{"title":"改善罕见病治疗:补贴、定价和支付方案","authors":"W. Olsder, Tugce G. Martagan, Christopher S. Tang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3481150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are more than 7,000 known rare diseases, but pharmaceutical manufacturers developed treatments for only 500 of them. To improve the availability and accessibility of treatments for rare diseases, governments have introduced several programs including subsidies, exogenous pricing, and outcome-based payment schemes in recent years. What kind of subsidy programs and pricing mechanisms can improve patient access? Inspired by various pilot programs, we present a multistage game theoretic model to analyze different subsidy schemes proposed for rare diseases. In addition to the traditional setting in which the manufacturer sets the price, we consider an “exogenous pricing scheme” under which an independent consortium sets the price. We also examine an outcome-based payment scheme, which offers the drug for free if it is not efficacious. We formulate a four-stage Stackelberg game to determine whether it is optimal to subsidize the pharmaceutical manufacturer, the patients, or both. Our results offer several insights. First, we find that government subsidies are crucial to entice new drug development for rare diseases. Also, we find that the pricing scheme matters: The exogenous pricing scheme can improve patient welfare, but it reduces the manufacturer’s expected profit. We find that this result is robust even when an outcome-based payment scheme is used. This paper was accepted by Jayashankar Swaminathan, operations management. Funding: This work was supported by the Dutch Science Foundation [Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek VENI Talent Scheme]. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4634 .","PeriodicalId":431495,"journal":{"name":"Public Economics: Taxation","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving Access to Rare Disease Treatments: Subsidy, Pricing, and Payment Schemes\",\"authors\":\"W. Olsder, Tugce G. Martagan, Christopher S. Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3481150\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are more than 7,000 known rare diseases, but pharmaceutical manufacturers developed treatments for only 500 of them. To improve the availability and accessibility of treatments for rare diseases, governments have introduced several programs including subsidies, exogenous pricing, and outcome-based payment schemes in recent years. What kind of subsidy programs and pricing mechanisms can improve patient access? Inspired by various pilot programs, we present a multistage game theoretic model to analyze different subsidy schemes proposed for rare diseases. In addition to the traditional setting in which the manufacturer sets the price, we consider an “exogenous pricing scheme” under which an independent consortium sets the price. We also examine an outcome-based payment scheme, which offers the drug for free if it is not efficacious. We formulate a four-stage Stackelberg game to determine whether it is optimal to subsidize the pharmaceutical manufacturer, the patients, or both. Our results offer several insights. First, we find that government subsidies are crucial to entice new drug development for rare diseases. Also, we find that the pricing scheme matters: The exogenous pricing scheme can improve patient welfare, but it reduces the manufacturer’s expected profit. We find that this result is robust even when an outcome-based payment scheme is used. This paper was accepted by Jayashankar Swaminathan, operations management. Funding: This work was supported by the Dutch Science Foundation [Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek VENI Talent Scheme]. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4634 .\",\"PeriodicalId\":431495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Economics: Taxation\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Economics: Taxation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3481150\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Economics: Taxation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3481150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
已知的罕见病有7000多种,但制药商只开发了其中500种的治疗方法。近年来,为了提高罕见病治疗的可得性和可及性,各国政府推出了包括补贴、外生定价和基于结果的支付方案在内的若干方案。什么样的补贴计划和定价机制可以改善患者获得治疗的机会?在不同的试点项目的启发下,我们提出了一个多阶段博弈论模型来分析不同的罕见病补贴方案。除了制造商设定价格的传统设定之外,我们还考虑了一种“外生定价方案”,即由独立的财团设定价格。我们还研究了一种基于结果的支付方案,如果药物无效,则免费提供药物。我们制定了一个四阶段的Stackelberg博弈来确定是否补贴制药商、患者或两者都是最优的。我们的研究结果提供了一些见解。首先,我们发现政府补贴对于吸引罕见病新药开发至关重要。此外,我们发现定价方案的影响:外生定价方案可以提高患者的福利,但降低了制造商的期望利润。我们发现,即使使用基于结果的支付方案,这个结果也是稳健的。这篇论文被运营管理的Jayashankar Swaminathan接受。资助:本研究由荷兰科学基金会[Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek VENI Talent Scheme]资助。补充材料:数据文件和在线附录可在https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4634上获得。
Improving Access to Rare Disease Treatments: Subsidy, Pricing, and Payment Schemes
There are more than 7,000 known rare diseases, but pharmaceutical manufacturers developed treatments for only 500 of them. To improve the availability and accessibility of treatments for rare diseases, governments have introduced several programs including subsidies, exogenous pricing, and outcome-based payment schemes in recent years. What kind of subsidy programs and pricing mechanisms can improve patient access? Inspired by various pilot programs, we present a multistage game theoretic model to analyze different subsidy schemes proposed for rare diseases. In addition to the traditional setting in which the manufacturer sets the price, we consider an “exogenous pricing scheme” under which an independent consortium sets the price. We also examine an outcome-based payment scheme, which offers the drug for free if it is not efficacious. We formulate a four-stage Stackelberg game to determine whether it is optimal to subsidize the pharmaceutical manufacturer, the patients, or both. Our results offer several insights. First, we find that government subsidies are crucial to entice new drug development for rare diseases. Also, we find that the pricing scheme matters: The exogenous pricing scheme can improve patient welfare, but it reduces the manufacturer’s expected profit. We find that this result is robust even when an outcome-based payment scheme is used. This paper was accepted by Jayashankar Swaminathan, operations management. Funding: This work was supported by the Dutch Science Foundation [Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek VENI Talent Scheme]. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4634 .