— Report indicates net health benefit for tavapadon when compared to no pharmacological treatment; current pricing represents “low” value for money —

BOSTON, November 3, 2026 – The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) today released a Final Evidence Report assessing the comparative clinical effectiveness and value of tavapadon (JuvmoTM, AbbVie Inc.) for Parkinson’s Disease.

ICER’s report on this therapy was the subject of the October 2026 public meeting of the CTAF, one of ICER’s three independent evidence appraisal committees that discusses and votes on ICER’s report findings. Currently available evidence indicates that tavapadon provides some relief from key symptoms. Benefits from tavapadon appear to be similar to those of older, generic drugs, however, and discontinuation from tavapadon due to adverse events was relatively high.

Downloads: Final Evidence Report | Report-at-a-Glance | Policy Recommendations 

“Tavapadon provides a net health benefit over no additional pharmacological treatment, but there are open questions about its benefits compare to other available symptomatic treatments,” said ICER’s Chief Scientific Officer and Director of Health Technology Assessment Methods and Engagement, Dan Ollendorf, PhD, MPH. “Unfortunately, the manufacturer chose a price for tavapadon far above any reasonable estimate of a value-based price. This may lead payers to implement formulary restrictions to limit provider and patient access to this new treatment.”

ICER’s Public Meeting: Voting Results on Clinical Effectiveness and Benefits Beyond Health 

ICER assessed, and the independent appraisal committee voted on, the evidence for the net health benefit of tavapadon:

  • The panelists unanimously found (13-0) that current evidence is adequate to demonstrate a net health benefit for tavapadon when compared to no additional pharmacological treatment (for patients with early Parkinson’s disease).
  • A majority found (12-1) that current evidence is not adequate to demonstrate a net health benefit for tavapadon when compared to levodopa, dopamine agonists (DAs), or monoamine oxidase-B (MAO-B) inhibitors (for patients with early Parkinson’s disease).
  • A majority found (9-4) that current evidence is adequate to demonstrate a net health benefit for tavapadon plus levodopa when compared to levodopa alone (for patients on levodopa – and possibly on stable doses of other therapies – experiencing motor fluctuations).
  • A majority found (12-1) that current evidence is not adequate to demonstrate a net health benefit for tavapadon plus levodopa when compared to of DAs plus levodopa, MAO-B inhibitors plus levodopa, or catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitors plus levodopa (for patients on levodopa – and possibly on stable doses of other therapies – experiencing motor fluctuations).

Panel members also weighed potential benefits and disadvantages beyond the direct health effects and weighed special ethical obligations. Voting highlighted the following as particularly important for payers and other policymakers to note: 

  • If payment/cost were not issues, tavapadon is likely to provide a small improvement to access to treatment because of its method of delivery and/or treatment setting.

ICER’s Public Meeting: Voting Results on Long-Term Value for Money 

ICER has calculated a health benefit price benchmark (HBPB) * for tavapadon to be between $4,800 to $6,900 per year for Parkinson’s disease with motor fluctuations. AbbVie’s list price for tavapadon is $58,800 per year. A discount of 88% to 92% would be needed from the list price to reach ICER’s fair price range.

For early Parkinson’s disease, ICER could not calculate a health benefit price benchmark (HBPB) due to significant uncertainty regarding the mix of benefits and harms.

After reviewing the clinical evidence and considering the treatment’s benefits beyond health noted above, the CTAF evaluated the long-term value of tavapadon:

  • For patients with early Parkinson’s disease, the panelists unanimously found (13-0) found that at current pricing, tavapadon represents “low” long-term value for money.
  • For patients with Parkinson’s disease with motor fluctuations, the panelists unanimously found (13-0) found that at current pricing, tavapadon plus levodopa compared to DAs plus levodopa represents “low” long-term value for money.

Key Policy Recommendations 

ICER’s independent assessment of value informs the critical decisions that stakeholders across the US health system need to make around pricing and coverage. Following the voting session, a policy roundtable of experts — including clinical experts, patients and patient advocates, and representatives of US payers — convened to discuss the pricing implications and recommendations to ensure fair access. Key recommendations stemming from the roundtable discussion include: 

  • Payers could reasonably limit coverage to patients whose clinical characteristics are consistent with those studied in the pivotal clinical trials.
  • For patients with early Parkinson’s disease, manufacturers and research funders should support head-to-head trials of tavapadon compared with levodopa. Similarly, for patients with Parkinson’s disease receiving levodopa who experience motor fluctuations, manufacturers and research funders should support head-to-head trials of tavapadon compared with other once-daily dopamine agonists.
  • Clinical research should give greater attention to the non-motor manifestations of Parkinson’s disease, including cognitive function, and to therapies that improve these outcomes.

Access and Affordability Alert

At the current price of tavapadon (list price of $58,800 per year), 11% of the eligible population could be treated before reaching the ICER potential budget impact threshold of $821 million. Therefore, ICER is issuing an access and affordability alert for tavapadon.

The purpose of an ICER access and affordability alert is to signal to stakeholders and policymakers that the amount of added health care costs associated with a new service may be difficult for the health system to absorb over the short term without displacing other needed services, creating pressure on payers to sharply restrict access, or causing rapid growth in health care insurance costs that would threaten sustainable access to high-value care for all patients.

ICER’s detailed set of policy recommendations is available in the Final Evidence Report and in the standalone Policy Recommendations document. 

*ICER’s HBPB is a price range suggesting the highest US price a manufacturer should charge for a treatment, net of all rebates and discounts, based on the amount of improvement in overall health patients receive from that treatment, when a higher price would cause disproportionately greater losses in health among other patients in the health system due to rising overall costs of health care and health insurance. In short, it is the top price range at which a health system can reward innovation and better health for patients without doing more harm than good.

About ICER 

The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) is an independent, non-profit research institute that conducts evidence-based reviews of health care interventions, including prescription drugs, other treatments, and diagnostic tests. In collaboration with patients, clinical experts, and other key stakeholders, ICER analyzes the available evidence on the benefits and risks of these interventions to measure their value and suggest fair prices. ICER also regularly reports on the barriers to care for patients and recommends solutions to ensure fair access to prescription drugs. For more information about ICER, please visit www.icer.org.