BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF IMPLEMENTING TENDERS BETWEEN THE BRANDED INFLIXIMAB AND ITS BIOSIMILARS IN THE PUBLIC HOSPITALS OF PARIS
Author(s)
Bocquet F1, Fusier I1, Cordonnier A1, Lechat P2, Paubel P1
1AP-HP, AGEPS, Paris, France, 2COMEDIMS AP-HP, Paris, France
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the budgetary impact of different scenario of tenders between the branded infliximab (BRANDED-INFLIX) and its biosimilars (BIOSIM-INFLIX) that could be implemented in the 37 public hospitals of Paris (AP-HP). METHODS: Data collected: i) branded infliximab expenditures over the 2012-2014 period; ii) 2014 medical information from PMSI hospital database (French medical information system program) to determine for which therapeutic indications the patients were treated with infliximab (gastroenterology, rheumatology, dermatology or others) by distinguishing infliximab-naïve patients (INFLIX-NAÏVE) and infliximab-experienced patients (INFLIX-EXPERIENCED). Three scenarios have been considered for the budget impact analysis: tender between BRANDED-INFLIX and BIOSIM-INFLIX to list only one infliximab in the hospital drug formulary with a hypothetical price decline of 20% (S1) or 30% (S2); tender between BRANDED-INFLIX and BIOSIM-INFLIX only for INFLIX-NAÏVE and no tender for INFLIX-EXPERIENCED who remain treated by BRANDED-INFLIX with a price decline of 20% and a proportion of INFLIX-NAÏVE treated by BIOSIM-INFLIX of 10% (S3). RESULTS: The branded infliximab represented €42.1 million expenditures in 2014 compared to €38.1 and €33.6 million in 2013 and in 2012 respectively. In 2014, 5483 patients were treated with the branded infliximab for several therapeutic indications: gastroenterology (61.9%), rheumatology (26.4%), dermatology (1.4%) and others (10.3%). The proportions of INFLIX-NAÏVE by indication were: 35.9% in rheumatology, 32.5% in gastroenterology, 40.3% in dermatology and 42.8% in other indications. Over 3 years, S1 would generate savings of €22.8 million and S2 would save €34.2 million, whereas with S3 the savings would amount to €7.3 million (€4.5 million in gastroenterology, €2.1 million in rheumatology, €0.1 in dermatology and €0.6 in other indications). CONCLUSIONS: If the Committee on Medicinal Products (COMED) of AP-HP decides to implement tenders between BRANDED-INFLIX and BIOSIM-INFLIX the savings will be largely dependent on the scope of these tenders. These results could be considered by the COMED in its decision-making process.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2015-11, ISPOR Europe 2015, Milan, Italy
Value in Health, Vol. 18, No. 7 (November 2015)
Code
PMS30
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Budget Impact Analysis
Disease
Gastrointestinal Disorders, Multiple Diseases, Musculoskeletal Disorders