ISSUE: Conventional cost-effectiveness methods calculate value-based prices according to both the health gains and cost-savings attributable to the treatment. These cost savings are included regardless of whether the standard of care (SOC) itself is priced in alignment with value according to opportunity costs within the US health system. Including 100% of the cost savings of potentially inefficient SOC and assigning those savings to the new intervention in the calculation of a value-based price prolongs this inefficiency for new generations of SOC. The importance of this issue is heightened with single and short-term therapies which have the potential to displace SOC costs for the remainder of a patient’s lifetime.

OVERVIEW: The panel will start with an introduction by the moderator who will highlight the issue and the subject for debate (10 min). The moderator will share the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review's (ICER) experience developing adaptations to single and short-term therapy value assessments and the existing controversy over how best to value such therapies when SOC is not priced to value. The discussion will then be opened to 3 panelists representing perspectives from health technology assessment (HTA) organizations in the US and Canada, and Industry. Each panelist will be given time (7-10min) to share their perspective on the potential impact of adapted value assessment methods, suggest alternative methods, and defend their position. The remaining 20 minutes will be a question-and-answer period with the audience. As a topic that questions traditional cost-effectiveness methods, there are implications on pricing, innovation, payment, and patient access. The panel is anticipated to be of interest to HTA practitioners, researchers, payers, manufacturers, patients, and the public.