Cargando…

Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate

Background: Outcomes-based reimbursement (OBR) can reduce decision uncertainty and accelerate patient access to cell and gene therapies, however, OBR is rarely applied in practice in England. Oncology is the therapy area with the most cell and gene therapies in late-stage development, and the System...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jørgensen, Jesper, Kefalas, Panos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Routledge 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6609347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31303982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1635842
_version_ 1783432298076569600
author Jørgensen, Jesper
Kefalas, Panos
author_facet Jørgensen, Jesper
Kefalas, Panos
author_sort Jørgensen, Jesper
collection PubMed
description Background: Outcomes-based reimbursement (OBR) can reduce decision uncertainty and accelerate patient access to cell and gene therapies, however, OBR is rarely applied in practice in England. Oncology is the therapy area with the most cell and gene therapies in late-stage development, and the Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy (SACT) dataset and The European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry are two data collection infrastructures that could potentially act as conduits for implementing OBR in cancer in England. Objective: To perform a gap analysis to identify the key requirements for upgrading the SACT and EBMT databases for the purposes of enabling OBR, and a top-level estimation of how much this upgrade may cost, using either a manual (staff-heavy) workaround or part automation (technology-heavy) approach. Methodology: The analysis of current data capture and gaps is informed by secondary research, while the assumptions and data used to derive the top-level cost estimates were informed by consensus-based primary research with experts in healthcare information technology (IT) systems integration and platform development, as well as experts of SACT and EBMT. Findings: In its current form, the SACT dataset in isolation is largely unfit for enabling OBR in oncology, whether through clinical, economic or humanistic outcomes. The EBMT registry has a greater potential; however, this relates to key clinical outcomes only, not economic or humanistic outcomes. Part automation requires a higher upfront investment than the manual workaround (~£1.8 million vs. ~£400k); however, lower annual costs (~£200 vs. ~£260k-£850k) mean that part automation becomes a more cost-effective approach over time. Conclusions: An appropriately automated and scalable data collection infrastructure should be implemented, with the ability to integrate clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes with healthcare cost data and payment systems, to enable OBR not only in cancer but also in other therapy areas.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6609347
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Routledge
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66093472019-07-12 Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate Jørgensen, Jesper Kefalas, Panos J Mark Access Health Policy Original Research Article Background: Outcomes-based reimbursement (OBR) can reduce decision uncertainty and accelerate patient access to cell and gene therapies, however, OBR is rarely applied in practice in England. Oncology is the therapy area with the most cell and gene therapies in late-stage development, and the Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy (SACT) dataset and The European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry are two data collection infrastructures that could potentially act as conduits for implementing OBR in cancer in England. Objective: To perform a gap analysis to identify the key requirements for upgrading the SACT and EBMT databases for the purposes of enabling OBR, and a top-level estimation of how much this upgrade may cost, using either a manual (staff-heavy) workaround or part automation (technology-heavy) approach. Methodology: The analysis of current data capture and gaps is informed by secondary research, while the assumptions and data used to derive the top-level cost estimates were informed by consensus-based primary research with experts in healthcare information technology (IT) systems integration and platform development, as well as experts of SACT and EBMT. Findings: In its current form, the SACT dataset in isolation is largely unfit for enabling OBR in oncology, whether through clinical, economic or humanistic outcomes. The EBMT registry has a greater potential; however, this relates to key clinical outcomes only, not economic or humanistic outcomes. Part automation requires a higher upfront investment than the manual workaround (~£1.8 million vs. ~£400k); however, lower annual costs (~£200 vs. ~£260k-£850k) mean that part automation becomes a more cost-effective approach over time. Conclusions: An appropriately automated and scalable data collection infrastructure should be implemented, with the ability to integrate clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes with healthcare cost data and payment systems, to enable OBR not only in cancer but also in other therapy areas. Routledge 2019-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6609347/ /pubmed/31303982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1635842 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Jørgensen, Jesper
Kefalas, Panos
Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
title Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
title_full Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
title_fullStr Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
title_full_unstemmed Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
title_short Upgrading the SACT dataset and EBMT registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in England: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
title_sort upgrading the sact dataset and ebmt registry to enable outcomes-based reimbursement in oncology in england: a gap analysis and top-level cost estimate
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6609347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31303982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1635842
work_keys_str_mv AT jørgensenjesper upgradingthesactdatasetandebmtregistrytoenableoutcomesbasedreimbursementinoncologyinenglandagapanalysisandtoplevelcostestimate
AT kefalaspanos upgradingthesactdatasetandebmtregistrytoenableoutcomesbasedreimbursementinoncologyinenglandagapanalysisandtoplevelcostestimate