IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

I Farmaci Oncologici in Italia: innovazione e sostenibilità economica

  • Fabio Pammolli

    ()

    (IMT Lucca Institute for Advanced Studies and CERM Foundation - Competitività, Regole, Mercati)

  • Massimo Riccaboni

    ()

    (IMT Lucca Institute for Advanced Studies and and Department of Managerial Economics, Strategy and Innovation, K.U. Leuven)

  • Nicola Carmine Salerno

    ()

    (EIOPA - European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority)

I farmaci innovativi ad alto costo ci fanno toccare con mano quali potranno essere i dilemmi della sanità futura se non si completano le riforme della governance di questo capitolo complesso della spesa pubblica (non solo federalismo, ma sistemi contabili e di reporting, schemi di compartecipazione al costo, screening delle prassi terapeutiche per sollecitare best practice, etc.). Quel trade-off crudo che abbiamo di fronte, tra sostenibilità della spesa e domanda di prestazioni da parte dei cittadini, è, per i farmaci ad alto costo, già una realtà vissuta in tutti gli ospedali. Nella prima parte del rapporto Pammolli, Riccaboni e Salerno descrivono le caratteristiche del comparto, fornendone le grandezze principali attuali e prospettiche, anche in chiave di comparazione internazionale. Nella seconda parte, gli autori approfondiscono il quadro normativo-regolatorio che attualmente presiede alla governance dei farmaci oncologici in Italia. Ne emerge un sistema con ombre e approssimazioni, con impostazioni diverse e spesso incompatibili tra Aifa e Regioni, tra Regione e Regione, addirittura tra Als e Ospedali di una stessa Regione. Un assetto poco trasparente e certo non pronto a governare in maniera positiva e programmatica la forbice tra risorse spendibili e necessità e urgenza delle terapie. Nella parte conclusiva del rapporto si avanzano alcune proposte di policy, distinguendo tra quelle attuabili in tempi brevi e quelle per le quali sono necessari tempi di attuazione più lunghi. Le due tipologie di intervento andrebbero avviate il prima possibile e auspicabilmente condotte in parallelo.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cermlab.it/wp-content/uploads/cerm/wp/wpcerm-2012-02.pdf
File Function: First version, 2012
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Competitività Regole Mecati (CERM) in its series Working Papers with number 02-2012.

as
in new window

Length: 71 pages
Date of creation: Jun 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ern:wpaper:02-2012
Contact details of provider: Postal: Via Fiorentina, 1, 53100 Siena
Phone: +39 3488120691
Web page: http://www.cermlab.it/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & Laura Magazzini, 2010. "The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D," Working Papers 06/2010, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
  2. Angus Deaton, 2003. "Health, Inequality, and Economic Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(1), pages 113-158, March.
  3. Stefano Capri & Rossella Levaggi, 2010. "Shifting the risk in pricing and reimbursement schemes. A new model of risk-sharing agreements for innovative drugs," LIUC Papers in Economics 234, Cattaneo University (LIUC).
  4. David Cutler & Angus Deaton & Adriana Lleras-Muney, 2006. "The Determinants of Mortality," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(3), pages 97-120, Summer.
  5. Margaret K. Kyle, 2007. "Pharmaceutical Price Controls and Entry Strategies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 88-99, February.
  6. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090, August.
  7. Adrian Towse & Louis P. Garrison, 2010. "Can't Get No Satisfaction? Will Pay for Performance Help?: Toward an Economic Framework for Understanding Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Agreements for Innovative Medical Products," PharmacoEconomics, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 28(2), pages 93-102.
  8. Sergey V. Buldyrev & Jakub Growiec & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & H. Eugene Stanley, 2007. "The Growth of Business Firms: Facts and Theory," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 5(2-3), pages 574-584, 04-05.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ern:wpaper:02-2012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.