The industry has plenty of ways to define value. Thousands of academic and corporate health economists busily grind out cost-effectiveness analyses. CMS has designated five "compendia" as guides for reimbursable value, despite bizarrely opaque decision-making behind the compendias' choices.
read full article ›Payers will be buying the way other industrial buyers do -- they'll comparison shop. It's crucial that biopharma provide them the appropriate measurement tools. If they don't, buyers will settle on the easiest point of comparison: price.
read full article ›It’s the Planck constant of the pharmaceutical industry: if you’re going to build a commercially successful drug, it needs to
read full article ›Paying a lot of money to get your drug to market first is, in most cases, going to be worth a lot less in a payer-engaged future than it was in the physician-dominated past.
read full article ›Transparent comparative evaluations are necessary for determining the relative value of drugs. But, in part because of resistance from drug companies and payers, stakeholders are finding other tools to help identify the appropriate choices.
read full article ›Not all payers make their decisions the same way. Smart payer segmentation strategies are extremely important to successful biopharmas.
read full article ›As physicians lose decision-making authority to payers, drug companies need to segment markets more effectively: the patient populations prescribers are most likely to treat and that will spark the fewest access battles; and the specific payer lines-of-business least inclined to block new drugs’ use.
read full article ›Learn why are we are seeing increasing numbers of value-based deals in the industry, how they are structured and when they make sense.
read full article ›