Literature DB >> 24924625

Social value of a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in Spain: the point of view of oncologists.

C Camps-Herrero1, L Paz-Ares, M Codes, R López-López, A Antón-Torres, P Gascón-Vilaplana, V Guillem-Porta, A Carrato, J J Cruz-Hernández, C Caballero-Díaz, A Blasco-Cordellat, J A Moreno-Nogueira, E Díaz-Rubio.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The economic situation showed that the resources devoted to health spending are limited, making rationalisation of their consumption necessary. The relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses is becoming crucial. The ECO Foundation, promoting the quality of oncology care, set out to analyse the consensus on the new therapeutic targets inclusion and the integration of pharmacoeconomics when evaluating their effectiveness.
METHODS: Study about pharmacoeconomic estimations was performed during the first ECO-Seminar (2010). It was developed using a modified Delphi method, in four stages: (1) committee coordinator establishment, (2) expert-panel selection, (3) preparation and submission of survey (1 question) by email, and (4) analysis of the degree of consensus reached.
RESULTS: Results were obtained from surveys completed by 35 experts. Regarding the tolerable annual cost for the approval of new drugs, 68.8 % of the respondents considered a cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained between €30,000 and 100,000 acceptable (34.4 % €30,000-60,000; 34.4 % €60,000-100,000), 21.9 % of the respondents found costs between €100,000-150,000/QALY and 9.3 % of the respondents found costs above €150,000/QALY acceptable.
CONCLUSIONS: The costs of new drugs are higher than traditional treatments, making it a priority to identify subgroups of patients with specific molecular profiles as candidates for higher-efficiency-targeted therapies. The allocation of the available resources to the most effective interventions, to achieve the best clinical outcomes with lower costs and best subjective profile possible, allows expenditure to be rationalised. Pharmacoeconomic studies are a basic tool for obtaining better health outcomes according to the available resources, while also considering the other needs of the population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24924625     DOI: 10.1007/s12094-014-1170-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol        ISSN: 1699-048X            Impact factor:   3.405


  27 in total

1.  Pharmaceutical expenditure and therapeutic value of new medicines in Spain.

Authors:  Josep Darba
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  [Cost-effectiveness analysis in the economic assessment].

Authors:  Luis Prieto; José A Sacristán; Fernando Antoñanzas; Carlos Rubio-Terrés; José L Pinto; Joan Rovira
Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)       Date:  2004-04-10       Impact factor: 1.725

3.  What constitutes reasonable evidence of efficacy and effectiveness to guide oncology treatment decisions?

Authors:  Daniel Sargent
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2010

4.  Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.217

5.  When are "positive" clinical trials in oncology truly positive?

Authors:  Alberto Ocana; Ian F Tannock
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-12-03       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Cancer: the road to Amiens.

Authors:  David J Stewart; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-12-08       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Inquiry into the relationship between equity weights and the value of the QALY.

Authors:  Ana Bobinac; N Job A van Exel; Frans F H Rutten; Werner B F Brouwer
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 5.725

8.  Cancer drugs in the United States: Justum Pretium--the just price.

Authors:  Hagop M Kantarjian; Tito Fojo; Michael Mathisen; Leonard A Zwelling
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Treatment patterns, use of resources, and costs of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients in Spain: results from a Delphi panel.

Authors:  Dolores Isla; Nuria González-Rojas; Diana Nieves; Max Brosa; Henrik W Finnern
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.405

10.  The social value of a QALY: raising the bar or barring the raise?

Authors:  Cam Donaldson; Rachel Baker; Helen Mason; Michael Jones-Lee; Emily Lancsar; John Wildman; Ian Bateman; Graham Loomes; Angela Robinson; Robert Sugden; Jose Luis Pinto Prades; Mandy Ryan; Phil Shackley; Richard Smith
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 2.655

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  The Value of Medicines: A Crucial but Vague Concept.

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; Robert Terkola; Maarten Postma
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Do new cancer drugs offer good value for money? The perspectives of oncologists, health care policy makers, patients, and the general population.

Authors:  Tatiana Dilla; Luís Lizan; Silvia Paz; Pilar Garrido; Cristina Avendaño; Juan J Cruz-Hernández; Javier Espinosa; José A Sacristán
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 2.711

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.