Skip to main content

Value-Based Pricing

Incentive for Innovation or Zero Net Benefit?

PharmacoEconomics volume 29, pages 731–735 (2011)Cite this article

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 49.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry and the Department of Health. The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_098498.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

  2. Office of Fair Trading. The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme: anOFT market study. London: OFT, 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/comp_policy/oft885.pdf [Accessed 2011May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  3. Department of Health. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines: a consultation, 2010 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Consultations/Closedconsultations/DH_122760 [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  4. Towse A. Value based pricing, research and development, and patient access schemes: will the United Kingdom get it right or wrong? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 70 (3): 360–6

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Office for National Statistics. Statistical bulletin: UK business enterprise research and development 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/berd1210.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

  6. Joint Formulary Committee. British national formulary. London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Royal Pharmaceutical Society, 2011: 61

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kaplan W, Laing R. Priority medicines for Europe and the world. WHO, Department of Essential Drugs and Medicines [policy document WHO/EDM/PAR/2004.7]. Geneva: WHO, 2004 [online]. Available from URL: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2004/WHO_EDM_PAR_2004.7.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  8. Webb DJ, Walker A. Value-based pricing of drugs in the UK. Lancet 2007; 369 (9571): 1415–6

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Claxton K. OFT, VBP: QED? Health Econ 2007 Jun; 16 (6): 545–58

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 733–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sculpher S, Claxton K, Martin S, et al. Methods for estimation of the NICE cost-effectiveness threshold. Medical Research Council Methodology Research Programme [online]. Available from URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/che/research/teams/teehta/projects/methodological-research/workshop-held-at-imperial-college-london/ [Accessed 2011May 19]

  12. Martin S, Rice N, Smith PC. Does health care spending improve health outcomes? Evidence from English programme budgeting data. J Health Econ 2008; 27: 826–42

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Martin S, Rice N, Smith PC. The link between health spending and health outcomes for the new English primary care trusts. London: The Health Foundation, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  14. HM Treasury. Public expenditure by country, region and function [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/pesa_2010_chapter9.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

  15. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/B52/A7/TAMethodsGuideUpdatedJune2008.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  16. Persson U, Willis M, Odegaard K. A case study of ex ante, value-based price and reimbursement decision-making: TLV and rimonabant in Sweden. Eur J Health Econ 2010; 11: 195–203

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Williamson S. Patient access schemes for high-cost cancer medicines. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 111–2

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Raftery J. Multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme: a costly failure. BMJ 2010; 340: c1672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Claxton K, Briggs A, Buxton MJ, et al. Value based pricing for NHS drugs: an opportunity not to be missed? BMJ 2008; 336 (7638): 251–4

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Carroll S. Value-based pricing for pharmaceuticals: its role, specification and prospects in a newly devolved NHS [Centre for Health Economics Research Paper 60]. York: University of York, 2011 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/CHERP60.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hawkins N, Scott DA. Reimbursement and value-based pricing: stratified cost-effectiveness analysis may not be the last word. Health Econ 2011; 20: 688–98

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Appraising life-extending, end of life treatments. London: NICE, 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/E4A/79/SupplementaryAdviceTACEoL.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  23. NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre. Use of NICE appraised medicines in the NHS in England: 2009, experimental statistics. London: Prescribing Support Unit, 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ic.nhs.uk/webfiles/publications/007_Primary_Care/niceappmed0910/NICE_bulletin_2009.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  24. Duerden MG, Hughes DA. Generic and therapeutic substitutions in the UK: are they a good thing? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 70 (3): 335–41

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rawlins M, Barnett D, Stevens A. Pharmacoeconomics: NICE’s approach to decision-making. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 70 (3): 346–9

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. All Wales Medicines Strategy Group. Guidelines for appraising medicines. 2011 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sites3/Documents/371/Guidelines%20for%20appraising%20medicines.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hughes DA, Ferner RE. New drugs for old: disinvestment and NICE. BMJ 2010; 340: c572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ferner RE, Hughes DA, Aronson JK. NICE and new: appraising innovation. BMJ 2010; 340: b5493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Walker A, Booth C, Brown A, et al. How much good do new medicines do? [abstract]. Basic Clin Pharmacol 2009; 105 Suppl. 1: O23

    Google Scholar 

  30. HM Treasury. Part IIB: the taxation of innovation and intellectual property. Corporate tax reform: delivering a more competitive system, 2010 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/corporate_tax_reform_part2b_innovation_and_intellectual_property.pdf [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  31. GlaxoSmithKline. Government patent box proposals ‘transform’ UK attractiveness for investment [media release]. London: GlaxoSmithKline, 2010 Nov 29 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.gsk.com/media/pressreleases/2010/2010_pressrelease_10124.htm [Accessed 2011 May 19]

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kesselheim AS. Using market-exclusivity incentives to promote pharmaceutical innovation. N Engl J Med 2010; 363 (19): 1855–62

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to prepare this manuscript. The author has no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this editorial. The author is grateful to Professor Mark Sculpher for his helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Institute of Medical and Social Care Research, Bangor University, Dean Street, Bangor, Wales

    Dyfrig A. Hughes

Authors
  1. Dyfrig A. Hughes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dyfrig A. Hughes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hughes, D.A. Value-Based Pricing. Pharmacoeconomics 29, 731–735 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2165/11592570-000000000-00000

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11592570-000000000-00000