CORE
🇺🇦
make metadata, not war
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Community governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
research
Pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance (pCPA): Timelines Analysis and Policy Implications
Authors
Adcock
Balasubramanian
+14 more
Bertozzi
Bruce
Cave
Curtis
Hazell
Jeffcott
Milliken
Millson
Navarria
O’Connor
Pessina
Russo
Salek
von Elm
Publication date
1 February 2019
Publisher
'Frontiers Media SA'
Doi
Cite
Abstract
© 2019 Salek, Lussier Hoskyn, Johns, Allen and Sehgal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).This analysis follows our recent study showing that Canadian public reimbursement delays have lengthened from regulatory approval to listing decisions by public drug plans and delayed public access to innovative medicines, mainly due to processes following the Common Drug Review (CDR) and the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR). Public drug plans participate in a pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance (pCPA) joint negotiation process before making decisions about whether or not to reimburse a product reviewed through CDR and pCODR. This research aims to report the findings from a comprehensive analysis of pCPA process times, times to reimbursement by public payers in Canada, and to explore the opportunities to reduce total delays in public reimbursement with a specific focus on the pCPA process. An analysis was conducted of pCPA timelines with respect to making decisions about products and indications reviewed through CDR/pCODR, and focusses on three separate time components: time to begin negotiating, time spent negotiating, and time to implement the negotiation (i.e., time to list) in each of nine jurisdictions (i.e., 10 provinces of Canada, excluding Quebec). This study demonstrates the role of post-CDR/pCODR processes in large and lengthening delays to listing new medicines. Notably, oncology products have experienced the longest increases in time to begin negotiating and to complete negotiations. Trends in listing times post-pCPA across provinces are less clear, however, it appears that consistency in terms of timelines across provinces is not happening quite so smoothly for oncology products compared to non-oncology products. Listing rates also appear to be declining for non-oncology products, although this trend is less conclusive for oncology products. Challenges need to be addressed to improve efficiency, transparency, and ultimately reduce pCPA timelines and total timelines to public reimbursement. Suggested ways to improve and streamline the listing process are: (1) transparent target timelines and associated performance incentives for the pCPA and public plan decisions, (2) parallel HTA-pCPA processes to enable pCPA negotiations to start part-way through the HTA review and allow pCPA negotiation information to be fed back into the HTA review, and (3) innovative agreements that consider patient input and earlier coverage with real-world evidence development.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio
Similar works
Full text
Open in the Core reader
Download PDF
Available Versions
Directory of Open Access Journals
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:doaj.org/article:63558e2ff...
Last time updated on 04/06/2019
University of Hertfordshire Research Archive
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:uhra.herts.ac.uk:2299/2111...
Last time updated on 09/03/2020
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
Last time updated on 18/06/2021