Guide

Government Reliance on Value Assessments in Medicare Part B

Implications for Access for Medicare Beneficiaries

Over time, US payers have increasingly relied on the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review’s (ICER) recommendations to inform decision-making. ICER’s value assessments continue relying on cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) despite well-documented concerns over the metric. In 2018, Cencora examined how the blunt implementation of cost-effectiveness methods and findings, such as those employed by ICER, could affect patient access to medications. Cencora built upon the 2018 study and re-examined the original therapeutic areas including multiple sclerosis (MS), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and multiple myeloma (MM), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and added asthma, a therapeutic area recently assessed by ICER, to understand how patients may continue to be impacted in 2020.  
Cencora analyses found that if the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) were to apply the value assessments from the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) as the basis for coverage policy for Medicare Part B in 5 serious, complex conditions, 63% of patients would face access barriers to clinically important physician-administered treatments. 

Download our issue brief to read the full findings from the analyses. 
ICER brief
* Available in English only.

Related resources

Article

Why a strong transitional service agreement is vital for product life cycle management

Article

Q&A for innovators: Navigating the complex regulatory world of ATMPs/CGTs

Article

The drivers and benefits of the UK’s clinical trials regulation amendment

We’re here to help

Connect with our team today to learn more about how Cencora is helping to shape the future of healthcare.