Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:13:33.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A NEW HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM FOR JAPAN? SIMULATING THE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THE PRICE OF SIMEPREVIR

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2017

Jörg Mahlich ,
Isao Kamae  and
Bruno Rossi
Jörg Mahlich
Affiliation:
Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE), Health Economics, Janssen Pharmaceutical KK, [email protected]
Isao Kamae
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Public Policy, The Canon Institute for Global Studies
Bruno Rossi
Affiliation:
Bayer Yakuhin, Ltd, European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: Japanese authorities have announced a plan to introduce a health technology assessment (HTA) system in 2016. This study assessed the potential impact of such a policy on the price of the antivirologic drug simeprevir.

Methods: Taking the antivirologic drug simeprevir as an example, we compared the current Japanese price with hypothetical prices that might result if a U.K. (cost-utility) or German (efficiency frontier) style HTA assessment was in place.

Results: The simeprevir unit price under the current Japanese pricing scheme is 13,122 Japanese yen (equivalent to 109.35 U.S. dollars as of April 2015). Depending on the selection of comparators and the pricing method, and assuming that HTA will be used as a basis for price setting, the estimated prices of simeprevir vary up to four times higher than under the current Japanese pricing scheme.

Conclusions: Although the analysis is based on only one drug, it cannot be taken for granted that a new HTA system would reduce public healthcare expenditure in Japan.

