[Reporter’s View] Worth of ease in administration

How to calculate the worth of convenience in administration when listing drugs for reimbursement

You can now orally take injectables, change the daily doses to monthly doses, and manage your disease with once a year injections.

 

Such 'convenience of administration' has now become a competitive edge in the pharmaceutical market.

 

Convenience, which had been mainly emphasized for chronic diseases, is now being highlighted in various other disease areas including anticancer drugs and autoimmune diseases.

 

The emergence of one-shot drugs played a role, but other advanced new drugs have also been putting forth not only their efficacy but also their convenience.

 

The convenience of administration literally means 'that taking the medication is convenient.' The question arises, 'If I'm taking medication because I'm sick, is comfort really that important?

 

Shouldn't a drug’s efficacy be the most important aspect for the company?’ Nevertheless, pharmaceutical companies are quite obsessed with showing off their drug’s convenience.

 

In many cases, convenience is the main slogan for marketing and sales of the relevant drugs.

 

As such, “convenience” is emerging as a keyword in the healthcare industry.

 

However, the value of such ‘convenience’ is not very recognized in the process of reimbursement listing.

 

In particular, health authorities tend to be reluctant to accept the higher price of next-generation drugs that offer improved convenience compared to existing drugs for severe diseases such as cancer, which is a life-threatening disease.

 

From the government’s standpoint, it’s a valid argument.

 

If a drug receives a higher price simply because of its improved convenience, this may rather lower the opportunity cost for patients with other diseases that share the nation’s limited budget.

 

However, there is a high possibility of new drugs that offer improved convenience while showing the same efficacy as existing drugs being introduced to the market.

 

However, convenience is not unconditionally important.

 

It depends on the situation.

 

Common sense dictates that in the case of cancer, which is a life-threatening condition, there are not many cases where the prescription is changed for the sake of convenience.

 

Therefore, the convenience of such anticancer drugs must be accompanied by a significant breakthrough in the method of administration or offer improved efficacy.

 

A doctor would not give a patient a new drug if he or she is seeing efficacy with their currently prescribed drug, as this may cause unexpected side effects.

 

In addition, the convenience of the drug may be reduced when it is used as part of a combination therapy regimen or when the patient has relevant diseases.

 

However, it is also worth considering whether blindly rejecting the worth of convenience in administration is right.

 

There are cases where such improvements in convenience can lead to improvements in treatment outcomes.

 

There are also cases where long-acting drugs reduce the burden of monitoring and save health finances.

 

In the current healthcare trend where cancer is also turning into a chronic disease, the 'quality of life' of the patients cannot be ignored.

 

Convenience is a value that is difficult to either blindly support or ignore.

 

However, if a drug has been developed to treat a major condition, that values convenience in administration, the value of this drug that met this need should be recognized, amid the increasing number of drugs that are facing difficulties in the listing process that offer improved convenience.