OBJECTIVES: The price of medicines should be linked with value, but a single price may not accurately reflect value across multiple indications, which refer to different therapeutic uses such as different disease or stage, or in various combinations with other therapies. Indication-based pricing (IBP) in principle allows the healthcare system to support different prices for different indications of a medicine. Whilst there are some limited examples of IBP implementation, they are few. The aim of this paper is to set out the major issues that should be considered for and against IBP and to analyse responses from different stakeholders participating in a consultation.

METHODS: A paper was prepared presenting a discussion on major potential benefits and draw-backs according to economic theory, and of the distribution of these benefits between payers and consumers. This was posted on the OHE website together with a series of questions posed using Survey Monkey. The paper and the survey links were circulated to stakeholders including payers, industry, and academia in a number of countries.

RESULTS: At the time of submitting this abstract, the consultation is open. The analysis of responses will be reported and will demonstrate the perspectives across different stakeholders. For example, do payers’ views differ from that of industry and do views also differ across countries? Relevant considerations for implementation reported in responses will also be summarised.

CONCLUSIONS: Economic theory demonstrates that IBP could benefit payers and patients by allowing broader access and could incentivise R&D in new indications. It could also increase price competition. Yet, payers have expressed concern about the feasibility and cost of implementation and about affordability. Successful implementation of IBP requires a shared understanding among stakeholders of how and when new indications should be assessed and valued, as well as practical solutions to some of the barriers to implementation.