Literature DB >> 19883404

Good research practices for measuring drug costs in cost-effectiveness analyses: a managed care perspective: the ISPOR Drug Cost Task Force report--Part III.

Edward C Mansley1, Norman V Carroll, Kristina S Chen, Nilay D Shah, Catherine Tak Piech, Joel W Hay, James Smeeding.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this report is to provide guidance and recommendations on how drug costs should be measured for cost-effectiveness analyses conducted from the perspective of a managed care organization (MCO).
METHODS: The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Task Force on Good Research Practices-Use of Drug Costs for Cost Effectiveness Analysis (DCTF) was appointed by the ISPOR Board of Directors. Members were experienced developers or users of CEA models. The DCTF met to develop core assumptions and an outline before preparing a draft report. They solicited comments on drafts from external reviewers and from the ISPOR membership at ISPOR meetings and via the ISPOR Web site.
RESULTS: The cost of a drug to an MCO equals the amount it pays to the dispenser for the drug's ingredient cost and dispensing fee minus the patient copay and any rebates paid by the drug's manufacturer. The amount that an MCO reimburses for each of these components can differ substantially across a number of factors that include type of drug (single vs. multisource), dispensing site (retail vs. mail order), and site of administration (self-administered vs. physician's office). Accurately estimating the value of cost components is difficult because they are determined by proprietary and confidential contracts.
CONCLUSION: Estimates of drug cost from the MCO perspective should include amounts paid for medication ingredients and dispensing fees, and net out copays, rebates, and other drug price reductions. Because of the evolving nature of drug pricing, ISPOR should publish a Web site where current DCTF costing recommendations are updated as new information becomes available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19883404     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00661.x

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


  7 in total

1.  Bridging for an isolated subtherapeutic INR: an evaluation of clinical practice patterns, outcomes, and costs from an anticoagulation clinic.

Authors:  Jamie M Hwang; Thomas N Taylor; Krishna P Sharma; Jennifer L Clemente; Candice L Garwood
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  A Review of US Drug Costs Relevant to Medicare, Medicaid, and Commercial Insurers Post-Affordable Care Act Enactment, 2010-2016.

Authors:  Jacquelyn McRae; F Randy Vogenberg; Silky Webb Beaty; Elizabeth Mearns; Stefan Varga; Laura Pizzi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Vitamin K supplementation for the primary prevention of osteoporotic fractures: is it cost-effective and is future research warranted?

Authors:  O Gajic-Veljanoski; A M Bayoumi; G Tomlinson; K Khan; A M Cheung
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Cost-effectiveness of Implementing Smoking Cessation Interventions for Patients With Cancer.

Authors:  Douglas E Levy; Susan Regan; Giselle K Perez; Alona Muzikansky; Emily R Friedman; Julia Rabin; Nancy A Rigotti; Jamie S Ostroff; Elyse R Park
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-06-01

Review 5.  Assessing the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Sequencing.

Authors:  Kurt D Christensen; Dmitry Dukhovny; Uwe Siebert; Robert C Green
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2015-12-10

6.  Drug costs in context: assessing drug costs in cost-of-illness analyses.

Authors:  T Joseph Mattingly; Shannon Weathers
Journal:  Drugs Context       Date:  2022-07-21

7.  Estimating Drug Costs: How do Manufacturer Net Prices Compare with Other Common US Price References?

Authors:  T Joseph Mattingly; Joseph F Levy; Julia F Slejko; Nneka C Onwudiwe; Eleanor M Perfetto
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.981

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.