The Health and Social Consortium of Catalonia to Develop New Value-Based Purchasing Models Incorporating New Tools for Negotiation with the Pharmaceutical Industry
READ MORE
Insights & Articles
4 min
24.3.2024
Innovation Center is Shifting Focus from Medicare to Medicaid
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is revamping value-based payment models, which it pursues at its so-called “Innovation Center” or Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI). The CMMI implements alternative payment models in the government programs Medicare and Medicaid for the purpose of cost containment and improvement in quality of care.
Since its founding in 2010, CMMI has launched more than 50 alternative payment models. An oft-cited success story is the Medicare Part D (outpatient drugs) Senior Savings Model, which the Innovation Center set in motion to test the impact of offering Medicare beneficiaries prescription drug plan options that include comprehensive coverage of all insulin products – including medical devices – with considerably lower out-of-pocket costs. Thanks to a robust public-private partnership between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and entities with whom it contracts – Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D plans, as well as pharmaceutical companies – this model has achieved the goals laid out by the Innovation Center, which include cost savings, improved quality of care, and more equitable outcomes.
The CMMI payment models – sometimes called demonstration projects – are viewed as ways to bypass statutory or legislative obstacles, for the purpose of experimenting with new approaches to reimbursement. Though often piecemeal in nature, demonstration projects can be a fallback option if legislative efforts fail, as they appear to have done with the Build Back Better Act which is currently on ice.
For example, CMMI payment models are incorporating bundled payments for treatment episodes, to reduce Medicare Part B (physician-administered) drug spending through more prescribing of biosimilars and generics and a streamlining of healthcare services.
The CMMI is now shifting some of its focus of alternative payment models from Medicare to Medicaid. Continued Medicaid expansion appears to the impetus behind efforts by policymakers to prioritize equity and reduce inequality in health outcomes. Total Medicaid enrollment has grown to 86 million, an increase of 20% since February 2020.
In October of last year, the policy and programs group director at CMMI, Ellen Lukens, said that “models have been predominantly Medicare-oriented, and have disproportionately served white beneficiaries.” By contrast, relatively few models have centered around Medicaid beneficiaries, many of whom are minorities. That is about to change.
The CMS administrator, Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, has laid out a vision for the next decade, one in which CMMI will drive “meaningful change” towards an “equitable” and “value-based system of healthcare.”
To carry out the mission of improving equity, policymakers will explicitly address barriers to participation in CMMI payment models by healthcare providers that serve a high proportion of minority populations. Policymakers also want to entice more underserved patients to register to participate in pilot programs.
The CMMI has undertaken a major review of the Center’s existing payment models to determine what works and what doesn’t. The review calls on the Innovation Center to explore new forms of value-based models in Medicare and especially Medicaid. Here, payment would be tied not only to improved patient outcomes and decreased overall healthcare spending, but also reductions in health disparities and increased patient affordability (lower out-of-pocket costs). Partnering with Lyfegen may be the solution for manufacturers and payers alike, as Lyfegen’s value-based payment solution is already widely being used by payers and pharma manufacturers in Europe.
As the Innovation Center embarks on a quest to improve the Medicaid program, using alternative payment models, it may need to consider adjusting its criteria of what counts as a successful model. The equity parts may be easier to measure than certain other objectives. For example, lowering federal expenditures appears to be the overriding goal of the CMMI models, and therefore cost savings to the government their standard measure of success. But, depending on the disease area in question, sometimes cost savings might not be easily achievable, even if the model is very much worth it and may save beneficiaries out-of-pocket expenses. In certain disease areas, improved health outcomes might be a better objective, along with a cost-effective use of additional resources.
About the author
Cohen is a health economist with more than 25 years of experience analyzing, publishing, and presenting on drug and diagnostic pricing and reimbursement, as well as healthcare policy reform initiatives. For 21 years, Cohen was an academic at Tufts University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Amsterdam. Currently, and for the past five years, Cohen is an independent healthcare analyst and consultant on a variety of research, teaching, speaking, editing, and writing projects.
