Over the past 2 years, commercially insured patients enrolled in plans that had value-based contracts for certain high-cost drugs had lower copays for their medications than did patients enrolled in plans without such contracts. That finding comes from “Delivering Results for Patients: The Value of Value-Based Contracts,” a new report from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).
Over the past 2 years, commercially insured patients enrolled in plans that had value-based contracts for certain high-cost drugs had lower copays for their medications than did patients enrolled in plans without such contracts. That finding comes from “Delivering Results for Patients: The Value of Value-Based Contracts,” a report released today by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).
PhRMA’s report identifies the following types of value-based contracts:
According to PhRMA, value-based contracting has the potential benefit of allowing for broader access to innovative medicines by reducing the payers’ risk of suboptimal outcomes and encouraging the appropriate use of medicines. These agreements may also help to reduce medicine costs, says PhRMA, if manufacturers pay higher rebates for patients who do not meet their outcome targets. Patients could realize a savings if rebates are passed on to them.
As a result of these potential benefits, many health plans are warming to the idea of value-based arrangements, especially in the form of outcomes-based contracts, according the report. PhRMA says that, according to a 2017 Avalere Health report on payer perspectives on outcomes contracting, approximately 70% of commercial plans have a favorable view of this contract type, approximately 25% have implemented at least 1 such contract, and 30% report that they are negotiating a contract or contracts.
Among plans that have at least 1 outcomes-based contract, 55% report that they have entered into a contract that focuses on endocrine disorders—including diabetes—and another 33% are considering doing so. “If new value-based contracts are able to improve use of medicines for diabetes and reduce the burden of this disease in the United States by as little as [5%], these contracts could save nearly $9 billion annually in direct medical costs by preventing 365,000 emergency department visits, 390,000 hospital outpatient visits and 1.3 million hospital inpatient days,” according to the report.
Patients, too, could see a positive financial impact from such contracts. PhRMA says that it has worked with Avalere Health to analyze formulary coverage for existing outcomes-based contracts, including those for drugs that treat diabetes, high cholesterol, and HIV. Copays for patients enrolled in silver-level exchange plans with outcomes-based contracts were an average of 28% lower for these drugs than they were for patients enrolled in market average silver-level exchange plans.
However, barriers to value-based contracts—including concerns about how such arrangements might affect price reporting, issues with potentially implicating the federal anti-kickback statue, and uncertainty about the FDA’s rules regarding manufacturers’ communications with plans—make it difficult to accurately judge the potential that these contracts could have, says PhRMA.
“Small policy changes to modernize outdated regulations have the potential to lead to tremendous benefits for patients and the health care system,” the report concludes.
How AI Can Help Address Cost-Related Nonadherence to Biologic, Biosimilar Treatment
March 9th 2025Despite saving billions, biosimilars still account for only a small share of the biologics market—what's standing in the way of broader adoption and how can artificial intelligence (AI) help change that?
Eye on Pharma: Sandoz Files Antitrust Suit; Yuflyma Interchangeability; Costco’s Ustekinumab Pick
April 22nd 2025Sandoz's antitrust suit against Amgen, the FDA’s interchangeability designation for Celltrion’s adalimumab biosimilar, and the inclusion of an ustekinumab biosimilar in Costco’s prescription program highlight growing momentum to expand biosimilar access and affordability for patients with chronic inflammatory diseases.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
President Trump Signs Executive Order to Bring Down Drug Prices
April 16th 2025To help bring down sky-high drug prices, President Donald Trump signed an executive order pushing for faster biosimilar development, more transparency, and tougher rules on pharmacy benefit managers—aiming to save billions and make meds more affordable for everyone.
How State Substitution Laws Shape Insulin Biosimilar Adoption
April 15th 2025States with fewer restrictions on biosimilar substitution tend to see higher uptake of interchangeable insulin glargine, showing how even small policy details can significantly influence biosimilar adoption and expand access to more affordable insulin.