OP81 Outcome-Based Managed Entry Agreements For Rare Disease Therapies: Learnings From The Belgian Experience

Introduction The rising costs of rare disease therapies pose significant challenges for health technology assessment (HTA) decision-makers and payers, particularly given the limited clinical evidence available at the time of appraisal. This has created a growing need for outcome-based managed entry agreements (OBMEAs) that link post-launch evidence generation to appropriate payment models. This study examined the implementation of OBMEAs in Belgium and offers best practices to optimize their use globally. Methods A document analysis was conducted of managed entry agreements (MEAs) for all rare disease therapies reimbursed between January 2012 and August 2024. Through a standardized template, OBMEAs were identified and classified based on type of uncertainties included and outcomes to be collected. HTA reports were analyzed to assess the impact of clinical and real-world evidence (RWE) on the reassessment of these therapies at the end of the OBMEA. Results The Belgian payer implemented outcome-based managed entry agreements (OBMEAs) for 57 orphan drugs, including five advanced therapy medicinal products. All OBMEAs followed a coverage with evidence development scheme, primarily addressing budget impact (32%) and efficacy (27%). The median duration was 24 months, with some agreements extended or renewed up to five times. Only eight percent of OBMEAs resulted in a definitive listing. RWE was frequently rejected during reassessment due to concerns about validity and incomplete registries. Key recommendations include establishing clearer data collection protocols and improving transparency at multiple levels to enhance the effectiveness of these agreements. Conclusions The findings highlight the challenges of implementing outcome-based MEAs in a manner that truly addresses long-term uncertainties. Adopting the best practices outlined in this study could support OBMEAs to fulfill their promise of balancing sustainability with timely patient access to innovative therapies.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462325101359
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

OP81 Outcome-Based Managed Entry Agreements For Rare Disease Therapies: Learnings From The Belgian Experience

Yvonne Denier, Alessandra Blonda, Inneke van de Vijver, Steven Simoens et al.
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

OP81 Outcome-Based Managed Entry Agreements For Rare Disease Therapies: Learnings From The Belgian Experience

Yvonne Denier, Alessandra Blonda, Inneke van de Vijver, Steven Simoens, Karen Facey, Isabelle Huys
article en

Abstract

Introduction The rising costs of rare disease therapies pose significant challenges for health technology assessment (HTA) decision-makers and payers, particularly given the limited clinical evidence available at the time of appraisal. This has created a growing need for outcome-based managed entry agreements (OBMEAs) that link post-launch evidence generation to appropriate payment models. This study examined the implementation of OBMEAs in Belgium and offers best practices to optimize their use globally. Methods A document analysis was conducted of managed entry agreements (MEAs) for all rare disease therapies reimbursed between January 2012 and August 2024. Through a standardized template, OBMEAs were identified and classified based on type of uncertainties included and outcomes to be collected. HTA reports were analyzed to assess the impact of clinical and real-world evidence (RWE) on the reassessment of these therapies at the end of the OBMEA. Results The Belgian payer implemented outcome-based managed entry agreements (OBMEAs) for 57 orphan drugs, including five advanced therapy medicinal products. All OBMEAs followed a coverage with evidence development scheme, primarily addressing budget impact (32%) and efficacy (27%). The median duration was 24 months, with some agreements extended or renewed up to five times. Only eight percent of OBMEAs resulted in a definitive listing. RWE was frequently rejected during reassessment due to concerns about validity and incomplete registries. Key recommendations include establishing clearer data collection protocols and improving transparency at multiple levels to enhance the effectiveness of these agreements. Conclusions The findings highlight the challenges of implementing outcome-based MEAs in a manner that truly addresses long-term uncertainties. Adopting the best practices outlined in this study could support OBMEAs to fulfill their promise of balancing sustainability with timely patient access to innovative therapies.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health CareVol. 41(S1)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.