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
READ MORE
The goal of this innovative initiative is to increase the processes of value-based drug procurement, allowing CSC-affiliated health centers to focus on the evaluation of the clinical, economic, and social benefits that the drug can provide in relation to its cost.
For the design of these new procurement models, the "Lyfegen Agreements Library" database and the “Lyfegen Drug Contracting Simulator” were used, and work was done on the automation of administrative tasks and on improving interoperability among hospitals and health administrations. These tools allow the CSC to model various agreements and improve the drug management process in the central contracting office. The Health and Social Consortium of Catalonia thus becomes the first organization in Spain to incorporate these tools.
"From the Consortium, we are convinced that access to innovation and the sustainability of the health system relies on reaching innovative management agreements with pharmaceutical laboratories," says Josep Maria Guiu, director of the Pharmacy and Medication Area of the CSC. "The alliance with Lyfegen gives us a tool to work in this direction and to advance in the establishment of satisfactory agreements that facilitate access to innovation and contribute to the sustainability of the health system."
Girisha Fernando, CEO of Lyfegen, comments that "We are proud to help the Consortium lead access to innovation to improve patient care in Catalonia." "By using our advanced solutions, more than 100 health organizations throughout the region can research, model, and efficiently manage agreements, as well as value-based drug procurement," he adds.
“This allows professionals to really focus on what matters most: patient care.”
The collaboration with Lyfegen reflects the commitment of the Health and Social Consortium of Catalonia to value-based drug procurement and to access to pharmacological innovation, as well as the will to continue working for the implementation of solutions that ensure equity and sustainability of the health system.
The total contracting volume of the CSC, which acts as the purchasing center for the subsidized health sector of Catalonia, was 1.497 billion euros in 2023. Of this amount, 90% corresponded to medicines and 10% to sanitary products.
In recent years, the Consortium of Health and Social Services of Catalonia has incorporated social value aspects into the purchasing processes. For example, it has committed to ensuring that 100% of its drug and sanitary product tenders incorporate environmental clauses by 2024.
Lyfegen is an independent provider of rebate management software designed for the healthcare industry. Lyfegen solutions are used by health insurances, governments, hospital payers, and pharmaceutical companies around the globe to dramatically reduce the administrative burden of managing complex drug pricing agreements and to optimize rebates and get better value from those agreements. Lyfegen maintains the world’s largest digital repository of innovative drug pricing models and public agreements and offers access to a robust drug pricing simulator designed to dynamically simulate complex drug pricing scenarios to understand full financial impact. Headquartered in Basel, Switzerland, the company was founded in 2018 and has a market presence in Europe, North America, and the Middle East. Learn more at Lyfegen.com.
The Consortium of Health and Social of Catalonia (CSC) is a public entity with a local and associative basis, founded in 1983, which has its origin in the municipal movement. The CSC, a reference to the sector and with a clear vocation for service, has as a mission: to promote excellent and sustainable health and social models to improve the quality of life of the people, offering services of high added value to its partners. CSC wants to be the main reference for knowledge and capacity for cooperation, influence and anticipation in the face of the new challenges of the health and social system. All CSC associates are public or private non-profit bodies. For more information, please visit https://www.consorci.org/el-csc/en_index
READ MORE
Pharma says they want greater competition within the industry and more incentives for pharmaceutical innovation; value-based purchasing agreements can provide both.
Value-based purchasing arrangements first appeared in the European markets in the 1990s, while U.S. healthcare markets did little with value-based contracts for pharmaceuticals until the 2000s. The high cost of new drugs coming to market, large annual increases in existing drug prices, and political pressure from lawmakers on payers to address the high cost of healthcare have encouraged stakeholders to make greater use of value-based purchasing arrangements.
It’s easy to understand the appeal of value-based purchasing agreements for private and public payers. Value-based purchasing is one way both U.S. and European payers are using to reduce overall healthcare spending.
