed, data-driven decision-making.

1. The Lyfegen Agreements Library: As the world’s largest digital repository of drug pricing agreements, the Lyfegen Library gives users access to over 6,000 public agreements and 20 unique pricing models.

Accelerate Effective Contracting: With a comprehensive database covering over 550 drugs and real-world agreements from 33 countries, payers and pharma teams can find, compare, and analyze pricing models that meet specific market and therapeutic needs.

Support Pragmatic Contracting: By exploring data from more than 150 drug manufacturers, users can identify successful contracting models and structures that match the challenges of gene therapies. This ensures informed choices that support sustainable access to innovative treatments.

2. Lyfegen Drug Contracting Simulator: Our simulator enables pharma and payer teams to model various drug pricing scenarios, providing real-time insights to drive negotiations.

Accelerate Negotiations with Real-World Simulations: The simulator allows users to run multiple pricing models, delivering scenario-based insights that reflect real-world financial implications. This helps pharma and payers create compelling business cases and select pricing models that suit both patient needs and budget constraints.

Improve Collaboration Across Teams: With flexible, secure access, the Drug Contracting Simulator enables local and global teams to work collaboratively. Users can save and share simulations, compare scenarios, and make evidence-based decisions quickly.

By equipping stakeholders with essential tools for research and analysis, Lyfegen’s solutions reduce the complexities of payer-pharma contracting, allowing stakeholders to navigate the high stakes of gene therapy reimbursement effectively.

Shaping the Future of Gene Therapy Access with Lyfegen

Gene therapies represent a future of precision medicine and improved patient outcomes. Yet, making this future accessible requires innovative approaches to contracting and reimbursement. By leveraging Lyfegen’s solutions, payers and pharma companies can structure contracts that maximize patient access to these therapies while managing financial risk.

Lyfegen is committed to supporting stakeholders as they navigate the challenges of gene therapies, providing solutions that bring real-world data, evidence-based simulations, and efficient contracting processes to the forefront. With the Lyfegen Agreements Library and Drug Contracting Simulator, payers and pharmaceutical teams have the tools they need to secure the future of gene therapies in a way that’s both financially sustainable and patient-centered.

To explore how Lyfegen’s Agreements Library and Drug Contracting Simulator can support your contracting needs for gene therapies, connect with our team or schedule a demo today.

Read More

The role of value-based care in patient access

READ MORE

The role of value-based care in patient access

With rising healthcare costs around the world, value-based care (VBC) is a paradigm shift poised to make healthcare more accessible and affordable. It’s a departure from the traditional fee-for-service (FFS) model, which pays providers each time they perform a service. In this type of care model, providers are rewarded for the volume of care they provide, rather than the quality.  

Value-based care shifts the priority of healthcare to patient wellbeing and patient centeredness. Value-based care agreements incentivize healthcare stakeholders to achieve better outcomes, and may even penalize excessive spending or unnecessary procedures.  

There are many approaches to providing and paying for value-based care, and they will be the subject of this article. Let’s take a broad look at what VBC is, its benefits, its challenges, and future directions.  

Why value-based care is needed

Healthcare costs are rising across the globe, and patients are bearing the brunt of it, with out-of-pocket healthcare costs rising faster than costs to insurers. Drugs are also becoming more expensive, and insurers and employers are concerned about high-cost claims. Many insurers are refusing to cover expensive treatments, like cell and gene therapies, or GLP-1 agonists.  

Although the fee-for-service model is still important, value-based care can fill the gaps to bring medicines to patients faster. Using cell and gene therapies as an example, VBC could prevent patients like Forrest VanPatten from dying during the process of jumping from insurer to insurer, hoping to find one that will cover the treatment.  

Alternative payment models (ABMs), a core element in the delivery of VBC, help these therapies get to market faster, by lowering the financial burden of expensive therapies. This could include installment payments, among several types of value-based contracts.  

Although pharmaceutical companies continue to improve patient outcomes by developing more effective medicines, healthcare costs include more than the price of the drugs. The total cost of care must also be managed and requires a close evaluation of how care is delivered to the patient.  

Ultimately, value-based care is a strategy to deliver a better healthcare experience to the patient while utilizing resources more effectively. It is feasible to reward healthcare practitioners for improving patient health, whether it be keeping them out of the hospital, reducing their reliance on medication, or becoming completely disease-free. But there are many challenges in implementing these models, as we’ll discuss.

The types of value-based care

There are many forms of value-based care, and different terms are used interchangeably. Use the glossary table below while reading this article to better understand.  

