Leaders in Payer & HTA Strategy
Regulators ask whether a product is safe and effective. Payers ask a harder question: whether it is worth paying for, at your price, instead of what they cover today. That case is built from evidence, and the window to generate it is during development, not after launch. We build access strategy alongside the regulatory program: the payer evidence plan, the price and its defense, the HTA submissions, and for devices, the coding, coverage, and payment pathway that turns clearance into revenue.
We cover the full access arc: planning the payer evidence during development, setting and defending the price, winning the HTA and payer reviews, and for devices, securing the codes and coverage that make adoption possible.
Integrated evidence plans that put payer requirements into the development program while the trials can still carry them.
Global pricing corridors, launch sequencing against reference pricing, and mock negotiations run by former payers.
EU Joint Clinical Assessment readiness plus national submissions: NICE, G-BA (AMNOG), HAS, and the other major HTA bodies.
Global value dossiers, AMCP Format dossiers, and payer materials that survive the committee meeting you're not in.
Cost-effectiveness and budget impact models, PRO strategy, and real-world evidence built to withstand the payer's own analysts.
CPT and HCPCS strategy, CMS and commercial coverage campaigns, and payment pathways from NTAP to TCET.
The most common access failure is a Phase 3 program that answers the regulator's question and leaves the payer's unanswered: wrong comparator, missing quality-of-life endpoint, no economic data collection. We bring payer requirements into the development plan while protocols can still carry them, so the same trials that win approval also fund the value story. One evidence plan, both audiences.
A launch price is not one decision; it is the anchor for every negotiation that follows it, in every market that references the markets before it. We build pricing strategy that survives that chain: corridors grounded in payer research, launch sequences that protect the reference price, and negotiation preparation run by people who used to sit on the payer's side of the table.
Under the EU HTA Regulation, the Joint Clinical Assessment runs in parallel with the EMA review, and its PICO scoping can demand comparisons your trials never made. National bodies then layer their own methods on top: NICE's cost-effectiveness thresholds, AMNOG's added-benefit categories, HAS's ASMR ratings. We plan for these assessments from scoping onward and author submissions that anticipate the assessor's methods instead of discovering them in the report.
The decisive conversation about your product happens inside the payer's own committee, retold by a reviewer working from your dossier. That document has to argue for itself: claims linked to evidence, objections answered before they are raised, and a structure the committee's process can digest. We build the global value dossier once, then localize it so every market argues from the same facts.
Every serious payer and HTA body will rebuild your model, rerun your comparisons, and stress-test your assumptions. Economic evidence only helps if it holds up under that treatment: transparent structure, defensible inputs, and sensitivity analyses that show you already asked the hard questions. Our health economists build models and evidence syntheses designed to be taken apart, because they will be.
A cleared device without a code cannot be billed; a coded device without coverage will not be ordered; a covered device paid below cost will not be stocked. We run the three tracks as one campaign: the code applications, the coverage evidence and payer engagement, and the payment benchmarks that make the economics work for the provider who has to choose your product.
Two engagements extend the core work: leading the market access function before you can justify the full-time hire, and rebuilding access when a rejection or restriction has already landed.
Access decisions start years before launch, but most companies hire their market access lead months before it. Our senior consultants act as your head of market access in the interim: owning the evidence plan, briefing the board on pricing risk, standing up the payer engagement program, and building the function the permanent hire will inherit.
A negative HTA recommendation, a restrictive coverage policy, or an AMNOG price below expectations is the start of a negotiation, not the end of one. We diagnose why the assessment went wrong, decide whether the fix is new evidence, a new comparison, or a new price, and run the resubmission, appeal, or managed-entry negotiation that follows.
Access advice is only as good as its realism about how payers decide. Our teams combine former payer and HTA committee members, health economists who build to national methods guides, and market access leaders who have carried launches from evidence plan to reimbursement.
Consultants who have voted on formulary committees and written HTA assessments. They know which arguments move a committee and which ones get skimmed.
Because we run regulatory strategy too, the access plan and the regulatory plan are built from the same evidence, not negotiated between two vendors after the fact.
Modelers who build to NICE, IQWiG, and CADTH methods expectations, with the documentation discipline that lets a payer's analyst walk the model without a guide.
Drugs, biologics, cell & gene therapies, devices, and diagnostics, across payer systems in North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
Tell us where the program stands: evidence in hand, markets in scope, and the access questions keeping the plan honest. We'll match you with a senior market access lead and respond within one business day. All inquiries are strictly confidential.
Our team's perspectives on payer strategy, HTA methods, and what actually decides coverage: coming soon. In the meantime, reach out directly with a question you'd like to see addressed.
Early lessons from joint clinical assessment, and what they mean for your PICO.
Anchoring value when there is nothing on the market to reference.
The evidence packages payers actually accept, and the ones they only say they want.