Tenders: Manufacturers View

1
Tenders Manufacturers View
Sophie Ludgate Director, Government Affairs
Public Policy, BioScience Europe WFH Global
Forum, September 2007
2
Tenders manufacturers view

• We support
• Clinical freedom
• Treatment defined by patient need
• Treatments chosen by a doctor in consultation
  with his/her patient
• Purchasing processes that reflect an appreciation
  of clinical differences in therapeutic options
• Purchasing processes that recognise research and
  innovation

3
Tenders manufacturers view

• Tenders are increasingly a reality for the
  purchase of hemophilia treatments
• There are pros cons and whether they are
  positive for the hemophilia community or
  detrimental will be affected by
• Existing standards of care treatment in a
  particular country
• The nature of the tender and how it is conducted

4
Effect of tender will depend on existing
standards of care treatment

• In some developing countries tenders have been a
  supportive mechanism to introduce treatment or
  raise average IU per capita
• However, tenders can lead to
• Limitations on clinical freedom
• Limitations on the opportunity to increase
  prophylaxis
• Limitations on access to new therapies
• Treatment caps

5
Effect of tender will be dictated by the nature
of the tender and how it is conducted

• In the event of a tender, we support
• Transparent and clearly defined tender process
• Single tender committee made up of an appropriate
  range of expertise clinicians, expert patients,
  regulatory authorities, procurement officials
• Appropriate weighting of tender award criteria
  between safety, supply, efficacy, price and
  demonstrated commitment to community, as defined
  using technical and scientific expertise of
  tender committee members
• Equal fair process for companies engaged in
  tender process
• Appropriate assessment of award criteria

6
Different types of tender

• Differences in scale and type
• E-auctions

7
E-Auctions

• Inappropriate process - hemophilia treatment is
  different from basic hospital supplies
  treatments for non life threatening conditions
  this should be reflected in the way they are
  purchased
• Process fails to recognise the need for
  individual decisions on therapy based on dialogue
  between the patient and physician
• Reject the assumption that is inherent in the
  e-auction process that all hemophilia treatments
  are the same
• Expansion of the process raises concerns for
  future innovation in hemophilia treatment

8
Summary

• The use of tenders to purchase hemophilia
  treatments has the potential to benefit or act
  against the interests of the hemophilia community
• Some countries would benefit and and some would
  not
• In the event of a tender expert clinician
  patient involvement at all stages is crucial, as
  is a fair transparent process