IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0293264.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying a cost-based pricing model for innovative cancer treatments subject to indication expansion: A case study for pembrolizumab and daratumumab

Author

Listed:
  • R J S D Heine
  • F W Thielen
  • R H J Mathijssen
  • R W F van Leeuwen
  • M G Franken
  • C A Uyl-de Groot

Abstract

Background: Expanding the indication of already approved immuno-oncology drugs presents treatment opportunities for patients but also strains healthcare systems. Cost-based pricing models are discussed as a possibility for cost containment. This study focuses on two drugs, pembrolizumab (Keytruda) and daratumumab (Darzalex), to explore the potential effect of indication broadening on the estimated price when using the cost-based pricing (CBP) model proposed by Uyl-de Groot and Löwenberg (2018). Methods: The model was used to calculate cumulative yearly prices, cumulative prices per indication, and non-cumulative indication-based prices using inputs such as research and development (R&D) costs, manufacturing costs, eligible patient population, and a profit margin. A deterministic stepwise analysis and scenario analysis were conducted to examine how sensitive the estimated price is to the different input assumptions. Results: The yearly cumulative cost-based prices (CBPs) ranged from €52 to €885 for pembrolizumab per vial and €823 to €31,941 for daratumumab per vial. Prices were higher in initial years or indications due to smaller patient populations, decreased over time or after additional indications. Sensitivity analysis showed that the number of eligible patients had the most significant impact on the estimated price. In the scenario analysis the profit margin contributed most to a higher CBPs for both drugs. Lower estimates resulted from assumed lower R&D costs. Discussion: The estimated CBPs are consistently lower than Dutch list prices for pembrolizumab (€2,861), mainly resulting from larger patient populations in registered indications. However, daratumumab’s list prices fall within the range of modeled CBPs depending on the year or indication (€4,766). Both CBPs decrease over time or with additional indications. The number of eligible patients and initial R&D costs have the most significant influence on the CBPs. These findings contribute to the ongoing discussions on pharmaceutical pricing, especially concerning cancer drugs with expanding indications.

Suggested Citation

  • R J S D Heine & F W Thielen & R H J Mathijssen & R W F van Leeuwen & M G Franken & C A Uyl-de Groot, 2024. "Applying a cost-based pricing model for innovative cancer treatments subject to indication expansion: A case study for pembrolizumab and daratumumab," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(2), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293264
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293264
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293264
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293264&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0293264?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patricia M. Danzon, 2018. "Differential Pricing of Pharmaceuticals: Theory, Evidence and Emerging Issues," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(12), pages 1395-1405, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shi, Wunan & Wouters, Olivier J. & Liu, Gordon & Mossialos, Elias & Yang, Xiuyun, 2020. "Association between provincial income levels and drug prices in China over the period 2010–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    2. Dewatripont, Mathias, 2022. "Which policies for vaccine innovation and delivery in Europe?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    3. Laura Birg, 2023. "Pharmaceutical regulation under market integration through parallel trade," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 1322-1346, November.
    4. Reisinger, Markus & Saurí, Lluís & Zenger, Hans, 2019. "Parallel imports, price controls, and innovation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 163-179.
    5. Raquel Fonseca & François Langot & Pierre-Carl Michaud & Thepthida Sopraseuth, 2020. "Understanding Cross-country Differences in Health Status and Expenditures," NBER Working Papers 26876, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Kjellberg, Hans & Sjögren, Ebba & Krafve, Linus Johansson, 2023. "The functions of known to be inaccurate prices in markets: A cross-country comparison of pharmaceutical list pricing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Piotr Merks & Urszula Religioni & Nuno Pinto de Castro & Anna Augustynowicz & Katarzyna Plagens-Rotman & David Brindley & Anna Kowalczuk & Justyna Kaźmierczak & Agnieszka Neumann-Podczaska & Eliza Bli, 2022. "Falsified Medicines Directive in a Secondary Care Environment—Impact on Supply Chain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-11, March.
    8. Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz & Néboa Zozaya & Bleric Alcalá & Álvaro Hidalgo-Vega, 2018. "Multi-Indication Pricing: Nice in Theory but Can it Work in Practice?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(12), pages 1407-1420, December.
    9. Nunan, Daniel & Di Domenico, MariaLaura, 2022. "Value creation in an algorithmic world: Towards an ethics of dynamic pricing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 451-460.
    10. Mathias Dewatripont, 2022. "Which Policies for Vaccine Innovation and Delivery in Europe ?," Working Papers ECARES 2022-14, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293264. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.