Literature DB >> 20831299

Comparative effectiveness research: the view from a pharmaceutical company.

Marc L Berger1, David Grainger.   

Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) represents the next stage in an evolution of research and knowledge development in regard to medical interventions. In this article we describe the challenges currently facing the innovative pharmaceuticals industry and briefly summarize the history of drug development, as context for the current movement to comparative effectiveness. CER should be considered alongside the wider field of health technology assessment (HTA), and we review the status of both CER and HTA internationally and their role in health policy. Limitations as to what can be achieved with HTA and limitations to the availability of evidence of comparative effectiveness at the time of market authorization provide ongoing challenges to all stakeholders. However, embracing CER is regarded as an essential step for the innovative pharmaceutical industry, as companies strive to more clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of their pipeline products with evidence that is compelling to payers and HTA agencies. Examples are given of how these evolving requirements from regulatory and HTA agencies are impacting on drug development efforts and how one company is responding. Finally, there are signs of increasing understanding and alignment across the various partners in drug development, registration and evaluation, and further suggestions are provided for consideration as the field matures and expands.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20831299     DOI: 10.2165/11535400-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  15 in total

1.  Drug development and the FDA's Critical Path Initiative.

Authors:  R L Woosley; J Cossman
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions.

Authors:  Michael F Drummond; J Sanford Schwartz; Bengt Jönsson; Bryan R Luce; Peter J Neumann; Uwe Siebert; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Is personalized medicine finally arriving?

Authors:  Malorye Allison
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  The NICE way of influencing health spending: a conversation with Sir Michael Rawlins. Interview by Nicholas Timmins.

Authors:  Michael Rawlins
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2009 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part II.

Authors:  Emily Cox; Bradley C Martin; Tjeerd Van Staa; Edeltraut Garbe; Uwe Siebert; Michael L Johnson
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  The confirmatory trial in comparative-effectiveness research.

Authors:  Alan M Garber; Mark A Hlatky
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: defining, reporting and interpreting nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part I.

Authors:  Marc L Berger; Muhammad Mamdani; David Atkins; Michael L Johnson
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 5.725

8.  Good research practices for measuring drug costs in cost-effectiveness analyses: an international perspective: the ISPOR Drug Cost Task Force report--Part VI.

Authors:  Lizheng Shi; Meredith Hodges; Michael Drummond; Jeonghoon Ahn; Shu Chuen Li; Shanlian Hu; Federico Augustovski; Joel W Hay; Jim Smeeding
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-10-26       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 9.  Linking payment to health outcomes: a taxonomy and examination of performance-based reimbursement schemes between healthcare payers and manufacturers.

Authors:  Josh J Carlson; Sean D Sullivan; Louis P Garrison; Peter J Neumann; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 2.980

10.  Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't.

Authors:  D L Sackett; W M Rosenberg; J A Gray; R B Haynes; W S Richardson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-01-13
View more
  2 in total

1.  Perspectives on comparative effectiveness research: views from diverse constituencies.

Authors:  Dave Nellesen; Howard G Birnbaum; Paul E Greenberg
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Stem cell therapeutics--reality versus hype and hope.

Authors:  Nicolas H Zech; Karl-Heinz Preisegger; Peter Hollands
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 3.412

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.