Implementing performance-based risk-sharing agreements in non-small cell lung cancer immunotherapy: a real-world data case study

Adéla Bártová (), Filippo Rumi, João Vasco Santos, Adam Svobodník and Barbora Rihova ()
Additional contact information
Adéla Bártová: Masaryk University
Filippo Rumi: Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
João Vasco Santos: RISE-Health, University of Porto
Adam Svobodník: Masaryk University
Barbora Rihova: Masaryk University

Health Economics Review, 2025, vol. 15, issue 1, 1-15

Abstract: Abstract Background Performance-based risk-sharing agreements (PBRSA) represent an innovative tool for managing uncertainty and balanced distribution of the financial risk of high-cost drugs. By linking reimbursement to real-world treatment performance, these agreements help mitigate budgetary impacts. This study poses an illustrative patient-level PBRSA reimbursement model for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) immunotherapy based on collected real-world data (RWD). Methods A retrospective analysis of 266 patients with NSCLC treated with immunotherapy was performed. Progression-free survival (PFS) served as the primary outcome measure of therapeutic effectiveness. An illustrative patient-level PBRSA model was developed to quantify the manufacturer’s financial participation based on deviations from established PFS thresholds reported in randomised controlled trials (RCT). The manufacturer’s financial responsibility increased proportionally to greater deviations in patient outcomes from the RCT benchmark. Cost calculations were limited exclusively to the acquisition price of immunotherapies, excluding administration, toxicity management, and other indirect costs. The potential PBRSA scenario was compared with the current reimbursement situation. Results Using this reimbursement method, cost savings per checkpoint inhibitor for healthcare payers could represent between 27.3% and 66.2% of the total cost, depending on the individual PFS reached. For the RWD cohort of NSCLC patients unsuccessfully treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy was 57.5% (a reduction in cost to payers from $27 996 to $11 893 per patient); pembrolizumab in combination 51.7% ($33 595 to $16 237); nivolumab 37.1% ($5 608 to $3 531); atezolizumab 27.3% ($11 799 to $8 583); and durvalumab 66.2% ($44 005 to $14 882). Conclusions This study proposes an illustrative patient-level PBRSA reimbursement model leveraging real-world clinical data to enhance risk-sharing for high-cost therapies. Unlike conventional cost-effectiveness analyses, this method directly links clinical performance and manufacturer financial responsibility. Future research should integrate comprehensive cost considerations and validate model performance in broader clinical settings.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-025-00646-3 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:15:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-025-00646-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/13561

DOI: 10.1186/s13561-025-00646-3

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics Review is currently edited by J. Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg

More articles in Health Economics Review from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().