The Value of Investing in Innovative Medicines: A Scalable Approach to Measure the Lifetime Social Impact
Author(s)
ADNAN ATITALLAH, MSc1, Eva Levi, Phd2, Rebecca Grün, PhD2, Ioannis Athanasiou, MSc3, Davide Lovera, MPH4, Malina Müller, BA, MA, PhD2, Katya Galactionova, Phd5, Christian Fischer, MSc3, Svenn Alexander Kommandantvold, MASc, MPhil6, Kunal Samanta, MSc5, C Simone Sutherland, BSc, MSc, PhD7, Thomas Paling, MSc8, Kopano Mukelabai, PharmD9, Khaled Ismail, MBA10, Benjamin Wheatley, MA10.
1Health economics, WifOR, Darmstadt, Germany, 2WifOR Institute, Darmstadt, Germany, 3WifOR GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany, 4WifOR Institute, Berlin, Germany, 5Roche, Basel, Switzerland, 6Roche Products Ltd, Oslo, Norway, 7F. Hoffmann - La Roche AG, BASEL, Switzerland, 8Roche, London, United Kingdom, 9F. Hoffmann - La Roche AG, basel, Switzerland, 10F. Hoffmann - La Roche AG, Basel, Switzerland.
1Health economics, WifOR, Darmstadt, Germany, 2WifOR Institute, Darmstadt, Germany, 3WifOR GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany, 4WifOR Institute, Berlin, Germany, 5Roche, Basel, Switzerland, 6Roche Products Ltd, Oslo, Norway, 7F. Hoffmann - La Roche AG, BASEL, Switzerland, 8Roche, London, United Kingdom, 9F. Hoffmann - La Roche AG, basel, Switzerland, 10F. Hoffmann - La Roche AG, Basel, Switzerland.
OBJECTIVES: To develop a scalable methodology to measure the Social Impact (SI) of medicines over the course of a patient’s lifetime, accounting for the value of both short-term treatments with long-acting effects and chronic (long-term) treatments. This framework was designed to be applicable across multiple products, disease areas, and geographic regions, building on previously published methodology.
METHODS: Similar to the annual SI, the lifetime SI estimation is based on the patient population treated within a single calendar year. While the annual SI approach considers only the benefits accrued within one year, the lifetime approach captures the long-term benefit. Health outcomes were assessed in terms of incremental Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Time horizons were based on cost-effectiveness models used in HTA submissions and adjusted to reflect population characteristics specific to each indication. The number of people treated in 2023 for each medicine was obtained, and age distribution was derived from prevalence data. Using these inputs, total population-level QALYs gained were calculated. These health gains were then translated into socioeconomic value by assessing their direct effects on paid and unpaid labour. Effects along the value chain, including indirect and induced effects triggered by increased consumption of goods and spending, were also considered, building on input-output (IO) modelling.
RESULTS: The lifetime SI of individuals treated in 2023 was $28.3 billion, $40.7 billion, and $3 billion for trastuzumab & pertuzumab, ocrelizumab, and faricimab, respectively. On average, the lifetime SI was 24-fold higher than the annual SI.
CONCLUSIONS: The developed lifetime SI approach offers a means of capturing the broader economic benefit of treatments throughout a patient’s lifetime, aggregated at a population level. It does however introduce uncertainties, as well as have limitations, such as not capturing important value dimensions including system impact and caregiver burden, which are also crucial for patients and society.
METHODS: Similar to the annual SI, the lifetime SI estimation is based on the patient population treated within a single calendar year. While the annual SI approach considers only the benefits accrued within one year, the lifetime approach captures the long-term benefit. Health outcomes were assessed in terms of incremental Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Time horizons were based on cost-effectiveness models used in HTA submissions and adjusted to reflect population characteristics specific to each indication. The number of people treated in 2023 for each medicine was obtained, and age distribution was derived from prevalence data. Using these inputs, total population-level QALYs gained were calculated. These health gains were then translated into socioeconomic value by assessing their direct effects on paid and unpaid labour. Effects along the value chain, including indirect and induced effects triggered by increased consumption of goods and spending, were also considered, building on input-output (IO) modelling.
RESULTS: The lifetime SI of individuals treated in 2023 was $28.3 billion, $40.7 billion, and $3 billion for trastuzumab & pertuzumab, ocrelizumab, and faricimab, respectively. On average, the lifetime SI was 24-fold higher than the annual SI.
CONCLUSIONS: The developed lifetime SI approach offers a means of capturing the broader economic benefit of treatments throughout a patient’s lifetime, aggregated at a population level. It does however introduce uncertainties, as well as have limitations, such as not capturing important value dimensions including system impact and caregiver burden, which are also crucial for patients and society.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
EE42
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Epidemiology & Public Health, Study Approaches
Topic Subcategory
Novel & Social Elements of Value
Disease
Oncology, Sensory System Disorders (Ear, Eye, Dental, Skin), Systemic Disorders/Conditions (Anesthesia, Auto-Immune Disorders (n.e.c.), Hematological Disorders (non-oncologic), Pain)