Next Article in Journal
A Systematic Review of the Characteristics of Data Assessment Tools to Measure Medical Doctors’ Work-Related Quality of Life
Previous Article in Journal
Reply to: Comment on Increased Reliance on Physician Assistants: An Access-Quality Tradeoff?
 
 
Journal of Market Access & Health Policy (JMAHP) is published by MDPI from Volume 12 Issue 1 (2024). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Taylor & Francis.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Amortization of Gene Therapies Funding on the Results and Conclusions of CEMs and BIMs

by
Hubert Polek
1,*,
Justyna Janik
2,
Ewelina Paterak
2,
Monique Dabbous
3,
Michał Pochopień
3 and
Mondher Toumi
3
1
Department of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Assignity, Cracow, Poland
2
Department of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Putnam PHMR, Cracow, Poland
3
Département de Santé Publique, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2023, 11(1), 2232648; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1080/20016689.2023.2232648
Submission received: 25 January 2023 / Revised: 14 June 2023 / Accepted: 30 June 2023 / Published: 10 July 2023

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background: Gene replacement therapy (GRT) is a treatment method used to combat or prevent various diseases. Its high one-off cost constitutes a major obstacle for successful market access. This paper aims to assess and discuss the applicability of amortization in models, such as cost-effectiveness models (CEMs) and budget impact models (BIMs) informing HTA recommendations and reimbursement decisions. Methods and findings: A hypothetical CEA and BIA were considered. The objective was to compare the GRT with and without amortization. A straight-line amortization model was used. The CEM and BIM were considered and assessed based on two set of scenarios: considering different amortization duration or different discounting rate. The impact of amortization against the total cost of gene therapy was assessed for all the scenarios. The cost difference between GRT with and without amortization in relation to its total cost was -$58,855, thus amortization does not have a significant impact on the results and conclusions of the cost-effectiveness analysis. For BIM in the base case, amortization had no impact on the results. Conclusion: Amortization has negligible impact on the results of CEM and total BIM and no impact on the conclusions from the model. One exception is the budget impact in case of an amortization period longer than the time horizon of BIM, where a half of the GRT price is moved beyond the model time horizon. Amortization has a distinguishing effect from an accounting perspective, but it does not have any implication for payers.
Keywords: gene therapies; amortization; economic analysis; affordability; assessment gene therapies; amortization; economic analysis; affordability; assessment

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Polek, H.; Janik, J.; Paterak, E.; Dabbous, M.; Pochopień, M.; Toumi, M. The Impact of Amortization of Gene Therapies Funding on the Results and Conclusions of CEMs and BIMs. J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2023, 11, 2232648. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1080/20016689.2023.2232648

AMA Style

Polek H, Janik J, Paterak E, Dabbous M, Pochopień M, Toumi M. The Impact of Amortization of Gene Therapies Funding on the Results and Conclusions of CEMs and BIMs. Journal of Market Access & Health Policy. 2023; 11(1):2232648. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1080/20016689.2023.2232648

Chicago/Turabian Style

Polek, Hubert, Justyna Janik, Ewelina Paterak, Monique Dabbous, Michał Pochopień, and Mondher Toumi. 2023. "The Impact of Amortization of Gene Therapies Funding on the Results and Conclusions of CEMs and BIMs" Journal of Market Access & Health Policy 11, no. 1: 2232648. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1080/20016689.2023.2232648

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop