Hemophilia – Access & Reimbursement – Detailed, Expanded Analysis (US)

Instructions for uploading your PowerPoint presentation and survey:

The PPT attachment needs to be the first node under the report (i.e., it should appear before your survey).Name the PPT in the same fashion as you want it displayed on the Platform. The name will be displayed exactly as it appears in the filename. We recommend using the following naming convention for the PPT filename: Indication – Product – Report. The name in the “Title” field in the Form tab should be the same as the PPT.Select the “Embed” option in the “EmbedAttachment” field for the PPT attachment. This will ensure that it is embedded on the Platform.The survey should be uploaded to Kentico as a File Attachment after the PPT attachment. The survey should be in PDF in the DRG survey document. The name in the “Title” field in the Form tab should be the same as the survey.Select the “Sidebar” option in the “EmbedAttachment” field for the survey attachment.For the Abstract field: Copy/Paste the key inputs from the product brochure, per guidance from Marketing.

Hemophilia treatment is gradually consuming more U.S. payer budget dollars. The increasing cost of factor concentrate and the growing preference for prophylaxis treatment are key factors driving these costs upward. Despite hemophilia patient advocacy groups strongly pushing for coverage of all brands, formulary exclusions are starting to appear. In some states, Medicaid is doing more to control the cost of factor concentrate use (for example, by introducing preferred/nonpreferred formulary tiers). Additionally, hemophilia payers tend to focus on direct cost. Given that replacement of a joint as a result of hemophilic arthropathy will not become a reality for another 20 years, payers remain focused on what will happen over the next 18-24 months.

QUESTIONS ANSWERED

• How do payers reimburse hemophilia drugs in 2019, and what restrictions do they impose? Which factors most greatly influence payers’ reimbursement decisions for Genentech’s Hemlibra?
• How do payers expect access to Genentech’s Hemlibra to evolve, and for which emerging therapies do payers expect to receive coverage?
• What clinical benefits are physicians and payers looking for in emerging therapies such as Novo Nordisk’s concizumab and BioMarin’s BMN 270, and what kind of savings are payers seeking?
• What role does reimbursement, restriction, and patient cost play in physicians’ decisions to prescribe therapies for hemophilia? What patient shares can emerging therapies garner under various reimbursement scenarios?

Geography: United States

Primary Research: Survey of 100 U.S. hematologists Survey of 30 U.S. managed care organization (MCO) pharmacy and medical directors (PDs/MDs)

Key Drugs Covered: Hemlibra, Advate, Adynovate, Afstyla, Alprolix, BeneFIX, Eloctate, FEIBA, Hemlibra, Idelvion, Jivi, Kogenate, Kovaltry, Novoeight, NovoSeven, Nuwiq, Xyntha

Content Highlights

• Reimbursement and contracting
• Access and prescribing
• Special topics
• Opportunities and challenges for emerging therapies

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

U.S. Access & Reimbursement provides in-depth insight on the impact of payer policy on prescribing behavior so that clients can build their market access strategy and optimize their brand positioning. This analysis of primary market research with physician specialists and U.S. payers helps clients stay up-to-date on restriction policies, gauge payer and prescriber attitudes toward specific therapies, identify opportunities where brands can capture patient share through market access, and maximize opportunities for emerging therapies by learning how previous brands gained favorable reimbursement or why they stumbled.