value-based contracting for drugs and medical devices...alternative contracts outcomes-based...
TRANSCRIPT
Session 181 PD - Value-Based Contracting for Drugs and Medical Devices
Moderator:
Gabriela Dieguez, FSA, MAAA
Presenters: Maggie Alston, CHFP Patrick Cunningham
SOA Antitrust Compliance Guidelines SOA Presentation Disclaimer
Value-Based Contracting for Pharmaceutical and Device Manufacturers
October 18, 2017
SOA Annual MeetingBoston, MA
Gabi Dieguez, FSA, MAAA
Principal & Consulting Actuary
Maggie Alston, CHFP
Healthcare Analytics Consultant
Agenda
I. From volume to value: incentives for value-based contracting
II. Value-based contracting options for pharmaceuticals and devices
III. A manufacturer’s perspective
IV. Q&A
2
The Shift from Volume to Value
3
Value-Based Contracting Differs from Fee-for-Service
Under fee-for-service arrangements, a health plan or other payer pays an assigned fee for each covered item.
Providers are incentivized to provide more services or more aggressive services, particularly costly inpatient services like surgery.
In fee-for-service, the payer bears the risk, not the provider.
Value-based contracts are an attractive alternative to traditional drug and device contracting for payers and risk-bearing providers as the industry moves from volume to value. However, these contracts require a significant amount of data analytics.
4
FFS is no longer perceived by payers as providing value, nor is it likely to be financially sustainable given the already large share of the economy consumed by healthcare.
Key Factors Driving Value-Based Contracts
Rising Healthcare Costs with Perceived Poor Value
• Since 2000, health insurance premiums for a typical family have increased by 114%
Backlash against high prices
• Life science companies are facing sharp criticism for some of their pricing strategies
More government dollars
• Expansion of Medicaid + low-income subsidies in Exchanges + aging of “baby-boomers” = increasing government spending.
• This gives the government greater leverage and incentive to try to manage rising costs.
Constrained Budgets for Healthcare Spending
• In 1980, healthcare represented 9.2% of GDP. In 2010, that share nearly doubled to 17.9%.
5
Common Concepts in Value-Based Contracts
Value-based arrangements have many names:
Risk sharing contracts Advanced contracts
Alternative contracts Outcomes-based contracts
Payment reform Risk contracts
Shared risk contracts Pay-per-performance contracts
6
How Can Pharmacy and Device Manufacturers Benefit from Value-Based Contracts?
A manufacturer may be able to meet its goals by doing one or more of the following:
Using caps or limits to shift some of the risk away from the payer or life science company
Taking on price or volume risk to lower the payers’ risk
Offering financial guarantees of effectiveness in the real world to allay payer or provider fears.
Value-based contracting has a market value
Dialog about advanced contracts can help a payer understand a product’s value.
The result may be a traditional contract at more favorable terms.
7
How do Stakeholders Define “Value”?
8
“Value” Defined Differently by Stakeholders
9
Quantitative
• Economic Value• Medication Cost• Total cost of care (may include
cost avoidance)• Enhanced reimbursement (quality
adjusted FFS premium)• Quality-adjusted life years
Qualitative
• Clinical outcomes not monetarily linked
• Patient experience• Societal impact
“Value” Defined Differently by Stakeholders
Manufacturer: Competitive edge
Payer:Controlling costs
PBM:Steer utilization
Different from / create
barriers for competitors
Accelerate / retain
market acceptance
Leverage stronger
products to promote
weaker products
Obtain better formulary
placement
Build a better
partnership with
customers
Reduced uncertainty
around products
─ Cost of product /
class
─ Product performance
Align product cost with
clinical value
Potentially improve
outcomes for patients /
members / employees
Lower medical costs
through increased
adherence
Steer utilization to
profitable channels
(mail order or specialty
pharmacy)
Increase utilization
(additional revenue
through rebates)
Positively market to
payers
Receive additional
rebates
Encourage
manufacturer
competition
11
Examples of Value-Based Contracts
Contracts between a pharmaceutical company and a payer
A company that manufacturers PCSK9 inhibitors (a class of cholesterol drugs) entered into a value-based contract with a national health plan.
The manufacturer offered the health plan deeper discounts on the drug if patients using the drug do not reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels at least as well as demonstrated in clinical trials.
If the drug lowers LDL cholesterol to the expected level—or better—the negotiated drug price remains the same.
