Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Gene Therapy in Oncology | Research

Values, challenges, and responses associated with high-priced potential cures: perspectives of diverse stakeholders in South Korea

Authors: Jihyung Hong, Eun-Young Bae, Hye-Jae Lee, Tae-Jin Lee, Philip Clarke

Published in: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The emergence of high-priced potential cures has sparked significant health policy discussions in South Korea, where the healthcare system is funded through a single-payer National Health Insurance model. We conducted focus group interviews (FGIs) and accompanying surveys with diverse stakeholders to comprehensively understand related issues and find better solutions to the challenges brought by these technologies.

Methods

From October to November 2022, 11 FGIs were conducted with stakeholders from various sectors, including government payers, policy and clinical experts, civic and patient organisations, and the pharmaceutical industry, involving a total of 25 participants. These qualitative discussions were supplemented by online surveys to effectively capture and synthesise stakeholder perspectives.

Results

Affordability was identified as a critical concern by 84% of stakeholders, followed by clinical uncertainty (76%) and limited value for money (72%). Stakeholders expressed a preference for both financial-based controls and outcome-based pricing strategies to mitigate these challenges. Despite the support for outcome-based refunds, payers raised concerns about the feasibility of instalment payment models, whether linked to outcomes or not, due to the specific challenges of the Korean reimbursement system and the potential risk of ‘cumulative liabilities’ from ongoing payments for previously administered treatments. In addition, the FGIs highlighted the need for clear budgetary limits for drugs with high uncertainties, with mixed opinions on the creation of special silo funds (64.0% agreement). Less than half (48%) endorsed the use of external reference pricing, currently applied to such essential drugs in South Korea. A significant majority (84%), predominantly non-pharma stakeholders, advocated for addressing cost-effectiveness uncertainty through re-assessment once long-term clinical data become available.