Keywords

SimeprevirHealth technology assessmentAntiviral drugsJapan
Type
Policies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , 2017 , pp. 121 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Deloitte. Outlook life sciences 2015. Tokyo: Deloitte; 2015. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Life-Sciences-Health-Care/gx-lshc-2015-life-sciences-report-japan.pdf (accessed June 20, 2015).Google Scholar
2. WHO. The World Health Report 2000: Health systems: Improving performance. Geneva: WHO; 2000 Google Scholar
3. Reich, M, Ikegami, N, Shibuya, K, Takemi, K. 50 years of pursuing a healthy society in Japan. Lancet. 2011;378:1051–1053.Google Scholar
4. OECD. Reviews of health care quality: Japan - Raising standards. Paris: OECD; 2015.Google Scholar
5. Ikegami, N. 2014. Universal health coverage for inclusive and sustainable development: Lessons from Japan. World Bank Group. Washington, DC: 2015. doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-0480-3.Google Scholar
6. Muramatsu, N, Akiyama, H. Japan: Super-aging society preparing for the future. Gerontologist. 2011;51:425–432.Google Scholar
7. OECD. Health Statistics 2014: How does Japan compare? Paris: OECD; 2014. http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/Briefing-Note-JAPAN-2014.pdf (accessed June 20, 2015).Google Scholar
8. Kamae, I. The new era of health technology assessment - A surge of new ‘Black Ships’. Canon Institute of Global Studies, Columns and Papers: Macroeconomics; 2016. http://www.canon-igs.org/en/column/macroeconomics/20160219_3517.html Google Scholar
9. European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. 2015. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) application in select markets and implications for Japan, Tokyo. 2015.Google Scholar
10. Kumada, H, Toyota, J, Okanoue, T, et al. Telaprevir with peginterferon and ribavirin for treatment-naive patients chronically infected with HCV of genotype 1 in Japan. J Hepatol. 2012;56:78–84.Google Scholar
11. Hayashi, N, Izumi, N, Kumada, H, et al. Simeprevir with peginterferon/ribavirin for treatment-naive hepatitis C genotype 1 patients in Japan: CONCERTO-1, a phase III trial. J Hepatol. 2014;61:219–227.Google Scholar
12. Quigley, JM, Bryden, PA, Scott, DA, Kuwabara, H, Cerri, K. The relative efficacy and safety of Simeprevir and telaprevir in treatment-naive hepatitis C infected patients in a Japanese population – Bayesian network meta-analysis. Hepatol Res. 2015;45:E89–E98.Google Scholar
13. Sangiovanni, A, Prati, GM, Fasani, P, et al. The natural history of compensated cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus: A 17-year cohort study of 214 patients. Hepatology. 2006;43:1303–1310.Google Scholar
14. Roche, B, Samuel, D. Hepatitis C virus treatment pre- and post-liver transplantation. Liver Int. 2012;32 (Suppl 1):120–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. WHO. Cost-effectiveness thresholds. Geneva: WHO; 2015. http://www.who.int/choice/costs/CER_thresholds/en/ (accessed June 20, 2015).Google Scholar
16. Cabinet Office Japan. Tables of GDP and its components. Tokyo: Cabinet Office Japan; 2015. http://www.esri.cao.go.jp/en/sna/data/sokuhou/files/2014/qe144_2/gdemenuea.html (accessed June 20, 2015).Google Scholar
17. Statistics Japan. Population statistics Japan. Tokyo: Statistics Japan; 2015. http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/jinsui/tsuki/index.htm (accessed May 20, 2015).Google Scholar
18. Kuwabara, H, Westerhout, K, Treur, M, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of Simeprevir in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin for treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 patients in Japan. J Med Econ. 2015;18:502–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Henschke, C, Sundmacher, L, Busse, R. Structural changes in the German pharmaceutical market: Price setting mechanisms based on the early benefit evaluation. Health Policy. 2013;109:263–269.Google Scholar
20. Caro, J, Nord, E, Siebert, U, et al. The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation of health-care interventions. Health Econ. 2010;19:1117–1127.Google Scholar
21. Gissl, C, Götz, G, Mahlich, J, Rapp, J. Cost-effectiveness of Interferon-free therapy for Hepatitis C in Germany - An application of the efficiency frontier approach. BMC Infect Dis. 2015;15:297.Google Scholar
22. Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare. 中央社会保険医療協議会 (Central Social Insurance Medical Council). Tokyo: Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare; 2015. http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/shingi/shingi-chuo.html?tid=128154, (accessed June 1st 2015).Google Scholar
23. Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare. 中医協の公表資料 (Central Social Insurance Medical Council official document), November 13. Tokyo: Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare; 2013.Google Scholar
24. Gandjour, A, Gafni, A, Schlander, M. Determining the price for pharmaceuticals in Germany: Comparing a shortcut for IQWiG's efficiency frontier method with the price set by the manufacturer for ticagrelor. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14:123–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Stollenwerk, B, Lhachimi, S, Briggs, A, et al. Communicating the parameter uncertainty in the IQWiG efficiency frontier to decision-makers. Health Econ. 2015;24:481–490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Gemeinsamer Bundesauschuss. Beschluss des Gemeinsamen Bundesausschusses über eine Änderung der Arzneimittel-Richtlinie (AM-RL): Anlage XII - Beschlüsse über die Nutzenbewertung von Arzneimitteln mit neuen Wirkstoffen nach § 35a SGB V – Simeprevir. Berlin. 2015. https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/39-261-2098/2014-11-20_AM-RL-XII_Simeprevir_2014-06-01-D-113_BAnz.pdf (accessed June 30, 2015).Google Scholar
27. Eger, S, Mahlich, J. Pharmaceutical regulation in Europe and its impact on corporate R&D. Health Econ Rev. 2014;4:23.Google Scholar
28. Höhle-Pasques, S, Hankowitz, J, Oberender, P. Drei Jahre frühe Nutzenbewertung nach §35a SGB V – kritische Würdigung und Lösungsvorschlag (Three years early benefit assessment in Germany- a critical discussion). Pharmacoeconomics German Res Art. 2013;11:13–24.Google Scholar
29. Igarashi, A, Tang, W, Cure, S, et al. Cost-utility-analysis of Sofosbuvir for treatment of genotype 2 chronic hepatitis C in Japan. Value Health. 2014;17:A368.Google Scholar
30. Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare. 中央社会保険医療協議会 (Central Social Insurance Medical Council). Tokyo: Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare; 2015. http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/shingi2/0000084737.html (accessed May 20 2015).Google Scholar
31. Iyengar, S, Tay-Teo, K, Vogler, S, et al. Prices, costs, and affordability of new medicines for hepatitis C in 30 countries: An economic analysis. PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002032.Google Scholar
32. Kamae, I, Yamabe, K, Sugimoto, T. The decision criteria for assessing cost-effectiveness of a health care technology under budget constraint. Value Health. 2014;17:A732.Google Scholar
33. Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (JPMA). Pharmaceutical Administration and Regulations in Japan. Tokyo: JPMA; 2014. http://www.jpma.or.jp/english/parj/whole.html (accessed May 20 2015).Google Scholar
34. Arrow, KJ. Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. Am Econ Rev. 1963;53:941–973.Google Scholar
35. Hafner, P, Mahlich, J. Determinants of physician's office visits and potential effects of co-payments: Evidence from Austria. Int J Health Plann Manage. 2016;31:e192–e203.Google Scholar