Contracts between a pharmacy benefits management company (PBM) and pharmaceutical companies
Express Scripts has been engaging pharmaceutical companies in value-based contracting discussions for certain oncology drugs.
Under the proposed pay-for-performance arrangements, companies’ payment would be based on the effectiveness of their products.
12
Developing and Implementing a Value-Based Contract
A Framework to Build Effective Contracts
While contracting is not “one size fits all”, a consistent approach can be helpful.
Understand the payer’s environment
Current challenges / opportunities
Emerging challenges / opportunities
Typical contracting style
Evaluate the payer’s contracting capabilities
Consider the product characteristics
Determine the appropriate value-based contracting approach
Definition of value
Possible challenges
Ability to collect measurable data
Indicated population
Label considerations
Other legal considerations
Outcomes based vs. financial based
Timing, data, legal considerations
13
What Questions Should Manufacturers Consider for Designing Value-Based Contracts?
What risks does the customer (payer or provider) have that the company can address by taking on risk?
What is the customer’s primary concern? Do they want to manage spending for the entire therapeutic class or just the company’s product?
Are they concerned about high spending for individual patients or high aggregate demand for the product? Is the customer concerned with how the product will perform in the real word versus clinical trials?
What contracting strategies can be used to manage inappropriate use?
All of these questions can be approached quantitatively, with models, simulations, and real-world data.
17
How Companies Develop and Implement Value-Based Contracts
18
Value-Based Contracting Options for Pharmaceuticals and Devices
Financial and Adherence/Clinical Outcomes
Deciding Whether or Not to Engage in a Value-Based Contract
Should have designated experts in place with the skills to develop and evaluate proposed value-based contracts for key products.
Things to consider when vetting potential value-based contracts include:
Does the company have the expertise necessary to develop and execute these types of contracts? Have they engaged in value-based contracts with other pharmaceutical or device companies?
What market challenges could be solved by entering into this value-based contract with this company?
Does entering into the value-based contract make since and financially?
Are the outcomes being measured meaningful?
Can the contract be executed?
21
Defining “Value”: Possible Outcomes
18
Financial
Per Member Per Month (PMPM), fully capitated
Per Patient Cap
Free or Discounted Scripts
Adherence & Clinical
Proportion of Days Covered (PDC)
Proportion of Patients Reaching a Target
Utilization
Financial Value-based Contracts: Potential Challenges
19
Alignment Between Payers and Manufacturers
Challenge: Payers and Manufacturers need to agree on the financial parameters:
Which patients are eligible
How to measure the outcome
How the data will be collected, processed, and analyzed
Potential Solution: Identify what parameters can be calculated from the data available – many financial
parameters are already being calculated by payers or can be easily calculated using claims data. Third
party data validators can be retained to verify results.
Multiple Indications
Challenge: If a drug has multiple indications, manufacturers could face losses if utilization exceeds
what was used to calculate the caps and PMPMs.
Solution: Create a bundled price to accommodate variation in prices and dosing amongst multiple
indications.
20
Free or Discounted First Scripts for Patients Who Stop Treatment
Example: Health Plan does not pay for a patient’s IBS drug scripts if that patient stops taking the drug
within three months of starting treatment.
Per Patient Cap
Example: PBM does not pay for a patient’s macular degeneration drug scripts after they hit the pre-set
individual cap of 10 scripts.
Per Member Per Month (PMPM) Contracting
Example: Health Plan pays a fixed PMPM for a portfolio of heart failure drugs produced by the
manufacturer, which allows patients to receive as many scripts as necessary.
Regimen-Based Pricing
Example: Two lung cancer drugs that are supposed to be taken together are priced lower if purchased in a
bundle versus individually.
Potential Financial Value-Based Contracts
Adherence/Clinical Outcomes: What to Measure?
21
Identifying Meaningful Clinical Outcomes
Challenge: Even if data is available, it is not always easy to identify and define a clinical outcome upon
which to contract.
Potential Solution: Identify clinical outcomes that are tied to payments/cost since they will likely be
coded in claims data and will likely result in a positive financial outcome for the payer.
Example: Reduction in inpatient hospital utilization
Alignment Between Payers and Manufacturers
Challenge: Payers and Manufacturers need to agree on which outcome(s) to select, which patients are
eligible, how to measure the outcome, and how the data will collected, processed, and analyzed.
