OBJECTIVES : Procurement of medicines through competitive bidding (tendering) is a common measure taken by governments to lower pharmaceutical expenditure. While tendering is used for the purchase of medicines with approved equivalents, their adjudication depends on product performance against tender criteria, with individual criterion weights varying by country/region. This research explores the criteria used by several countries to rate and adjudicate pharmaceutical tenders.

METHODS : A literature review was conducted on tender processes and criteria. Interviews were conducted with 22 payers from Italy, Spain, UK, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Australia and Brazil to determine the key criteria used to rate tenders. Discussion topics included the tender process, criteria, and potential future changes.

RESULTS : Bibliographic research on tender process and key criteria in several countries produced limited results. Of the 22 payers interviewed, 18 were advisors or key decision makers on pharmaceutical tendering. All payers mentioned price as the key criterion to adjudicate tenders (importance of 4.9/5), followed by shelf life (4.4), and stability data (4.1). Pack size/weight (2.7/5), and social responsibility (local partnering, 2.7) were the least important criteria. We identified country-specific trends, such as to increase the weight of cost-effectiveness criteria when adjudicating tenders in the UK, whereas payers from Italy and Spain expected increased quality performance metrics, national as opposed to regional tenders (Italy), and multi- buy purchase (Spain). Future tenders could grant an increased weight to environmental factors according to four payers. Based on these finding, further research would be needed to define asset-specific tender shaping strategies.

CONCLUSIONS : Information on country-specific tender criteria assessment is rarely found through public sources. Although economic criteria remain the most highly valued across geographies, country/region-specific requirements could be determinant in the adjudication of tenders. Furthermore, as certain tendering criteria may be differently weighted in the future, changes in the tendering process should be constantly monitored and proactively shaped.