Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Valuing and pricing the components of combination therapies can be difficult because of competition law issues, difficulty implementing different prices for the same product in alternative uses, and attributing value to each component of the combination. We propose a value attribution solution that allows all combination components to be priced according to their relative value in the combination.
METHODS: We developed a value attribution solution that is universal, symmetrical, and neutral to each combination constituent, regardless of whether it is the backbone or the add-on, and complete, meaning that it will always attribute the full value of the combination between the component parts. Moreover, it can be applied to any number of components in the combination (eg, triplets or quadruplets). We compared this solution with 2 other existing approaches.
RESULTS: The results of the proposed value attribution solution sit between those of the 2 other value attribution approaches as it combines elements of each. As the degree of additivity moves further away from one in either direction, then our general approach ratios also move, reflecting the impact of the incremental value.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed value attribution solution for combination therapies differs from 2 existing approaches by being universally applicable and allowing for symmetry when neutral to the constituent components of the combination. To optimally contribute to policy debate and practice, various requirements for its implementation need to be well understood, including how to overcome (1) partial information, (2) whether its assumptions can be relaxed, and (3) implementation issues.
METHODS: We developed a value attribution solution that is universal, symmetrical, and neutral to each combination constituent, regardless of whether it is the backbone or the add-on, and complete, meaning that it will always attribute the full value of the combination between the component parts. Moreover, it can be applied to any number of components in the combination (eg, triplets or quadruplets). We compared this solution with 2 other existing approaches.
RESULTS: The results of the proposed value attribution solution sit between those of the 2 other value attribution approaches as it combines elements of each. As the degree of additivity moves further away from one in either direction, then our general approach ratios also move, reflecting the impact of the incremental value.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed value attribution solution for combination therapies differs from 2 existing approaches by being universally applicable and allowing for symmetry when neutral to the constituent components of the combination. To optimally contribute to policy debate and practice, various requirements for its implementation need to be well understood, including how to overcome (1) partial information, (2) whether its assumptions can be relaxed, and (3) implementation issues.
摘要：
目标：由于竞争法问题，对联合疗法的组成部分进行评估和定价可能很困难，在替代用途中难以为同一产品实施不同的价格，并将价值归因于组合的每个组成部分。我们提出了一种价值归因解决方案，该解决方案允许所有组合组件根据其在组合中的相对价值进行定价。
方法：我们开发了一种通用的价值归因解决方案，对称,对每个组合成分都是中性的，不管是骨干还是附加，这意味着它将始终归因于组成部分之间的组合的全部值。此外，例如,其可以应用于组合中的任何数量的组分(例如三元组或四元组)。我们将此解决方案与其他两种现有方法进行了比较。
结果：所提出的价值归因解决方案的结果介于其他两种价值归因方法之间，因为它结合了每种方法的元素。随着可加性程度在任一方向上远离一个，那么我们的一般接近率也会发生变化，反映增量价值的影响。
结论：提出的组合疗法的价值归因解决方案与两种现有方法不同，因为它具有普遍适用性，并且在对组合的组成成分中性时允许对称。为政策辩论和实践做出最佳贡献，需要很好地理解其实施的各种要求，包括如何克服(1)部分信息，(2)其假设是否可以放宽,(3)实施问题。
方法：我们开发了一种通用的价值归因解决方案，对称,对每个组合成分都是中性的，不管是骨干还是附加，这意味着它将始终归因于组成部分之间的组合的全部值。此外，例如,其可以应用于组合中的任何数量的组分(例如三元组或四元组)。我们将此解决方案与其他两种现有方法进行了比较。
结果：所提出的价值归因解决方案的结果介于其他两种价值归因方法之间，因为它结合了每种方法的元素。随着可加性程度在任一方向上远离一个，那么我们的一般接近率也会发生变化，反映增量价值的影响。
结论：提出的组合疗法的价值归因解决方案与两种现有方法不同，因为它具有普遍适用性，并且在对组合的组成成分中性时允许对称。为政策辩论和实践做出最佳贡献，需要很好地理解其实施的各种要求，包括如何克服(1)部分信息，(2)其假设是否可以放宽,(3)实施问题。
