Browsing by Subject "hallitun käyttöönoton sopimus"

Conditional reimbursement was introduced in Finland in January 2017 as a temporary addition in the Finnish Health Insurance Act. An agreement can be made between a marketing authorisation holder (MAH) and the Pharmaceuticals Pricing Board. Conditional reimbursement status can be allowed for a medicinal product if the drug is addressing unmet medical need and there are uncertainties associated to the medicinal product considering i.e. therapeutic value or cost-effectiveness, when traditional reimbursement procedures are not suitable. Risk-sharing is an essential part of the agreements and the results are monitored. Types of agreements are divided into financial- and performance-based agreements. Conditional reimbursement in Finland has not yet been studied in a large extent since its introduction. The aim of this study was to create an overview of the medicinal products with conditional reimbursement in Finland, how the unmet medical need is addressed, and which treatment options are available. Also, benefits and risks of the different stakeholders of risk-sharing agreements (RSA), why these agreements are worth to implement, earlier experiences from the European Economic Area (EEA) countries and what pharmaceutical companies should consider prior to negotiations were investigated. A document analysis was performed for investigating the medicinal products with conditional reimbursement status in Finland. A systematic literature review was conducted for collecting information and earlier experiences of RSAs and managed entry agreements (MEA) in the EEA-countries. On February 1st, 2019 there was 19 medicinal products with conditional reimbursement in Finland. These drugs are successfully addressing unmet medical need. All stakeholders of RSAs encounter benefits and risks of these agreements but the MAH is the one carrying the largest responsibilities and risks. Risk-sharing agreements gained in popularity since the early 2000s in the EEA-countries. There is no golden standard for types of agreements made but MEAs are enshrined in legislation in most countries. The pharmaceutical company should as early as possible start shaping details and collect information of the product for which conditional reimbursement will be proposed to. Negotiations might be challenging, but the aim is an agreement in which both the MAH and the payer are content with. Finland is following a similar trend as other EEA-countries, since most of the medicinal products with conditional reimbursement are oncology medicines. The use of the drugs has been limited through reimbursement number codes for certain patients who are most likely to benefit from the treatment. Rationales for introducing RSAs in EEA-countries were similar, e.g. working with finite resources, improving access, reducing uncertainty and prices, managing budget impact and improving cost-effectiveness. It seems like Finland is unique by the temporary introduction of conditional reimbursement in legislation and in other countries it has been introduced as permanent. Starting the preparations early for negotiations could save time and resources. When a RSA is made and the medicinal product shows the benefits expected, this is the ideal situation where all stakeholders benefit.