Potential Solution: Leverage existing payer industry reporting infrastructure to select outcomes
Examples: HEDIS or Medicare Star Rating measures
• Potential Solution: Choose metrics considering payers’ ability to influence real world performance
• Example: Medication adherence
Potential Adherence Outcomes-Based Contracts
22
Proportion of Days Covered (PDC)
Example: Manufacturer of a heart medication pays a lower rebate if 80% of patients have a PDC of at least 80% in a given year.
Medication Possession Ratio (MPR)
Example: Manufacturer of a heart medication pays a lower rebate if 80% of patients have a MPR of at least 80% in a given year.
Scripts per Patient - Individual
Example: Manufacturer of a HIV drug pays an additional rebate if the average number of scripts per patient in a given year is greater than or equal to 7.
Scripts per Patient - Aggregate
Example: Manufacturer of a HIV drug pays an additional rebate for each patient who uses more than 7 scripts in a given year.
Daily Average Consumption (DACON)
Example: Manufacturer of an insulin drug pays a lower rebate if the average DACON is less than the maximum units/day on the label.
Persistency
Example: Manufacturer of a diabetes drug pays a lower rebate if 80% of new patients fill a script at least 180 days after their first script.
Potential Clinical Outcomes-Based Contracts
23
Proportion of Patients Reaching a Target
Example: Manufacturer of an anti-hypertension drug pays an additional rebate if less than 75%
percent of eligible patients reached their target blood pressure.
Absolute Target
Example: Manufacturer of an anti-diabetic drug pays an additional rebate if the average HbA1C
level for eligible patients was above 8.0.
Free or Discounted Scripts for Non-Responders
Example: Payer would be reimbursed for the first three months of a weight-loss medication for
eligible patients who fail to lose 5% of their body weight in the same time period.
Utilization
Example: Manufacturer of a multiple sclerosis drug would pay an additional rebate if eligible
patients did not have a 5% decrease in hospital admissions.
Events
Example: Manufacturer of a cholesterol-lowering drug would pay an additional rebate if more
than 10% of eligible patients experienced a myocardial infarction.
Value-Based Contracting Data Considerations
24
Implementing a value-based contract will require using clinical and
administrative PHI to determine the outcome of interest for eligible
members.
HIPAA
Pharmaceutical and device companies’ contract administration areas aren’t used to handling private
health information, which will be required to administer a value-based contract.
Sample Size
A measure’s sample may be too small to achieve statistical stability, especially if the measure has
strict eligibility requirements.
There may not be enough dollars at stake to justify the overhead required to implement the contract.
Clinical Data
Clinical data can be difficult to collect for all eligible patients due to how it is collected and stored.
Value-Based Contracting Regulatory Considerations
Medicaid Best Price
Concern that steep rebates from value-based contracting will trigger an additional rebate due to a
new low price.
Particularly a concern for “free” promotional scripts or scripts for “non-responders.
Price Reporting
Pharmaceutical and device companies are unsure of how to report the variable rebates, and in which
fiscal year to record them.
If the contracting is done on a bundle of drugs, how should the rebates be allocated, and will this
trigger an additional rebate due to Medicaid Best Price?
Anti-kickback
Could value-based contracting be considered constitute influence on the spending on a federal
program.
Off-label Use
Concern about value-based contracting promoting off-label use.
25
Successful Implementation of a Value-Based Contract
During contract development, models should be leveraged that can:
Measure the contract’s outcome variability
Quantify the potential contract’s risk
Allow the user to determine the potential contract’s feasibility
Work proactively to setup channels to collect and process the data for a contract.
Need regular activity and commitment to making the contract work—launching and waiting to see the results is generally not a viable strategy.
Engage with third-party vendors to help develop modeling tools, setup data warehouses, perform reconciliation, etc.
26
Competitive Landscape of Value-Based Contracting
When considering whether or not to engage in value-based contracting, companies need to pay close attention to their competitive environment.
For example, if a competitor offering to bundle several of its diabetes products into a value-based contract, your company may need to consider offering a value-based contract to customers as well, or risk losing significant market share.
Need to consider products pipeline products how new launches might affect the competitive market, including in future renewal years.
27
Caveats
This slide deck has been prepared solely for the purpose of illustrating the topic of value-based contracting for pharmaceutical products and devices. It may not be appropriate for other purposes.
The American Academy of Actuaries requires its members to identify their credentials in their work product. Gabriela Dieguez is a member of the American Academy of Actuaries and meet its qualification requirements to issue this communication.