For drug companies, value-based purchasing puts an end to their unencumbered pricing strategy. But pharmaceutical manufacturers realize value-based purchasing agreements are the best way, and maybe the only way, to get their new, higher-priced products covered by payers and into the treatment plans of patients.
How do pharmaceutical companies determine their drug prices?
Pharmaceutical companies are in business to generate as much revenue as possible without jeopardizing patients’ access to their treatments. In the U.S., where drug pricing is unregulated, pharmaceutical manufacturers can charge any price they want for their products. In the EU, member states use regulations such as direct control over pricing, referencing the average price of a drug among all EU members to set a national price, or regulating the drug manufacturers’ profit.
When deciding on a new drug’s retail price, the manufacturer considers several areas of concern such as the drug’s competition, government-granted exclusivity, patents in force, and a drug’s clinical effectiveness and benefit to patient outcomes.
Pricing a drug incorrectly can have severe consequences for the manufacturer’s bottom line. Private and public payers in the U.S. have ways of restricting patients’ access to drugs that they consider overpriced. In European countries, drug manufacturers risk being fined by authorities for unfair prices and excessive price hikes.
Value-based purchasing promotes competition in the pharmaceutical market
In the U.S., there are economic policies and legal loopholes that manipulate competition in the drug industry. The Biden administration considers this one of the key problems to address to support drug pricing reform. The president’s Executive Order 14036, the Competition Executive Order, calls for increased transparency, innovation, and competition.
Even though manufacturers take advantage of U.S. government protections that create temporary monopolies for some drugs, the large industry trade group PhRMA has joined the call for reforms that fix the current distortions in the market that stifle competition.
Manufacturers producing new drugs with in-class competition from other manufacturers—such as generics, biosimilars, or new uses or combinations of older drugs—use the real-world evidence gathered from value-based purchasing agreements to demonstrate the greater clinical value of their treatments compared to their competitors’ products. Data that show a drug’s uniqueness and effectiveness may be used to justify a manufacturer’s higher-than-average price.
In addition, manufacturers hope aligning a drug’s price to its clinical value will shift payers’ focus away from approving treatments based solely on the lowest price to covering similar treatments that might be more expensive but produce better health outcomes for patients.
Value-based purchasing incentivizes research and development (R&D) of new drugs
The post-market clinical data gathered under value-based purchasing can facilitate data-driven drug development. For example, the drug company Novartis published a position paper in which they stated they use real-world evidence to support the development of customized interventions and to invest in research in areas of the highest value for patients.
In the U.S.market in recent years, the number of clinical trials and an overall increase in spending on brand-name prescription drugs suggest that pharmaceutical manufacturers have been concentrating their research and development dollars on new high-cost specialty drugs for complex, chronic, or rare conditions they expect will be the most profitable.
New treatments like these, where the drug’s value is yet to be established for payers, are good candidates for value-based purchasing arrangements. The successful implementation of value-based purchasing contracts—with better health outcomes for patients, cost controls for payers, and fair prices for manufacturers—encourages even more data-driven drug development.
The Lyfegen Platform
Value-based purchasing agreements are a complex but necessary part of doing business for pharmaceutical manufacturers. They provide a framework for assessing a drug’s value using shared outcome measures and provide real-world evidence of the benefits of their products for patient health outcomes. Manufacturers who are unwilling to enter into value-based purchasing contracts with payers may find themselves at a disadvantage in negotiations with other stakeholders.
Lyfegen’s software platform helps healthcare insurances, pharma, and medtech companies implement and scale value-based purchasing contracts with greater efficiency and transparency. The Lyfegen Platform collects real-world data and uses intelligent algorithms to provide valuable insights on drug performance and cost in value-based contracts. By enabling the shift away from volume-based and fee-for-service healthcare to value-based healthcare, Lyfegen increases access to healthcare treatments and their affordability.
Value-based purchasing arrangements first appeared in the European markets in the 1990s, while U.S. healthcare markets did little with va...
Read MoreSign up & be the first to know about INNOVATIONS
* By sending this message, you agree to our privacy policy.
