The Stockholm Administrative Court recently ruled that under the so-called 'trilogue negotiations' between pharmaceutical companies, the Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency and the Swedish regions could require an originator company to compensate them for products marketed by parallel importers.
The Stockholm Administrative Court recently ruled that the obligation on tenderers of public procurements of medicinal products to have routines which ensure that the use and handling of active ingredients would have as little effect on the environment as possible, as well as the obligation that they routinely survey and have dialogue with their subcontractors, were permissible. The decision has been appealed to the Administrative Court of Appeal in Stockholm, which has yet to make a decision.
In eight landmark decisions, the Patent and Market Court of Appeal decided that the terms for already granted supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) should be recalculated in order to reflect a 2015 European Court of Justice decision regarding the method for calculating SPC terms under EU Regulation 469/2009. Several pharmaceutical companies that had been granted SPCs noted that the Patent and Registration Office's method of calculating SPC terms was not in line with EU law.
The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency recently reassessed the reimbursement status of Cerezyme and VPRIV – two products indicated against Gaucher's disease – and decided to decrease the products' prices. This caused the marketing authorisation holders behind the products to withdraw them from the reimbursement system. Consequently, there is no longer a product against Gaucher's disease that is nationally reimbursed in Sweden.
The government recently issued new directives to review the pricing and reimbursement system and the national financing system for medicinal products. The government declared that the existing system is complex and complicated and must be improved in order to operate a modern healthcare system. The review seeks to find a clear division of responsibilities between the national government and local county councils and regions and to establish foreseeable processes for stakeholders.
The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV) recently denied reimbursement for an orphan drug for the treatment of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension based on a health technology assessment which took into account off-label use of treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The Stockholm Administrative Court has since upheld the TLV decision, agreeing with the TLV's reasoning that the orphan drug should be compared with available PAH treatments.
The Supreme Administrative Court recently ruled that e-cigarettes not marketed for smoking cessation purposes should not be classified as medicinal products. The court stated that in order to be classified as a medicinal product, the product, if used as intended, must be capable of appreciably restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions in human beings. It is not sufficient that the product has a pharmacological effect on the body's functions.
The Supreme Administrative Court recently handed down a long-awaited judgment in the case between the Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency and the Skane Region. The court departed from earlier judgments and stated that county councils and regions are permitted to enter into discount agreements with pharmaceutical companies for medicinal products which are included in the reimbursement scheme.
The Stockholm Administrative Court of Appeal recently clarified the possibility to consider financial aspects when determining whether there are special requirements for granting a named patient permission. The court dismissed arguments that high prices and limited availability of an authorised medicinal product could constitute special requirements for a named patient permission for an unauthorised medicinal product.
A pharmaceutical company's recent application to the Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV) for a pricing and reimbursement decision regarding a medicinal product with orphan drug status was rejected. The decision appears to be the first in which a product under off-label use has been used as a comparator in the TLV's health technology assessment.
The Uppsala Administrative Court has upheld a Medical Products Agency decision that a generic inhaler was not considered substitutable within the substitutability groups for which the generic company had applied. The court denied substitutability based on the generic inhaler's incompatibility with a spacer mentioned in the original inhaler's summary of product characteristics.
The Administrative Court of Appeal recently issued a judgment on the pricing of orphan drugs in the reimbursement system. The court considered whether a maximum price cap exists with regard to the cost-effectiveness calculation within the health technology assessment. The outcome is unsatisfactory for pharmaceutical companies, particularly those with orphan drugs or innovative new drugs in their product portfolio.
The Administrative Court of Appeal recently held that it is not possible for county councils and regions to acquire a discount on the price of medicinal products in the reimbursement system. The decision has been appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court. It remains to be seen what will happen to existing discount agreements within the reimbursement system should leave to appeal not be granted.
The Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SKL) represents the county councils which operate the majority of Swedish hospitals. The SKL has put in place a new cooperation framework for the introduction of new innovative medicinal products. The framework seeks to enable county councils to act as strong buyers of medicinal products, which would lead to, among other things, faster access to new treatments.