Market Access & HEOR · Market access / HEOR / payer strategy
CuRE Corridor
Market access & HEOR — AMCP/HTA value dossiers, CEA/BIA models, and payer RWE for reimbursement, built on the platform's governed real-world-evidence moat.
What it does
Market access & HEOR — AMCP/HTA value dossiers, CEA/BIA models, and payer RWE for reimbursement, built on the platform's governed real-world-evidence moat. The real-world-evidence moat becomes market-access leverage: payer value dossiers and CEA/BIA are built on the platform's own governed RWD via Calculate + Conduct, not licensed third-party datasets.
Key capabilities
- AMCP-format value dossiers + HTA submissions with a submission-lifecycle state machine (NICE, G-BA/IQWiG, HAS, CADTH-CDA-AMC, PBAC)
- 21 CFR Part 11 value-dossier & budget-impact (BIA) system-of-record: immutable WORM version seals + e-signed reviewer sign-off (ADR-COR-003)
- Value-based-contract evidence design — a mutable design sealed to a WORM / e-signed package, bound to Calculate outcomes (ADR-COR-002/-004)
- Artifact verification & qualified CEA replay — verifies supported template representations against a sealed dossier and replays qualified Calculate CEA runs from pinned inputs; unsupported or unqualified runs report unavailable. Sandbox compares static fixtures (ADR-COR-002 / ADR-PLT-044)
- Cost-effectiveness (CEA) + budget-impact (BIA) models on Calculate artifacts (consumed, not re-implemented)
- Payer real-world evidence for reimbursement — commissioned and consumed over Curtain-release-gated Conduct aggregates
- Grounded-AI dossier drafting + HTA-response Q&A — cite-or-refuse over the tenant's governed evidence via the Clarion gateway
- Payer/segment landscape, price & access records, and the value-message library
- Partner-emit egress: value/evidence artifacts emitted into commercial systems (Veeva, Model N, Vistex) — integrate, not become (ADR-COR-005)
- Read-only Crucible portfolio/eNPV lineage seam — the payer value case linked back to its ex-ante program-economics assumptions (ADR-COR-001)
- Org-private commercial-value domain (corridor), no cross-tenant read path
What sets it apart
- CEA and budget-impact models run on the platform's own governed RWD via Calculate — the value case built on the RWE moat, not licensed third-party data.
- The value dossier is a 21 CFR Part 11 system-of-record, not a document store: each submitted version freezes to an immutable WORM seal and releases only under an e-signed reviewer sign-off, with the meaning-of-signature bound into a hash-chained ledger — so the payer-value case is tamper-evident and inspection-ready (ADR-COR-003 / ADR-PLT-046).
- The real-world-evidence moat becomes market-access leverage: payer value dossiers and CEA/BIA are built on the platform's own governed RWD via Calculate + Conduct, not licensed third-party datasets bolted on.
- Consume-not-reimplement (the Caliber-from-Calculate shape, ADR-PLT-008): Corridor owns the commercial-value domain and the market-access buyer surface; Calculate owns the CEA/BIA/RWE methodology it consumes as version-pinned artifacts — never re-implemented (ADR-PLT-044).
- A clean clinical→commercial firewall (ADR-COR-001 D3): Corridor holds no PHI and does no record linkage — it consumes only Curtain-release-gated, disclosure-safe aggregates, so there is no re-identification or clinical-consent-laundering path in the commercial plane.
- Commercial-value data is org-private by default under an app-layer market-access governance persona (org_id-only tenancy, ADR-CRU-002) — a distinct governance surface from the clinical consent / DUA stack, not a reuse of it.
- Founding app of the Commercial bundle alongside Crucible (portfolio & decision economics, ADR-PLT-132) — the market-access / HEOR buyer surface, distinct from the corp-dev / portfolio-strategy one.
- Grounded-AI dossier drafting and HTA-response Q&A run cite-or-refuse over the tenant's own governed evidence via the Clarion AI gateway — grounded in the actual model and data, not a generic template; commercial-data-partner ingestion extends the surface further.
- The submission-lifecycle spine extends toward the newer payer-evidence regimes on the same governed substrate — an EU JCA / PICO dossier workspace and an IRA / IPAY payer-evidence workspace, and a Corridor seam onto the indirect-comparison methodology (MAIC, Bucher, network meta-analysis) Calculate already versions — each a consume-not-reimplement extension of the dossier and HTA surfaces shipping today.
Take a NICE submission through its appraisal lifecycle
Getting a medicine reimbursed ex-US is not a status field — it is an audited exchange with a health-technology-assessment body. Step a synthetic NICE single-technology appraisal through Corridor's real four-state machine (DRAFT → SUBMITTED ⇄ CLARIFICATION → DETERMINATION) and watch it refuse an illegal edge with the product's own rejection message. Each accepted move appends a sealed ledger row carrying its §11.50 controlled meaning — and the signature column shows the policy that decides which acts are attested: the sponsor's outbound acts are e-signed, recording the authority's inbound clarification request is not. Record the determination and the archetype's FAD vocabulary is enforced too.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
The archetype fixes only the document plan and the determination vocabulary — never the states or the legal edges. A new body is a catalog entry, not a schema fork.
Faded actions are illegal from DRAFT. Press one anyway to see the refusal.
The NICE Final Appraisal Determination categories. Recording a determination without one is refused before anything is written.
No transitions yet. Submit the draft to the authority to open the chain.
- 1Decision problem, technology & care pathway
- 2Clinical effectiveness
- 3Cost effectiveness (Calculate CEA artifact)
- 4Cost to the NHS and PSS (budget impact)
- 5Executive summary
The plan's section ids are folded into the submission's sealed snapshot, so the plan a submission was authored against is itself tamper-evident. The cost-effectiveness section binds a Calculate CEA artifact — Corridor never re-implements the methodology.
Why this is more than a toy
The state machine, the archetype catalog, and both refusals are a faithful, dependency-free port of Corridor's real HTA engine (apps/corridor/src/server/hta/): the TRANSITION_RULES legal-transition table and resolveTransition() guard from transitions.ts (so SUBMIT from SUBMITTED is refused exactly as the product's tRPC transition rejects it), the NICE archetype's document plan and Final Appraisal Determination vocabulary from archetypes.ts, the HTA_TRANSITION_MEANINGS §11.50 vocabulary from meanings.ts, and the InvalidHtaTransitionError / InvalidDeterminationOutcomeError messages verbatim — all ported line-for-line. The machine is archetype-agnostic by design (ADR-COR-003): an archetype fixes only the document plan and the determination vocabulary, so adding G-BA/IQWiG, HAS, CADTH-CDA-AMC or PBAC is a catalog entry, not a schema fork. The signature split is ADR-PLT-046 — outbound attested acts carry a §11.70 e-signature bound to the sealed row's SHA-256 hash; the inbound administrative event is WORM-audited but unsigned, because nobody attests to what the authority did. Every refusal is fail-closed: the product throws inside the tenant transaction, so no ledger row, no transition row, and no state change survive. The document plan's cost-effectiveness section binds a Calculate CEA artifact — per ADR-PLT-044 Corridor never re-implements the health-economic methodology, it binds the version-pinned output. Here the machine runs entirely client-side on a synthetic submission — no backend, no real data.
See CuRE Corridor in action
Every research ecosystem is unique. Let's discuss how CuRE can be configured for your needs.