OBJECTIVES: Currently, drug products are assigned a single unit price, regardless of the number of indications for which they are marketed. Whether this approach best reflects product value and provides optimal access to medicines is currently under debate. Under a multi-indication pricing (MIP) system, prices would differ by indication. Implementation of a MIP system would face several logistical challenges, and understanding how these have been addressed and considered will be useful to informing feasibility assessments in other settings. The aim is to perform a targeted literature review to identify research on the feasibility and implementation of MIP schemes internationally. METHODS: A targeted literature review of EMBASE via Embase.com was conducted in October 2018 to identify literature on MIP feasibility. Grey literature, including HTA databases, were also searched. Articles were included if they explored barriers and facilitators of implementing MIP. RESULTS: 420 unique hits were identified and reviewed. Sixteen studies were included, 15 examining MIP feasibility and implementation in several jurisdictions and one cost-effectiveness model. The US was the most common jurisdiction examined (n=6), followed by the UK (n=4), the EU (n=2), Spain (n=2), and Scandinavian countries (n=2). The routinely included domains in feasibility assessments of MIP were data capabilities (collection, management and analysis), cost, and stakeholder collaboration/transparency. Potential implementation issues include administrative burden, off-label use, system gaming, and contractual flexibility. Consistent messages were that enhanced collaboration and transparency was needed among stakeholders (i.e., payers and manufacturers) to develop flexible pricing agreements and drug formularies, benchmark willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds, and develop rules for off-label prescription pricing. CONCLUSIONS: Key feasibility issues related to MIP are data infrastructure and their associated costs, and the development of flexible, collaborative relationships. This review found that the costs of MIP could potentially increase overall spending. These findings will be of interest to jurisdictions assessing the feasibility of MIP.