TY - JOUR
T1 - The unexploited potential of data systems tracking medicines utilization
T2 - an opportunity to improve access to oncology combination therapies
AU - Simoens, Steven
AU - Dodwell, David
AU - Hartevelt, Michael
AU - Lindgren, Peter
AU - Pistollato, Michele
AU - Pont, Lisa
AU - Pontes, Caridad
AU - Roediger, Alexander
AU - Sablek, Antun
AU - Van Ganse, Eric
AU - Wang, Qinyi
AU - Wenger, Chris
AU - Wilsdon, Tim
AU - Xoxi, Entela
AU - Godman, Brian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2025 Simoens, Dodwell, Hartevelt, Lindgren, Pistollato, Pont, Pontes, Roediger, Sablek, Van Ganse, Wang, Wenger, Wilsdon, Xoxi and Godman.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Background: While progress has been made in oncology treatments, including the introduction of combination therapies, barriers affect patient access. There are approaches that could improve access including combination-specific pricing that allow the price to reflect whether a product is used in monotherapy or in combination. The feasibility of this solution requires data on the utilization of combination therapies. Aim: To investigate the ability of data systems across Belgium, England, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Australia to track drug utilization of combination therapies, particularly in oncology. Methods: A targeted literature review was conducted to investigate the attributes of the key data systems. One-on-one semi-structured interviews were subsequently conducted with country experts to validate the research, who were screened based on their expertise and knowledge of the respective data and reimbursement systems in their countries, followed by an advisory board to align on policy recommendations. Country-specific and cross-border insights were gathered from nine experts across these countries. Results: There are data systems that routinely collect medicine utilization data across seven European countries and Australia. These datasets can potentially be leveraged to track the utilization of combination therapies. Where available, administrative data systems, such as reimbursement claims data, can be leveraged, though other types of systems, such as product registries, may be more suitable in some countries, emphasizing the need to consider country-specific nuances. Using existing data systems is likely to be less resource-intensive than setting up a novel system for this application. While viable sources of data exist in most countries, many need improving to fully harness their tracking potential. There are several common areas where improvement is needed to track combination therapies effectively. These include data quality, access for different stakeholders, minimizing the burden of data entry and management, and increasing support from national authorities to foster multi-stakeholder engagement. Conclusion: While most countries possess data systems that could serve as a foundation for tracking combination oncology therapies, these systems require optimization and proper implementation. Our core recommendation is for policymakers to explore the expansion and enhancement of data infrastructures.
AB - Background: While progress has been made in oncology treatments, including the introduction of combination therapies, barriers affect patient access. There are approaches that could improve access including combination-specific pricing that allow the price to reflect whether a product is used in monotherapy or in combination. The feasibility of this solution requires data on the utilization of combination therapies. Aim: To investigate the ability of data systems across Belgium, England, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Australia to track drug utilization of combination therapies, particularly in oncology. Methods: A targeted literature review was conducted to investigate the attributes of the key data systems. One-on-one semi-structured interviews were subsequently conducted with country experts to validate the research, who were screened based on their expertise and knowledge of the respective data and reimbursement systems in their countries, followed by an advisory board to align on policy recommendations. Country-specific and cross-border insights were gathered from nine experts across these countries. Results: There are data systems that routinely collect medicine utilization data across seven European countries and Australia. These datasets can potentially be leveraged to track the utilization of combination therapies. Where available, administrative data systems, such as reimbursement claims data, can be leveraged, though other types of systems, such as product registries, may be more suitable in some countries, emphasizing the need to consider country-specific nuances. Using existing data systems is likely to be less resource-intensive than setting up a novel system for this application. While viable sources of data exist in most countries, many need improving to fully harness their tracking potential. There are several common areas where improvement is needed to track combination therapies effectively. These include data quality, access for different stakeholders, minimizing the burden of data entry and management, and increasing support from national authorities to foster multi-stakeholder engagement. Conclusion: While most countries possess data systems that could serve as a foundation for tracking combination oncology therapies, these systems require optimization and proper implementation. Our core recommendation is for policymakers to explore the expansion and enhancement of data infrastructures.
KW - Australia
KW - Europe
KW - individual patient-level healthcare data
KW - oncology combination therapies
KW - pharmaceutical policy
KW - pricing and reimbursement
KW - utilization tracking
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105014900086
U2 - 10.3389/fphar.2025.1532022
DO - 10.3389/fphar.2025.1532022
M3 - Article
C2 - 40910009
AN - SCOPUS:105014900086
SN - 1663-9812
VL - 16
JO - Frontiers in Pharmacology
JF - Frontiers in Pharmacology
M1 - 1532022
ER -