VBC can involve the following:  

  • Programs that work on delivering care more effectively
  • Payment models that involve sharing risk between the payer and the manufacturer  
  • Population-based payments to provider organizations
  • Patient-centered care: focusing on the needs and wants of the patient
  • Restricting access to medications only for those for whom it would be more effective

There are many ways medicine and care can be delivered to people in ways that support better outcomes. Let’s summarize the models above.  

Effective care delivery

The accountable care organization (ACO) is a group of clinical entities and providers that in synchronization, aim to deliver efficient and cost-effective healthcare to patients. If the efforts are successful, saved costs can be distributed, providing an incentive to avoid unnecessary procedures. A key component of ACOs is that financial responsibility lies on caregivers. ACOs were a central component of the Affordable Care Act in the United States, and generally describe the American healthcare system. However in several European countries, similar models providing integrative care do exist.  

This type of integrated care model may still rely on the fee-for-service model, but aim to reduce the volume of care.  

Risk-sharing agreements

Several value-based drug pricing agreements foster risk-sharing between the manufacturer of the drug and the payer. The following are examples:  

  • Pay-for-performance (P4P)
  • Coverage with evidence development (CED)
  • Outcomes guarantees
  • Installment payments
  • Managed entry agreements

Many of the above terms overlap with each other. What they have in common is that they can address clinical uncertainty—payers may be reluctant to reimburse therapies with limited clinical evidence from the pivotal trial. However, to ensure patient access, risk-sharing agreements are way to allow patients to be treated for a steep discount, while gathering real-world evidence.  

In a pay-for-performance agreement, payers will only have to pay for the treatment if anticipated patient outcomes are achieved. Several hybrid iterations of this type of agreement exist, including milestone payments, where payers receive rebates if disease progresses.  

You can find specific examples of these kinds of agreements in our Agreements Library.  

Population-based payments

Population-based payments facilitate integrative care delivery. They involve payments for either a specific condition, or for the care of an entire patient. However, unlike an ACO, population-based payments are value-based and are not based on the fee-for-service model.  

The Health Care Payment Learning & Action Network (HCP LAN) defines population-based payments as a “single payment that encompasses a broad array of services.” This is also more widely referred to as capitation. Capitation can apply to the care for a specific condition, or the entire continuum of care.  

NHS England defines capitation as “paying a provider or group of providers to cover the majority (or all) of the care provided to a specified population across different care settings. The regular payments are calculated as a lump sum per patient.”

Capitated payments typically involve a per-member-per-month fee. They provide predictable revenue for hospitals and providers while incentivizing them to provide quality care.  

Restricted access

Another way to address clinical uncertainty is to limit who can receive treatment as real-world evidence is being gathered. By refining the eligibility criteria, patients most-likely to benefit from the treatment can receive access.

What are some of the challenges of implementing value-based care?

There are several challenges to implementing value-based care. They include:  

  • Limiting who may receive care
  • Managing revenues
  • Integrating healthcare services  
  • Measuring clinical outcomes

One challenge with VBC is deciding on patient eligibility. Insurers may choose to cover a very select group of patients, denying others who may need treatment coverage, to ensure that they are incentivized accordingly. This leads to another challenge: choosing the right outcomes to measure. In the fee-for-service model, billing is tied to the condition and medication being prescribed, whereas in a value-based contract, financial incentives are tied to outcomes measured by a healthcare provider.

The chosen outcomes must be evidence-based and tracked accordingly. Collecting data, sharing it with various stakeholders, and integrating it into a patient’s care is another challenge. Great structural changes are needed to ensure the compliant sharing of this type of data.  

For manufacturers and hospitals alike, another challenge is to manage revenues. Pharmaceutical companies may be unclear for example on how drug profitability could vary with a performance-based or utilization cap contract. One of our solutions to this largely manual process was to create a drug price simulator. This tool helps manufacturers of health technologies compare and contrast different value-based contracts during the negotiation process.

For hospitals, it’s imperative to correctly track rebates, especially if they are warranted after upfront payments: our rebate management platform helps hospital systems identify up to 30% more rebates.  

Value-based care can balance innovation while lowering healthcare costs, but implementing it involves enhanced coordination of care delivery and significant organizational changes. VBC also involves innovative payment models that share risk with healthcare providers or place the burden of risk on them entirely to incentivize quality care.

Value-based payment models can reduce high upfront costs of expensive therapies while further evidence is gathered to justify the high costs. For providers, VBC may reduce burnout risk by incentivizing them to keep patients healthy.

The integration of value-based care in healthcare systems around the world requires data. At Lyfegen, we help pharma, MedTech, and providers understand the impact of value-based payment models with our innovative software. Let’s make this shift happen together.

Read More