Literature DB >> 21142275

Accounting for the drug life cycle and future drug prices in cost-effectiveness analysis.

Martin Hoyle1.   

Abstract

Economic evaluations of health technologies typically assume constant real drug prices and model only the cohort of patients currently eligible for treatment. It has recently been suggested that, in the UK, we should assume that real drug prices decrease at 4% per annum and, in New Zealand, that real drug prices decrease at 2% per annum and at patent expiry the drug price falls. It has also recently been suggested that we should model multiple future incident cohorts. In this article, the cost effectiveness of drugs is modelled based on these ideas. Algebraic expressions are developed to capture all costs and benefits over the entire life cycle of a new drug. The lifetime of a new drug in the UK, a key model parameter, is estimated as 33 years, based on the historical lifetime of drugs in England over the last 27 years. Under the proposed methodology, cost effectiveness is calculated for seven new drugs recently appraised in the UK. Cost effectiveness as assessed in the future is also estimated. Whilst the article is framed in mathematics, the findings and recommendations are also explained in non-mathematical language. The 'life-cycle correction factor' is introduced, which is used to convert estimates of cost effectiveness as traditionally calculated into estimates under the proposed methodology. Under the proposed methodology, all seven drugs appear far more cost effective in the UK than published. For example, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio decreases by 46%, from £61, 900 to £33, 500 per QALY, for cinacalcet versus best supportive care for end-stage renal disease, and by 45%, from £31,100 to £17,000 per QALY, for imatinib versus interferon-α for chronic myeloid leukaemia. Assuming real drug prices decrease over time, the chance that a drug is publicly funded increases over time, and is greater when modelling multiple cohorts than with a single cohort. Using the methodology (compared with traditional methodology) all drugs in the UK and New Zealand are predicted to be more cost effective. It is suggested that the willingness-to-pay threshold should be reduced in the UK and New Zealand. The ranking of cost effectiveness will change with drugs assessed as relatively more cost effective and medical devices and surgical procedures relatively less cost effective than previously thought. The methodology is very simple to implement. It is suggested that the model should be parameterized for other countries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21142275     DOI: 10.2165/11584230-000000000-00000

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  Taking account of future technology in cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Joshua A Salomon; Milton C Weinstein; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-09-25

2.  Impact of generic drug entry on cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Shu Han; Scott B Cantor
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 3.  The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means.

Authors:  Christopher McCabe; Karl Claxton; Anthony J Culyer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Future drug prices and cost-effectiveness analyses.

Authors:  Martin Hoyle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

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

Authors:  Louis P Garrison; Edward C Mansley; Thomas A Abbott; Brian W Bresnahan; Joel W Hay; James Smeeding
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 6.  Bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, sunitinib and temsirolimus for renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  J Thompson Coon; M Hoyle; C Green; Z Liu; K Welch; T Moxham; K Stein
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.014

7.  Whose costs and benefits? Why economic evaluations should simulate both prevalent and all future incident patient cohorts.

Authors:  Martin Hoyle; Rob Anderson
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 8.  The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cochlear implants for severe to profound deafness in children and adults: a systematic review and economic model.

Authors:  M Bond; S Mealing; R Anderson; J Elston; G Weiner; R S Taylor; M Hoyle; Z Liu; A Price; K Stein
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.014

  8 in total
  11 in total

1.  Population- versus cohort-based modelling approaches.

Authors:  Olivier Ethgen; Baudouin Standaert
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Cinacalcet: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in secondary hyperparathyroidism in end-stage renal disease.

Authors:  Greg L Plosker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  The determinants of cost-effectiveness potential: an historical perspective on lipid-lowering therapies.

Authors:  Rodrigo Refoios Camejo; Clare McGrath; Marisa Miraldo; Frans Rutten
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Cost-effectiveness of ibrutinib as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in older adults without deletion 17p.

Authors:  James I Barnes; Vasu Divi; Adrian Begaye; Russell Wong; Steven Coutre; Douglas K Owens; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-08-14

Review 5.  Emergent Challenges in Determining Costs for Economic Evaluations.

Authors:  Josephine C Jacobs; Paul G Barnett
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Multicohort models in cost-effectiveness analysis: why aggregating estimates over multiple cohorts can hide useful information.

Authors:  James F O'Mahony; Joost van Rosmalen; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Challenges for Economic Evaluation of Health Care Strategies to Contain Antimicrobial Resistance.

Authors:  Emily A F Holmes; Dyfrig A Hughes
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-27

8.  The price of curing cancer.

Authors:  Afschin Gandjour
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-12-11       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 9.  New Zealand's drug development industry.

Authors:  Michelle Marie Lockhart; Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar; Christopher Carswell; Sanjay Garg
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  The value of innovation under value-based pricing.

Authors:  Santiago G Moreno; Joshua A Ray
Journal:  J Mark Access Health Policy       Date:  2016-04-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.