What Will It Take to Advance Value-Based Pharmaceutical Contracts?

Prices for drugs in the U.S. continue to rise – faster than the rate of inflation – according to a Harvard study that shows nearly half of new drugs marketed now cost $150,000 or more annually. Insurers, along with consumers and regulators, are anxiously seeking ways to lower costs and to make sure patients get the treatments they need. One solution that is gaining interest is value-based pharmaceutical contracting, where costs are tied to results; the more effective a drug, the more a payer will allocate for that drug.

This model isn’t new and it has proven to be successful in Europe, where many value-based pharma contracting are showing positive results for payers, patients, and pharmaceutical companies. As a result, some companies that cater to the U.S. market are moving towards this model, although there are challenges.

Value-based contracting is especially applicable for the growing number of cell and gene therapies and other new ultra-expensive treatments. By allowing insurers and other payers to pay in installments that are dependent on patient outcomes, or even to receive refunds if the drug does not perform as expected, pharma companies are sharing the risk with payers. And there is great value in that shared risk. Payers, for example, are able to realize better patient outcomes when drugs proving to be ineffective can be replaced with more effective ones. At the same time, pharmaceutical firms are incentivized to ensure that the treatments they offer payers are truly effective ones, spurring better and more effective research.

In addition to making sure that prices reflect patient outcome, value-based contracting helps expand the amount of data associated with a treatment. With more data on the effectiveness of treatments recorded – and more tracking of patients over time – researchers will have more data to draw on when developing new treatments. That data can include details on all aspects of a patient's care and even factor in the patient's adherence to medication schedules. This data can also help pharma companies advance their research.Finally, healthcare providers benefit from value-based contracting because they will be able to get a more accurate picture of their patients' overall health situations, which will allow them to provide higher-quality care. Despite all of the advantages for all parties involved, value-based contracting has not yet been widely embraced by payers or pharma companies. A survey of 180 large employers, insurers, and unions with health benefit programs shows just 12% use value-based contracting for specialty drugs, which are usually the most expensive treatments, and fewer than 1% of organizations are using them for more common drugs.

This apparent reluctance to adopt value-based contracting is surprising because payers who have leveraged this approach are finding that their pharma costs are falling.

But challenges do remain for both payers and insurance companies in adopting value-based contracting. In order to speed up the adoption of value-based contracting, there needs to be a willingness to change business culture and long-entrenched processes; an acknowledgement that value-based contracting can expand insights and opportunities for pharma companies, but more clear incentives are necessary; and more dialogue around industry standards and regulatory flexibility that take this contracting model into account.

Industries like insurance and pharma often have institutional, or legacy, systems and processes that no longer best serve the organization and market opportunity. Innovative new opportunities like value-based contracting likely requires change–changes to systems, to processes, and to people’s day-to-day operations. Some organizations find the implementation of value-based contracting models complicated because they require analyzing patient outcomes, negotiating prices based on those outcomes, and determining which drugs should be included in the program. All of these steps require access to–and analysis of–a great deal of data, which can be a significant investment. However, there are digital platforms that are designed to implement value-based contracting without overcomplicating the process–and the investment can yield operational efficiency, recovery of missed revenues, and, most importantly, provide critical access for patients to life-saving drug therapies.

Within the industry, there is an assumption among pharma companies that there is a limited return on their investment with value-based contracting, or even the possibility of lower revenues due to lower prices. But with the transparency that value-based contracting can bring to pharma companies through real-world data from patients taking their drugs, there comes expanded opportunities to understand drug performance and patient outcomes, both of which are valuable for future drug development and marketing. A KPMG report notes another important benefit of value-based contracting–for example, such agreements can enable pharma companies access to currently highly-regulated markets that they were unable to sell in before, thus serving as a competitive advantage. In order to keep pushing pharma companies in this direction, there need to be more clear incentives that can help them with access challenges.

As value-based contracting continues to be more commonplace, it is likely that there will be more standardization within the industry and regulatory parties. However, these changes should be happening now.  For example, standards are needed regarding what factors should be included when evaluating the effectiveness or value of a drug. Furthermore, value is a dynamic concept and the definition changes depending upon the viewpoint–value for a payer is different from value for pharma is different from value for a patient. The industry also needs to sort out what happens in outcome-based contracts when patients switch insurers.

Regulations can also stand in the way. While Medicaid has adopted a value-based contracting model for a small selection of drugs, most others are not covered by that arrangement. Most drugs are subject to Medicaid's Best Price policy where prices aren't connected to effectiveness or results, thus perpetuating the disconnect between price and value. The good news is that CMS, the government agency responsible for Medicaid and Medicare services, plans to extend and expand the value-based contracting model already in effect as they continue working towards the goals of improving health outcomes and lowering costs.

Change can be challenging. But as drug prices rapidly rise, the need for change has never been greater. Value-based contracting is the innovative solution that leverages the right data, at the right time, and with the right level of transparency to reduce costs, recover lost revenues, ensure more effective outcomes, help patients get healthier, and provide valuable data insights for future drugs and treatments. It's time to start implementing them.