These are illustrative strategy scenarios based on simplified pricing, access, uptake and reference-pricing assumptions.
Illustrative scenario
Single European corridor
157m EUR
Five year European revenue
- Blended net
- €10,694
- Markets
- 8 of 8
- Patients treated
- 5,296
- Modelled revenue impact of referencing
- 0.0m EUR
- Illustrative payer-relationship implication
- Neutral
Illustrative scenario
Germany first at a premium
166m EUR
Five year European revenue
- Blended net
- €11,338
- Markets
- 8 of 8
- Patients treated
- 5,296
- Modelled revenue impact of referencing
- 0.0m EUR
- Illustrative payer-relationship implication
- Strained
Illustrative scenario
Tolerant markets first, larger markets later
Illustrative preferred scenario151m EUR
Five year European revenue
- Blended net
- €11,900
- Markets
- 6 of 8
- Patients treated
- 4,516
- Modelled revenue impact of referencing
- 1.4m EUR
- Illustrative payer-relationship implication
- Strong
Illustrative scenario
Selective non launch
152m EUR
Five year European revenue
- Blended net
- €14,022
- Markets
- 5 of 8
- Patients treated
- 3,772
- Modelled revenue impact of referencing
- 1.5m EUR
- Illustrative payer-relationship implication
- Strained
Launch in Sweden, the Netherlands, and the UK at a defensible price to build a price record, then enter Germany and France with evidence in hand, and hold the low price markets back.
Scenario levers are illustrative assumptions, prices and revenues are calculated outputs, and the in favour and against points are strategic judgements.
German list price
€17,200
Average rebate
20%
Sequence
Tolerant small markets first
Net prices
Confidential
Revenue lost to referencing
1.4m EUR
Average months to reimbursement
15
In favour
- Builds real world adherence and outcome data before the German assessment
- No low list price exists in the basket when the big negotiations start
- Keeps Spain and Poland out until a confidential net price is agreed
Against
- Revenue starts slowly, and the small markets alone do not fund the launch
- Delays access for patients in Spain and Poland
The model does not select the scenario with the highest five-year revenue. Under the illustrative assumptions, the tolerant-markets-first strategy is preferred because it prioritises evidence generation, protection of the wider price corridor and preparedness for subsequent major-market negotiations.
| Scenario | Blended net | 5y revenue | Patients treated | Markets | Modelled revenue impact of referencing | Illustrative payer-relationship implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single European corridor | €10,694 | 157m EUR | 5,296 | 8 | 0.0m EUR | Neutral |
| Germany first at a premium | €11,338 | 166m EUR | 5,296 | 8 | 0.0m EUR | Strained |
| Tolerant markets first, larger markets laterIllustrative preferred scenario | €11,900 | 151m EUR | 4,516 | 6 | 1.4m EUR | Strong |
| Selective non launch | €14,022 | 152m EUR | 3,772 | 5 | 1.5m EUR | Strained |
The current illustrative assessment favours initial entry into more price-tolerant markets, followed by the larger anchor markets once additional evidence and price precedent are available.
Under these assumptions, Germany first at a premium may look attractive for the free pricing window, but any later negotiated step down would be visible and could be picked up by markets that reference it. Selective non launch appears to protect the corridor most effectively in the model, while leaving a substantial number of patients without access and potentially inviting parallel trade and political attention.
A single corridor structure looks sensible across all four modelled scenarios. What mainly separates the options in this demonstration is the order of entry and how much of the corridor is defended through evidence rather than discounting.
This sequencing would need to be tested against country-specific regulatory, HTA, commercial, patient-access and legal considerations.