Cargando…
Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR)
BACKGROUND: Public drug plans are faced with increasingly difficult funding decisions. In Canada, the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) makes funding recommendations to the provincial and territorial drug plans responsible for cancer drugs. Assessments of the economic models submitted by pha...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29441502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-017-0018-3 |
_version_ | 1783283078484983808 |
---|---|
author | Masucci, Lisa Beca, Jaclyn Sabharwal, Mona Hoch, Jeffrey S. |
author_facet | Masucci, Lisa Beca, Jaclyn Sabharwal, Mona Hoch, Jeffrey S. |
author_sort | Masucci, Lisa |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Public drug plans are faced with increasingly difficult funding decisions. In Canada, the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) makes funding recommendations to the provincial and territorial drug plans responsible for cancer drugs. Assessments of the economic models submitted by pharmaceutical manufacturers are publicly reported. OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this research was to identify recurring methodological issues in economic models submitted to pCODR for funding reviews. The secondary objective was to explore whether there exists any observed relationships between reported methodological issues and funding recommendations made by pCODR’s expert review committee. METHODS: Publicly available Economic Guidance Reports from July 2011 (inception) until June 2014 for drug reviews with a final funding recommendation (N = 34) were independently examined by two authors. Major methodological issues from each review were abstracted and grouped into nine main categories. Each issue was also categorized based on perception of the reviewer’s actions to manage it. RESULTS: The most commonly reported issues involved costing (59% of reviews), time horizon (56%), and model structure (36%). Several types of issues were identified that usually could not be resolved, such as quality of clinical data or uncertainty with indirect comparisons. Issues with costing or choice of utility estimates could usually be addressed or explored by reviewers. No statistically significant relationship was found between any methodological issue and funding recommendations from the expert review committee. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide insights that can be used by parties who submit or review economic evidence for continuous improvement and consistency in economic modeling, reporting, and decision making. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s41669-017-0018-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5711746 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57117462017-12-18 Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) Masucci, Lisa Beca, Jaclyn Sabharwal, Mona Hoch, Jeffrey S. Pharmacoecon Open Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Public drug plans are faced with increasingly difficult funding decisions. In Canada, the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) makes funding recommendations to the provincial and territorial drug plans responsible for cancer drugs. Assessments of the economic models submitted by pharmaceutical manufacturers are publicly reported. OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this research was to identify recurring methodological issues in economic models submitted to pCODR for funding reviews. The secondary objective was to explore whether there exists any observed relationships between reported methodological issues and funding recommendations made by pCODR’s expert review committee. METHODS: Publicly available Economic Guidance Reports from July 2011 (inception) until June 2014 for drug reviews with a final funding recommendation (N = 34) were independently examined by two authors. Major methodological issues from each review were abstracted and grouped into nine main categories. Each issue was also categorized based on perception of the reviewer’s actions to manage it. RESULTS: The most commonly reported issues involved costing (59% of reviews), time horizon (56%), and model structure (36%). Several types of issues were identified that usually could not be resolved, such as quality of clinical data or uncertainty with indirect comparisons. Issues with costing or choice of utility estimates could usually be addressed or explored by reviewers. No statistically significant relationship was found between any methodological issue and funding recommendations from the expert review committee. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide insights that can be used by parties who submit or review economic evidence for continuous improvement and consistency in economic modeling, reporting, and decision making. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s41669-017-0018-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2017-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5711746/ /pubmed/29441502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-017-0018-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Masucci, Lisa Beca, Jaclyn Sabharwal, Mona Hoch, Jeffrey S. Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) |
title | Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) |
title_full | Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) |
title_fullStr | Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) |
title_full_unstemmed | Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) |
title_short | Methodological Issues in Economic Evaluations Submitted to the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) |
title_sort | methodological issues in economic evaluations submitted to the pan-canadian oncology drug review (pcodr) |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29441502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-017-0018-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT masuccilisa methodologicalissuesineconomicevaluationssubmittedtothepancanadianoncologydrugreviewpcodr AT becajaclyn methodologicalissuesineconomicevaluationssubmittedtothepancanadianoncologydrugreviewpcodr AT sabharwalmona methodologicalissuesineconomicevaluationssubmittedtothepancanadianoncologydrugreviewpcodr AT hochjeffreys methodologicalissuesineconomicevaluationssubmittedtothepancanadianoncologydrugreviewpcodr |