Live Conference Coverage @Medcitynews Converge 2018 @Philadelphia: Promising Drugs and Breaking Down Silos
Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD
Promising Drugs, Pricing and Access
The drug pricing debate rages on. What are the solutions to continuing to foster research and innovation, while ensuring access and affordability for patients? Can biosimilars and generics be able to expand market access in the U.S.?
Moderator: , Director, Healthcare and Pharmaceutical Management Program, Columbia Business School
Speakers:
, AVP, Global & US Pricing/Market Access, Merck
, Chief Science Officer and Executive Vice President, National Pharmaceutical Council
, Senior Vice President and Managing Director, Healthcare, Safeguard Scientifics
, Associate Vice President, Pharmacy Services, Vizient
What is working and what needs to change in pricing models?
Robert: He sees so many players in the onStevencology space discovering new drugs and other drugs are going generic (that is what is working). However are we spending too much on cancer care relative to other diseases (their initiative Going Beyond the Surface)
Steven: the advent of biosimilars is good for the industry
Patrick: large effort in oncology, maybe too much (750 trials on Keytruda) and he says pharma is spending on R&D (however clinical trials take large chunk of this money)
Robert: cancer has gotten a free ride but cost per year relative to benefit looks different than other diseases. Are we overinvesting in cancer or is that a societal decision
Gary: maybe as we become more specific with precision medicines high prices may be a result of our success in specifically targeting a mutation. We need to understand the targeted drugs and outcomes.
Patrick: “Cancer is the last big frontier” but he says prices will come down in most cases. He gives the example of Hep C treatment… the previous only therapeutic option was a very toxic yearlong treatment but the newer drugs may be more cost effective and safer
Steven: Our blockbuster drugs could diffuse the expense but now with precision we can’t diffuse the expense over a large number of patients
President’s Cancer Panel Recommendation
Six recommendations
- promoting value based pricing
- enabling communications of cost
- financial toxicity
- stimulate competition biosimilars
- value based care
- invest in biomedical research
Patrick: the government pricing regime is hurting. Alot of practical barriers but Merck has over 200 studies on cost basis
Robert: many concerns/impetus started in Europe on pricing as they are a set price model (EU won’t pay more than x for a drug). US is moving more to outcomes pricing. For every one health outcome study three studies did not show a benefit. With cancer it is tricky to establish specific health outcomes. Also Medicare gets best price status so needs to be a safe harbor for payers and biggest constraint is regulatory issues.
Steven: They all want value based pricing but we don’t have that yet and there is a challenge to understand the nuances of new therapies. Hard to align all the stakeholders together so until some legislation starts to change the reimbursement-clinic-patient-pharma obstacles. Possibly the big data efforts discussed here may help align each stakeholders goals.
Gary: What is the data necessary to understand what is happening to patients and until we have that information it still will be complicated to determine where investors in health care stand at in this discussion
Robert: on an ICER methods advisory board: 1) great concern of costs how do we determine fair value of drug 2) ICER is only game in town, other orgs only give recommendations 3) ICER evaluates long term value (cost per quality year of life), budget impact (will people go bankrupt)
4) ICER getting traction in the public eye and advocates 5) the problem is ICER not ready for prime time as evidence keeps changing or are they keeping the societal factors in mind and they don’t have total transparancy in their methodology
Steven: We need more transparency into all the costs associated with the drug and therapy and value-based outcome. Right now price is more of a black box.
Moderator: pointed to a recent study which showed that outpatient costs are going down while hospital based care cost is going rapidly up (cost of site of care) so we need to figure out how to get people into lower cost setting
Breaking Down Silos in Research
“Silo” is healthcare’s four-letter word. How are researchers, life science companies and others sharing information that can benefit patients more quickly? Hear from experts at institutions that are striving to tear down the walls that prevent data from flowing.
Moderator: , Executive Director, Woodside Capital Partners
Speakers:
, CEO & Co-Founder, Seqster @seqster
, Real World Data Lead for Oncology, Pfizer
, Innovation, Research, & Development Lead, HealthShareExchange
, Chief Medical Officer, Innovaccer
Seqster: Seqster is a secure platform that helps you and your family manage medical records, DNA, fitness, and nutrition data—all in one place. Founder has a genomic sequencing background but realized sequence information needs to be linked with medical records.
HealthShareExchange.org :
HealthShare Exchange envisions a trusted community of healthcare stakeholders collaborating to deliver better care to consumers in the greater Philadelphia region. HealthShare Exchange will provide secure access to health information to enable preventive and cost-effective care; improve quality of patient care; and facilitate care transitions. They have partnered with multiple players in healthcare field and have data on over 7 million patients.
Innovacer
Data can be overwhelming, but it doesn’t have to be this way. To drive healthcare efficiency, we designed a modular suite of products for a smooth transition into a data-driven world within 4 weeks. Why does it take so much money to move data around and so slowly?
What is interoperatibility?
Ardy: We knew in genomics field how to build algorithms to analyze big data but how do we expand this from a consumer standpoint and see and share your data.
Lauren: how can we use the data between patients, doctors, researchers? On the research side genomics represent only 2% of data. Silos are one issue but figuring out the standards for data (collection, curation, analysis) is not set. Still need to improve semantic interoperability. For example Flatiron had good annotated data on male metastatic breast cancer.
David: Technical interopatabliltiy (platform), semantic interopatability (meaning or word usage), format (syntactic) interopatibility (data structure). There is technical interoperatiblity between health system but some semantic but formats are all different (pharmacies use different systems and write different prescriptions using different suppliers). In any value based contract this problem is a big issue now (we are going to pay you based on the quality of your performance then there is big need to coordinate across platforms). We can solve it by bringing data in real time in one place and use mapping to integrate the format (need quality control) then need to make the data democratized among players.
Rakesh: Patients data should follow the patient. Of Philadelphia’s 12 health systems we had a challenge to make data interoperatable among them so tdhey said to providers don’t use portals and made sure hospitals were sending standardized data. Health care data is complex.
David: 80% of clinical data is noise. For example most eMedical Records are text. Another problem is defining a patient identifier which US does not believe in.
Please follow on Twitter using the following #hash tags and @pharma_BI
#MCConverge
#cancertreatment
#healthIT
#innovation
#precisionmedicine
#healthcaremodels
#personalizedmedicine
#healthcaredata
And at the following handles:
@pharma_BI
@medcitynews
Read Full Post »
2012pharmaceutical
sjwilliamspa