Evaluation of the cost saving potential of introducing Benepali® and Flixabi® on the European and Italian markets

IF 0.4 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Farmeconomia-Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways Pub Date : 2017-10-10 DOI:10.7175/FE.V18I1.1330
C. Negrini, E. Psachoulia
{"title":"Evaluation of the cost saving potential of introducing Benepali® and Flixabi® on the European and Italian markets","authors":"C. Negrini, E. Psachoulia","doi":"10.7175/FE.V18I1.1330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: Biosimilar products play an important role in improving the access to biological medicines for an increased number of patients and enhancing the financial sustainability of the health systems. AIM: To assess the cost saving potential associated with the introduction of two biosimilars (Benepali ® and Flixabi ® ) vs. their respective reference biological products on the European and Italian markets. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to estimate the cost saving of the hypothetical introduction of Benepali ® and Flixabi ® vs. Enbrel ® and Remicade ® , respectively, in three European countries. The analysis was conducted from the payer perspective, over a 3-year period. In addition, the same model was used to assess the impact of Benepali ® vs. Enbrel ® in three Italian regions over a 2-year period. The model compares the costs associated with the current treatment patterns, used to manage patients with all the conditions which Benepali ® and Flixabi ® are authorized for, with that of a hypothetical treatment pattern in which biosimilar products have been introduced. Only direct costs associated with the drug acquisition were considered. The model was constructed using published country- or region-specific data, where available. Annual drug acquisition costs were calculated using the dosing information from SPCs and country-/region-specific price lists. RESULTS: The introduction of Benepali ® and Flixabi ® in the biologic therapeutic setting of three European countries resulted in substantial cost savings across the entire scenario, with different penetration over a 3-year period. Similarly, over a 2-year horizon, the introduction of Benepali ® in the biologic therapeutic setting of three Italian regions resulted in significant cost savings. In all cases, the greater savings were observed in the scenario where the biosimilars’ penetration was higher. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of Benepali ® and Flixabi ® has a substantial cost saving potential for the Italian and European health systems, and the budget impact is sensitive to the uptake rates of the biosimilars market.","PeriodicalId":41585,"journal":{"name":"Farmeconomia-Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Farmeconomia-Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7175/FE.V18I1.1330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Biosimilar products play an important role in improving the access to biological medicines for an increased number of patients and enhancing the financial sustainability of the health systems. AIM: To assess the cost saving potential associated with the introduction of two biosimilars (Benepali ® and Flixabi ® ) vs. their respective reference biological products on the European and Italian markets. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to estimate the cost saving of the hypothetical introduction of Benepali ® and Flixabi ® vs. Enbrel ® and Remicade ® , respectively, in three European countries. The analysis was conducted from the payer perspective, over a 3-year period. In addition, the same model was used to assess the impact of Benepali ® vs. Enbrel ® in three Italian regions over a 2-year period. The model compares the costs associated with the current treatment patterns, used to manage patients with all the conditions which Benepali ® and Flixabi ® are authorized for, with that of a hypothetical treatment pattern in which biosimilar products have been introduced. Only direct costs associated with the drug acquisition were considered. The model was constructed using published country- or region-specific data, where available. Annual drug acquisition costs were calculated using the dosing information from SPCs and country-/region-specific price lists. RESULTS: The introduction of Benepali ® and Flixabi ® in the biologic therapeutic setting of three European countries resulted in substantial cost savings across the entire scenario, with different penetration over a 3-year period. Similarly, over a 2-year horizon, the introduction of Benepali ® in the biologic therapeutic setting of three Italian regions resulted in significant cost savings. In all cases, the greater savings were observed in the scenario where the biosimilars’ penetration was higher. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of Benepali ® and Flixabi ® has a substantial cost saving potential for the Italian and European health systems, and the budget impact is sensitive to the uptake rates of the biosimilars market.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估Benepali®和Flixabi®在欧洲和意大利市场的成本节约潜力
导言:生物类似药产品在改善越来越多的患者获得生物药物和增强卫生系统的财务可持续性方面发挥着重要作用。目的:评估两种生物仿制药(Benepali®和Flixabi®)在欧洲和意大利市场上与各自的参考生物制品相比的成本节约潜力。方法:在三个欧洲国家建立了预算影响模型,以估计分别引入Benepali®和Flixabi®与Enbrel®和Remicade®的成本节约。该分析是从付款人的角度进行的,为期3年。此外,同样的模型被用于评估Benepali®与Enbrel®在意大利三个地区2年期间的影响。该模型比较了与当前治疗模式相关的成本,用于管理Benepali®和Flixabi®授权治疗的所有病症患者,以及引入生物仿制药的假设治疗模式。只考虑了与药品收购相关的直接成本。该模型是使用已公布的国家或地区特定数据(如有)构建的。年度药品采购成本是根据国家/区域特定价目表和spc的剂量信息计算的。结果:在三个欧洲国家的生物治疗环境中引入Benepali®和Flixabi®,在整个方案中节省了大量成本,在3年的时间内具有不同的渗透率。同样,在2年的时间里,在意大利三个地区的生物治疗环境中引入Benepali®,显著节省了成本。在所有情况下,在生物仿制药渗透率较高的情况下观察到更大的节省。结论:Benepali®和Flixabi®的引入为意大利和欧洲的卫生系统节省了大量的成本潜力,并且预算影响对生物仿制药市场的吸收率很敏感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊最新文献
The Importance of the Pharmacoeconomic Analyses in Drug Negotiation. A Farewell Editorial [Measurement-Based Procurement Approach for Biosimilars in Italy: A Position Paper] [Burden of Short Bowel Syndrome in Italy: Direct and Indirect Costs and Quality of Life] Cost-effectiveness of Empagliflozin, in Addition to Metformin, in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Italy [Budget Impact Analysis of the Adjuvanted Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine in the Elderly in Italy]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1