28
Society of Actuaries2017 Annual MeetingAugust 18th, 2017
Patrick CunninghamVice President, Commercial Development – [email protected]
Value-based contracting:A manufacturer’s perspective
2
The views and opinions expressed in this discussion are my own and do not necessarily reflect the position any current or former employers.
3
Healthcare and the shift from volume to value
Efficacy-Effectiveness gap
Value-based contracting
Scientific progress is leading to novel therapies to treat or even cure previously unmet medical needs
4Source: US Food and Drug Administration. "Novel Drugs Summary 2016." FDA website. http://www. fda. gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugInnovation/ucm474696. htm (2017).
• All FDA-approved products are required to meet our rigorous safety and efficacy standards
• New drugs are being developed to treat diabetes, various forms of cancer, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and hepatitis C among others
Increased spending on drugs, especially branded drugs, will continue to put pressure on overall healthcare spending
5
8%
1%
$259
45%
4%
17%
8%
2010
$265
3%
28%
28%
43%
4%
17%
1%
24%
2013
$253
46%
1%4%
18%
23%
8%
19%
$253
2009
46%
4% 1%41%
$496
1%3% 0%
12%
34%
10%
2022
3%
33%
2020 2021
42%
12%
1%3%
$466
10%
33%
10%
12%
10%
2019
3% 3%
$412
32%
12%
42%
2018
43%
$387
$438
31%
1%1%
10%
43%
12%
43%
1%
2017
31%
$360
3%
10%
13%
30%
2016
$341
1%3%
12%13%
10%
3%
30%
43%
10%
2015
1%
$298
3%
14%
1%
8%9%
1%
43%
$325
29%
10%
15%4%
2014
41%
11%
$597
0%
10%
2025
3%
35%
2024
43%
2023
41%
0%
41%
$561
10%
$528
11%
34%
22%
2012
8%
2011
26%
$259
44%
1%
16%
3%
Medicaid
Other Health Insurance Programs
Medicare
Other Third Party PayersPrivate Health Insurance
Out-of-Pocket Payments
Source: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group. For definitions, sources, and methods for NHE categories, see CMS.gov. National Health Expenditure Accounts methodology paper, 2017
Total U.S. prescription drug spending, in $ billions
CMS and private payors are leading the transition from paying for volume to value for all healthcare stakeholders, including manufacturers
6
• 85% of FFS payments tied to quality
• 30% of payments through alternative payment models
2016 2018
• 90% of FFS payments tied to quality
• 50% of payments through alternative payment models
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services. "HHS reaches goal of tying 30 percent of Medicare payments to quality ahead of schedule [news release]." (2016). Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. "CMS proposes to test new Medicare Part B prescription drug models to improve quality of care and deliver better value for Medicare beneficiaries [news release]." Press Release (Mar. 8, 2016), available at: https://www. cms. gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Fact-sheets/2016-Fact-sheets-items/2016-03-08. html (2016).
HHS announced goals for value-based payments
• Regardless of what happens with ACA, MACRA had strong bipartisan support when it passed, and the legislation’s shift toward value continues to have backing in Congress
• The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) is developing new payment models for healthcare delivery (e.g., ACOs) as well as drugs (e.g., Oncology Care Model)
7
Healthcare and the shift from volume to value
Efficacy-Effectiveness gap
Value-based contracting
Post-approval ResearchPhase I-III
Efficacy-Effectiveness Gap: Patient populations and the clinical trial infrastructure used for FDA approval are not representative of real-world utilization of drugs
8
Populations studied
Util
izatio
n
Variances in populations utilizing drugs versus the populations studied• Differing age groups• Race, ethnicity, gender• Unstudied comorbid conditions• Differing concomitant drugs• Lifestyle variances• Differences in disease severity• Varying levels of compliance
For FDA approval, a product’s safety and
efficacy are tested within a well-defined
population of patients
Randomized controlled clinical trials are
conducted within well-organized and well-
supported clinical research environments to
eliminate confounding variables and assess the
impact of a drug
Post-approval, drugs are used a much broader
set of patients that may nor may not experience
the same impact
Source: Adapted from Pollock, Mark Cziraky Michael. "Real-World Evidence Studies." (2015).
