Table 5 Status of application of drug price calculation adjustment factors in the similar efficacy comparison method (I)
Ultra-orphan drugs | Orphan drugs | Non-orphan drugs | |
|---|---|---|---|
Premium for usefulness-based group | n = 11 | n = 51 | n = 176 |
100% | 0 | 0 | 1 |
75% | 0 | 0 | 0 |
50% | 1 | 0 | 0 |
45% | 2 | 0 | 0 |
40% | 1 | 1 | 2 |
35% | 0 | 1 | 1 |
20% | 0 | 1 | 1 |
15% | 0 | 1 | 1 |
10% | 0 | 4 | 12 |
5% | 2 | 8 | 24 |
0% | 5 | 35 | 134 |
Premium for marketability-based group | n = 11 | n = 51 | n = 176 |
10% | 2 | 10 | 2 |
5% | 0 | 1 | 6 |
0% | 9 | 40 | 168 |
Premium for Sakigake Designation Scheme | n = 9 | n = 28 | n = 78 |
10% | 0 | 3 | 1 |
0% | 9 | 25 | 77 |
Foreign average price adjustment | n = 11 | n = 51 | n = 176 |
100% raise | 0 | 3 | 7 |
90–99% raise | 0 | 0 | 1 |
80–89% raise | 0 | 0 | 0 |
70–79% raise | 0 | 0 | 1 |
60–69% raise | 0 | 0 | 2 |
50–59% raise | 1 | 0 | 1 |
40–49% raise | 0 | 1 | 0 |
30–39% raise | 0 | 1 | 2 |
20–29% raise | 0 | 0 | 2 |
10–19% raise | 0 | 1 | 4 |
1–9% raise | 1 | 5 | 3 |
Not applicable | 9 | 36 | 147 |
1–9% lowering | 0 | 1 | 3 |
10–19% lowering | 0 | 1 | 1 |
20–29% lowering | 0 | 2 | 1 |
30–39% lowering | 0 | 0 | 0 |
40–49% lowering | 0 | 0 | 1 |
50–59% lowering | 0 | 0 | 0 |
60–69% lowering | 0 | 0 | 0 |
70% and more lowering | 0 | 0 | 0 |