Mapping the landscape of managed entry agreements: a systematic review of global frameworks, system-level components, and implementation challenges

Background: Managed Entry Agreements (MEAs) are pivotal for enabling access to innovative pharmaceuticals while mitigating financial risk and addressing evidence uncertainty. Despite conceptual acceptance, the essential requirements for their design and implementation are poorly documented, posing a challenge for evolving health systems. This study aimed to systematically review and map global evidence published in the literature on the existence and characterization of countries' MEA policies, focusing on the core system-level components, governance, and operational frameworks for successful implementation, and their associated development and implementation challenges. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2025. Studies discussing governance, frameworks, legislation, or implementation of pharmaceutical MEAs were included. Data were extracted and synthesized narratively. Results: Of 96 included studies, most focused on European (43%) and North American (28%) systems, with a significant evidence gap for the Middle East and low-income countries. While situational analysis was the most common theme (63%), the literature predominantly catalogued barriers rather than providing operational solutions. Key barriers were inefficient regulatory frameworks (identified in 42% of studies), data infrastructure limitations (41%), and high administrative burden (38%). Stakeholder analysis highlighted underrepresentation of academia and civil society. A minority of studies (15%) focused on Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs). Conclusion: This review identifies a critical "how-to" gap in the MEA literature. While the value of MEAs is acknowledged, there is a stark deficit of actionable, system-level guidance on the regulatory, governance, and operational prerequisites for implementation. For health systems seeking to adopt MEAs, future efforts must shift from describing barriers to developing concrete implementation toolkits, legislative roadmaps, and fit-for-purpose payment models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Published
2026-04-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2026.1803870
Primary Topic
Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mapping the landscape of managed entry agreements: a systematic review of global frameworks, system-level components, and implementation challenges

Rosanna Tarricone, Mansoor Ahmed Khan, Laila Carolina Abu Esba, Panos G. Kanavos et al.
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
article

Mapping the landscape of managed entry agreements: a systematic review of global frameworks, system-level components, and implementation challenges

Rosanna Tarricone, Mansoor Ahmed Khan, Laila Carolina Abu Esba, Panos G. Kanavos, Amal Hassan Al-Najjar, Fatma Maraiki, Consuela Cheriece Yousef, Hussain Abdulrahman Al‐Omar, Hind Almodaimegh, Jehan Alamre, Lolwa Hamad Almudaiyan, Sultan Tawfiq AlShurbaji, Khalid AlYahya, Esraa S. Altawil, Abdualmajeed Saad Binjumayah, Faisal Awwadh Alharbi, Asma Abdulaziz Almuhsin, Jaime Espín
article en

Abstract

Background: Managed Entry Agreements (MEAs) are pivotal for enabling access to innovative pharmaceuticals while mitigating financial risk and addressing evidence uncertainty. Despite conceptual acceptance, the essential requirements for their design and implementation are poorly documented, posing a challenge for evolving health systems. This study aimed to systematically review and map global evidence published in the literature on the existence and characterization of countries' MEA policies, focusing on the core system-level components, governance, and operational frameworks for successful implementation, and their associated development and implementation challenges. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2025. Studies discussing governance, frameworks, legislation, or implementation of pharmaceutical MEAs were included. Data were extracted and synthesized narratively. Results: Of 96 included studies, most focused on European (43%) and North American (28%) systems, with a significant evidence gap for the Middle East and low-income countries. While situational analysis was the most common theme (63%), the literature predominantly catalogued barriers rather than providing operational solutions. Key barriers were inefficient regulatory frameworks (identified in 42% of studies), data infrastructure limitations (41%), and high administrative burden (38%). Stakeholder analysis highlighted underrepresentation of academia and civil society. A minority of studies (15%) focused on Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs). Conclusion: This review identifies a critical "how-to" gap in the MEA literature. While the value of MEAs is acknowledged, there is a stark deficit of actionable, system-level guidance on the regulatory, governance, and operational prerequisites for implementation. For health systems seeking to adopt MEAs, future efforts must shift from describing barriers to developing concrete implementation toolkits, legislative roadmaps, and fit-for-purpose payment models.

Frontiers in PharmacologyVol. 17
Department of Health and Social Care (GB), Riyadh Armed Forces Hospital (SA), King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (SA), King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre (SA), King Saud Medical City (SA), Ministero della Salute (IT), King Saud University (SA), King Abdulaziz Medical City (SA), Directorate of Health (IS), King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (SA), New York Life Insurance Company (United States) (US), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (ES), National Guard Health Affairs (SA), University of York (GB), Andalusian School of Public Health (ES), Bocconi University (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
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.