Skip to Content

Journal of Market Access & Health Policy

Journal of Market Access & Health Policy (JMAHP) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that covers all different subdisciplines of ‘market access’ from economic, technical, scientific, sociological, psychological and policy perspectives, published quarterly online.
It is the official journal of the Market Access Society (MAS). Society members receive discounts on the APCs.

Get Alerted

Add your email address to receive forthcoming issues of this journal.

All Articles (334)

Structural Enablers of Rare Disease Treatment Coverage in Latin America and the Caribbean: Lessons from Emicizumab

  • Daniela Sugg Herrera,
  • Dino Sepúlveda Viveros and
  • Natalia Garrido
  • + 1 author

We examine how structural characteristics of health systems in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) shape access to innovative therapies, using emicizumab for hemophilia A as a case study. Although the therapy is available in the region, access remains uneven and constrained by high costs and fragmented health system arrangements. Using a descriptive structural approach, we characterize the health system configurations associated with financial coverage of emicizumab across 16 LAC countries, representing more than 85% of the regional population. Regulatory approval timelines and coverage status were described, and principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to synthesize multiple indicators into a Global Characteristics Index capturing five core health system functions: resource generation, financing, service delivery, general governance, and therapy-specific governance. Coverage is defined as formal access with explicit financial protection provided by the health system. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across countries. Regulatory approval was often achieved relatively rapidly, but this did not consistently translate into timely or comprehensive coverage. Countries with stronger structural characteristics—particularly in resource generation, service delivery, and governance—tended to achieve broader and more sustained coverage, although institutional capacity alone was not sufficient in all cases. Our results emphasize the need to strengthen health governance and adopt specific policies for rare diseases in the region.

25 February 2026

Emicizumab for Patients with Inhibitors: Approval and Access Durations Across Countries. Note: An asterisk (*) indicates that no official regulatory approval date was available, while double asterisk (**) indicates that no official access date was available. In these cases, dates and durations are estimated based on the best available country-level information as of the time of the study, including regulatory status and reported access conditions, even if formal access had not yet been established. Source: Author elaboration.
  • Perspective
  • Open Access

Can We Trust PAICs in Rare Diseases? Methodological Challenges and Limitations

  • Mikolaj Parkitny,
  • Samuel Aballéa and
  • Mondher Toumi
  • + 1 author

Population-adjusted indirect comparisons (PAICs), including Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison and Simulated Treatment Comparison, are increasingly used to inform health technology assessments. These methods offer a pragmatic approach to generating comparative evidence between treatments when head-to-head trial data are unavailable and standard indirect treatment comparison methods are unfeasible. In rare diseases, however, PAICs often face substantial methodological challenges arising from small sample sizes, limited covariate overlap, and the frequent use of unanchored comparisons that rely on unverifiable assumptions. These limitations can lead to unstable estimates, reduced precision, and bias that may undermine the reliability of findings. Methodological refinements—such as optimized weighting, Bayesian approaches, and doubly robust estimators—provide some improvements but do not resolve these fundamental issues. Current European Joint Clinical Assessment guidance recommends that anchored PAICs be applied with great caution, while unanchored PAICs are considered highly problematic, and other methods should be used instead. We argue that PAICs can play a supportive role within a multidimensional and deliberative HTA process, contributing to comparative assessment alongside other evidence sources when available data are limited. However, their results require careful interpretation and transparent communication of uncertainty. Future research should prioritize the further development of formal frameworks to quantify bias and systematically assess robustness, thereby preventing overstatement of the credibility of PAIC-derived evidence in rare disease contexts.

6 March 2026

Background: Value-based pricing has the potential to contribute to the appropriate allocation of healthcare expenditures. We developed the “MARIE”, a qualitative scheme that evaluates broad value elements without requiring a comparator to estimate new drug prices. In this study, we updated the conversion table that monetizes points calculated from value elements. Methods: We investigated and calculated the daily drug prices at the time of listing for drugs containing new active ingredients that were included in the National Health Insurance Drug Price List from fiscal year 2015 to 2024, summarizing the data using descriptive statistics. Results: New drug prices are listed annually in Japan, so we updated the conversion table using current drug prices to maintain continuity. This study also observed a trend where the median daily price tended to be higher as the maximum number of patients decreased. Conclusions: The MARIE method, our developed framework to qualitatively evaluate the various values of drugs, monetizing points calculated based on the elements of value via the conversion table, plays a crucial role. Updating the conversion table based on the latest data maintains continuity with the current drug pricing system and is considered to contribute to the social implementation of the MARIE method.

25 February 2026

Optimising Investment in Health Innovations in Europe

  • Tosin Adeyemo,
  • Tim Wilsdon and
  • Annabelle Godet
  • + 2 authors

European citizens made it clear in 2024 that healthcare should be the EU’s top priority for shaping the future of Europe. This sentiment reflects the escalating health challenges facing the region, driven by ageing populations, rising chronic disease burdens, and persistent disparities in access to healthcare. Despite these growing needs, the most recent data on health spending as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) is just slightly above the pre-COVID-19 pandemic level, and spending on pharmaceuticals specifically has remained a stable proportion of healthcare spending over the last 20 years. Austerity measures have profoundly impacted the health sector and pharmaceutical industry, more so than any other sectors, despite the wide range of health and socioeconomic benefits medicines bring to patients, the health system, and society. Such trends are not keeping pace with evolving population demographics and disease prevalence. To secure a healthier, more equitable future, Europe must urgently increase health investments, optimise health systems, and address unmet needs by supporting fast uptake of pharmaceutical innovations. Policymakers must work with all stakeholders to ensure stronger and sustained investments in health innovations by (i) adopting a long-term vision, moving away from short-term thinking and valuing health appropriately to drive economic growth; (ii) implementing transformative policies that eliminate ineffective and wasteful spending; (iii) promoting value-based approaches to improve patient access and system sustainability, and (iv) creating incentives that attract greater investments to strengthen Europe’s competitiveness and safeguard against health threats.

13 February 2026

News & Conferences

Issues

Open for Submission

Editor's Choice

XFacebookLinkedIn
J. Mark. Access Health Policy - ISSN 2001-6689