Literature DB >> 15841890

Variability of cost-effectiveness estimates for pharmaceuticals in Western Europe: lessons for inferring generalizability.

Marco Barbieri1, Michael Drummond, Richard Willke, Jeremy Chancellor, Bruno Jolain, Adrian Towse.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: It has long been suggested that, whereas the results of clinical studies of pharmaceuticals are generalizable from one jurisdiction to another, the results of economic evaluations are location dependent. There has been, however, little study of the causes of variation, whether differences in study results among countries are systematic, or whether they are important for decision making.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify economic evaluations of pharmaceuticals conducted in two or more European countries. The studies identified were then classified by methodological type and analyzed to assess their level of variability and to identify the main causes of variation. Assessments were also made of the extent to which differences in study results among countries were systematic and whether they would lead to a different decision, assuming a range of values of the threshold willingness-to-pay for a life-year or quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).
RESULTS: In total 46 intercountry drug comparisons were identified, 29 in multicountry studies and 17 in comparable single country studies that were considered to be sufficiently similar in terms of methodology. The type of study (i.e., trial-based or modeling study) had some impact on variability, but the most important factor was the extent of variation across countries in effectiveness, resource use or unit costs, allowed by the researcher's chosen methodology. There were few systematic differences in study results among countries, so a decision maker in country B, on seeing a recent economic evaluation of a new drug in country A, would have little basis on which to predict whether the drug, if evaluated, would be more or less cost-effective in his or her country. Given the extent of variation in cost-effectiveness estimates among countries, the importance of this for decision making depends on decision makers' thresholds in willingness-to-pay for a QALY or life-year. If a cost-effectiveness threshold (i.e., willingness-to-pay) for a life-year or QALY of dollar 50,000 were assumed, the same conclusion regarding cost-effectiveness would be reached in most cases.
CONCLUSION: This review shows that cost-effectiveness results for pharmaceuticals vary from country to country in Western Europe and that these variations are not systematic. In addition, constraints imposed by analysts may reduce apparent variability in the estimates. The lessons for inferring generalizability are not straightforward, although the implications of variation for decision making depend critically on the cost-effectiveness thresholds applying in Western Europe.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15841890     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.03070.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  35 in total

Review 1.  Cost effectiveness of treatment with new agents in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Mathilda L Bongers; Veerle M H Coupé; Elise P Jansma; Egbert F Smit; Carin A Uyl-de Groot
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  [Public access defibrillation. Limited use by trained first responders and laymen].

Authors:  S Maisch; P Friederich; A E Goetz
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  Better analysis for better decisions: has pharmacoeconomics come of age?

Authors:  Michael Drummond; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  The use of pharmacoeconomic evidence to support formulary decision making in Saudi Arabia: Methodological recommendations.

Authors:  Sinaa A Al Aqeel; Mohammed Al-Sultan
Journal:  Saudi Pharm J       Date:  2011-12-24       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 5.  Economic evaluations in the EURONHEED: a comparative analysis.

Authors:  Florencia Hutter; Fernando Antoñanzas
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 6.  Estimating drug costs in economic evaluations in Ireland and the UK: an analysis of practice and research recommendations.

Authors:  Dyfrig A Hughes; Lesley Tilson; Michael Drummond
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  Barriers to generalizability of health economic evaluations in Latin America and the Caribbean region.

Authors:  Federico Augustovski; Cynthia Iglesias; Andrea Manca; Michael Drummond; Adolfo Rubinstein; Sebastián García Martí
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of oral triptan therapy for migraine in four European countries.

Authors:  Manuel Hens; Ana Villaverde-Hueso; Veronica Alonso; Ignacio Abaitua; Manuel Posada de la Paz
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2013-07-10

9.  The cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in infants in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Lesong Conteh; Elisa Sicuri; Fatuma Manzi; Guy Hutton; Benson Obonyo; Fabrizio Tediosi; Prosper Biao; Paul Masika; Fred Matovu; Peter Otieno; Roly D Gosling; Mary Hamel; Frank O Odhiambo; Martin P Grobusch; Peter G Kremsner; Daniel Chandramohan; John J Aponte; Andrea Egan; David Schellenberg; Eusebio Macete; Laurence Slutsker; Robert D Newman; Pedro Alonso; Clara Menéndez; Marcel Tanner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Analysis of health-related quality of life and costs based on a randomised clinical trial of escitalopram for relapse prevention in patients with generalised social anxiety disorder.

Authors:  C François; S A Montgomery; N Despiegel; S Aballéa; J Roïz; P Auquier
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.