Real-world feedback from payers
9
Clinical benefit
• Payers are concerned that the real-world experience would not show the same level of clinical benefit as to what was seen in the clinical trials for the same patient population in the trial
• Payers are concerned that adjacent patient populations will not show the same level of clinical benefit as to what was seen in the clinical trials
Financial exposure
• With the Hepatitis C products in mind, payers are worried that a new drug or class of drugs will grow at the same rate and create a budget crisis
• Medication non-adherence may lead to increased costs without any corresponding clinical benefit
Efficacy-Effectiveness Gap and Utilization management
10
• The prospective use of a product within in a larger, heterogeneous population creates new risks that may not have been accounted for in the clinical evidence development process.
• This is especially true in the case of diseases which require adherence to complex regimens, require patient lifestyle changes, and/or require ongoing engagement with a healthcare team.
• For high-cost specialty products, the negative budget impact of over utilization and/or reduced clinical benefit lead to monitoring and utilization management
• Prior authorization, step-edits, quantity limits, and other processes limit the utilization of a new drug
Source: CVS/caremark. Repatha (evolocumab) FEP Clinical Criteria [Internet]. Lee's Summit, MO: CVS/caremark. http://www.caremark.com/portal/asset/FEP_Criteria_Repatha.pdf.CVS/caremark. Praluent (alicrocumab) FEP Clinical Criteria [Internet]. Lee's Summit, MO: CVS/caremark. www.caremark.com/portal/asset/FEP_Form_Praluent.pdf. Accessed October 16th, 2017.
11
Healthcare and the shift from volume to value
Efficacy-Effectiveness gap
Value-based contracting
Value-based contracting can create a win-win-win for patients, payors, and pharma by mitigating the efficacy-effectiveness gap
12
• Beyond the fixed and hostile negotiating positions that manufacturers and payers have gotten locked into, there are innovative means to bridge the information and trust gap that exists between these two groups.
• Value-based contracting holds the promise of contractually mitigating the risks from over utilization (e.g., product use among patients for whom a product is not indicated) or reduced clinical benefit (e.g., a clinical benefit less than observed in well-structured trials) so that more patients are able to achieve better clinical and economic outcomes.
Source: Sachs, Rachel, Nicholas Bagley, and Darius N. Lakdawalla. "Innovative Contracting for Pharmaceuticals and Medicaid's Best-Price Rule." (2017).
Developing a business case for value-based contracting:
13
Increase Access/Reduce Barriers
Increase Reimbursement/Reduce Rebates
Competitive Differentiation/Pressure
Developing New Capabilities
Governments, health plans, employers, and patients are demanding greater value, especially real world value, for their substantial healthcare investments.
Eli Lilly, Abbvie, Sanofi, Novartis, GSK, Merck, and others have begun to enter into value-based contracts, especially for novel specialty products in competitive therapeutic areas.
Utilization management programs can create significant barriers patients and physicians to benefit from a new product. Value-based contracting may influence these administrative hurdles.
The design, development, valuation, execution, and settlement of value-based contracts requires skills and experience.
The legal and regulatory challenges are substantial but can be addressed with prudent planning and coordination
Federal RegulatoryConcerns
Government Price Reporting
Anti-Kickback Statute
Medicare Part B and Part D Requirements
Patient Privacy (HIPAA)
Off-label promotion/unsubstantiated claims
Operational Concerns
Financial Accounting
Data Analytics
Gross-to-Net Impact
Contracting Complexity
14
The full benefit of value-based contracts for patients, payors, and other healthcare stakeholders has been limited by outdated regulatory requirements
Last thoughts
15
• The shift from volume to value is advancing for all sectors of healthcare, including for pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers
• Pharmaceutical and medical devices manufacturers still have attractive financial margins as many products have been priced based on a product’s clinical trial efficacy
• Efficacy-Effectiveness Gap: Patient populations and the clinical trial infrastructure used for FDA approval are not representative of a product’s real-world utilization
• Value-based contracting can create a win-win-win for patients, payors, and manufacturers by rewarding the real-world benefit of innovative products
• The financial, legal, and operational challenges of value-based contracts are significant, but the short-term and long-term benefits are compelling
Provide Your Feedback and Win!Complete meeting and session evaluations on the mobile app or meeting website and be entered to win one of these three great prizes:• One (1) complimentary registration to the 2018 Annual Meeting• One (1) complimentary room reservation (max. 3 nights) at the
Omni Nashville Hotel for the 2018 Annual Meeting• One (1) complimentary registration a SOA webcast
Responses will be kept anonymous. *See Official Rules at
http://soa.org/2017annualinfo
16