Conclusions

This study uncovers a broad agreement among stakeholders on the need for more effective value assessment methodologies for high-priced potential cures, stressing the importance of more robust and comprehensive re-assessment supported by long-term data collection, rather than primarily relying on external reference pricing. Each type of stakeholders exhibited a cautious approach to their specific uncertainties, suggesting that new funding strategies should accommodate these uncertainties with predefined guidelines and agreements prior to the initiation of managed entry agreements.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wenzl M, Chapman S. Performance-based managed entry agreements for new medicines in OECD countries and EU member states. In. Paris; 2019. Wenzl M, Chapman S. Performance-based managed entry agreements for new medicines in OECD countries and EU member states. In. Paris; 2019.
2.
go back to reference Yeung K, Suh K, Garrison LP Jr., Carlson JJ. Defining and managing High-Priced cures: Healthcare payers’ opinions. Value Health. 2019;22:648–55.CrossRefPubMed Yeung K, Suh K, Garrison LP Jr., Carlson JJ. Defining and managing High-Priced cures: Healthcare payers’ opinions. Value Health. 2019;22:648–55.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Detela G, Lodge A. EU Regulatory Pathways for ATMPs: Standard, Accelerated and adaptive pathways to marketing authorisation. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2019;13:205–32.CrossRefPubMedCentral Detela G, Lodge A. EU Regulatory Pathways for ATMPs: Standard, Accelerated and adaptive pathways to marketing authorisation. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2019;13:205–32.CrossRefPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Garattini L, Curto A, van de Vooren K. Italian risk-sharing agreements on drugs: are they worthwhile? Eur J Health Econ. 2015;16:1–3.CrossRefPubMed Garattini L, Curto A, van de Vooren K. Italian risk-sharing agreements on drugs: are they worthwhile? Eur J Health Econ. 2015;16:1–3.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Young KE, Soussi I, Toumi M. The perverse impact of external reference pricing (ERP): a comparison of orphan drugs affordability in 12 European countries. A call for policy change. J Mark Access Health Policy. 2017;5:1369817.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Young KE, Soussi I, Toumi M. The perverse impact of external reference pricing (ERP): a comparison of orphan drugs affordability in 12 European countries. A call for policy change. J Mark Access Health Policy. 2017;5:1369817.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Dabbous M, Chachoua L, Caban A, Toumi M. Managed Entry agreements: policy analysis from the European perspective. Value Health. 2020;23:425–33.CrossRefPubMed Dabbous M, Chachoua L, Caban A, Toumi M. Managed Entry agreements: policy analysis from the European perspective. Value Health. 2020;23:425–33.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Vogler S, Paris V, Ferrario A, Wirtz VJ, de Joncheere K, Schneider P, Pedersen HB, Dedet G, Babar ZU. How can pricing and reimbursement policies improve Affordable Access to Medicines? Lessons learned from European Countries. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15:307–21.CrossRefPubMed Vogler S, Paris V, Ferrario A, Wirtz VJ, de Joncheere K, Schneider P, Pedersen HB, Dedet G, Babar ZU. How can pricing and reimbursement policies improve Affordable Access to Medicines? Lessons learned from European Countries. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15:307–21.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Villa F, Tutone M, Altamura G, Antignani S, Cangini A, Fortino I, Melazzini M, Trotta F, Tafuri G, Jommi C. Determinants of price negotiations for new drugs. The experience of the Italian Medicines Agency. Health Policy. 2019;123:595–600.CrossRefPubMed Villa F, Tutone M, Altamura G, Antignani S, Cangini A, Fortino I, Melazzini M, Trotta F, Tafuri G, Jommi C. Determinants of price negotiations for new drugs. The experience of the Italian Medicines Agency. Health Policy. 2019;123:595–600.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Toumi M, Jarosławski S. Managed Entry agreements and funding for expensive therapies (pharmaceuticals, Health Economics and Market Access). Boca Raton: CRC; 2022. Toumi M, Jarosławski S. Managed Entry agreements and funding for expensive therapies (pharmaceuticals, Health Economics and Market Access). Boca Raton: CRC; 2022.
11.
go back to reference Xoxi E, Rumi F, Kanavos P, Dauben HP, Gutierrez-Ibarluzea I, Wong O, Rasi G, Cicchetti A. A proposal for value-based managed entry agreements in an environment of Technological Change and Economic Challenge for publicly funded Healthcare systems. Front Med Technol. 2022;4:888404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Xoxi E, Rumi F, Kanavos P, Dauben HP, Gutierrez-Ibarluzea I, Wong O, Rasi G, Cicchetti A. A proposal for value-based managed entry agreements in an environment of Technological Change and Economic Challenge for publicly funded Healthcare systems. Front Med Technol. 2022;4:888404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Jorgensen J, Kefalas P. The use of innovative payment mechanisms for gene therapies in Europe and the USA. Regen Med. 2021;16:405–22.CrossRefPubMed Jorgensen J, Kefalas P. The use of innovative payment mechanisms for gene therapies in Europe and the USA. Regen Med. 2021;16:405–22.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Xoxi E, Facey KM, Cicchetti A. The evolution of AIFA registries to support managed Entry agreements for Orphan Medicinal products in Italy. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:699466.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Xoxi E, Facey KM, Cicchetti A. The evolution of AIFA registries to support managed Entry agreements for Orphan Medicinal products in Italy. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:699466.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Pearson SD, Ollendorf DA, Chapman RH. New cost-effectiveness methods to Determine Value-based prices for potential cures: what are the options? Value Health. 2019;22:656–60.CrossRefPubMed Pearson SD, Ollendorf DA, Chapman RH. New cost-effectiveness methods to Determine Value-based prices for potential cures: what are the options? Value Health. 2019;22:656–60.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Danzon PM. Value-Based Pricing, Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds, and Affordability: Are They Compatible? (July/August 2020). VALUE & OUTCOMES SPOTLIGHT 2020;6. Danzon PM. Value-Based Pricing, Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds, and Affordability: Are They Compatible? (July/August 2020). VALUE & OUTCOMES SPOTLIGHT 2020;6.
18.
go back to reference Lee IH, Bloor K, Bae EY. A comparative analysis of Anticancer Drug appraisals including managed Entry agreements in South Korea and England. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2023;21:347–59.CrossRefPubMed Lee IH, Bloor K, Bae EY. A comparative analysis of Anticancer Drug appraisals including managed Entry agreements in South Korea and England. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2023;21:347–59.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Espin J, Schlander M, Godman B, Anderson P, Mestre-Ferrandiz J, Borget I, Hutchings A, Flostrand S, Parnaby A, Jommi C. Projecting Pharmaceutical expenditure in EU5 to 2021: adjusting for the impact of discounts and rebates. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018;16:803–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Espin J, Schlander M, Godman B, Anderson P, Mestre-Ferrandiz J, Borget I, Hutchings A, Flostrand S, Parnaby A, Jommi C. Projecting Pharmaceutical expenditure in EU5 to 2021: adjusting for the impact of discounts and rebates. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018;16:803–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Hernandez I, San-Juan-Rodriguez A, Good CB, Gellad WF. Changes in list prices, net prices, and discounts for branded drugs in the US, 2007–2018. JAMA. 2020;323:854–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hernandez I, San-Juan-Rodriguez A, Good CB, Gellad WF. Changes in list prices, net prices, and discounts for branded drugs in the US, 2007–2018. JAMA. 2020;323:854–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Kim MK, Do W. Conditional Coverage with evidence development for Evoltra in Korea. Regul Res Food Drug Cosmet. 2016;11:85–91. Kim MK, Do W. Conditional Coverage with evidence development for Evoltra in Korea. Regul Res Food Drug Cosmet. 2016;11:85–91.
25.
go back to reference Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Guidelines for the long-term follow-up investigation of advanced Biological products (N.: 1154–01). In.; 2021. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Guidelines for the long-term follow-up investigation of advanced Biological products (N.: 1154–01). In.; 2021.
26.
go back to reference Jorgensen J, Hanna E, Kefalas P. Outcomes-based reimbursement for gene therapies in practice: the experience of recently launched CAR-T cell therapies in major European countries. J Mark Access Health Policy. 2020;8:1715536.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jorgensen J, Hanna E, Kefalas P. Outcomes-based reimbursement for gene therapies in practice: the experience of recently launched CAR-T cell therapies in major European countries. J Mark Access Health Policy. 2020;8:1715536.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Values, challenges, and responses associated with high-priced potential cures: perspectives of diverse stakeholders in South Korea
Authors
Jihyung Hong
Eun-Young Bae
Hye-Jae Lee
Tae-Jin Lee
Philip Clarke
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1478-7547
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-024-00527-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 1/2024 Go to the issue