Cargando…

Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma

BACKGROUND: Differing methodological requirements and decision-making criteria are recognised as barriers to transferability of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) across jurisdictions. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the generic and specific transferability of published CEAs of systemic treatments for advance...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gorry, Claire, McCullagh, Laura, Barry, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7081651/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31761996
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00860-y
_version_ 1783508214255452160
author Gorry, Claire
McCullagh, Laura
Barry, Michael
author_facet Gorry, Claire
McCullagh, Laura
Barry, Michael
author_sort Gorry, Claire
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Differing methodological requirements and decision-making criteria are recognised as barriers to transferability of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) across jurisdictions. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the generic and specific transferability of published CEAs of systemic treatments for advanced melanoma to the Irish setting. METHODS: CEAs of treatments for melanoma were identified by systematic review. Transferability to the Irish setting was assessed using the EUnetHTA transferability tool for Economic Evaluation. We present a narrative discussion comparing the differences in key parameter inputs and the likely impact of these differences on the model outcomes and the reimbursement recommendation. Transferability is considered within the context of the Irish cost-effectiveness threshold, using the net monetary benefit (NMB) framework. RESULTS: No published CEAs (n = 15) aligned with the Irish reference case for CEA. Changes to key parameters were unlikely to change the conclusions of the CEA when the cost-effectiveness threshold was considered. Ten studies (19 pairwise comparisons) were compared with findings by the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) using NMB. Without accounting for differences in the cost-effectiveness threshold, there was alignment between the study conclusions and NCPE recommendations in 73.7% cases. When the Irish cost-effectiveness threshold was applied in the estimation of NMB, there was agreement in 89.5% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Alignment in methodological requirements for CEA is important to facilitate joint health technology assessment (HTA) by regional collaborations in Europe. When parameter inputs are not exactly aligned, conclusions may still be comparable across jurisdictions. For international joint procurement initiatives, determining and implementing joint decision rules may be more important than trying to align rules regarding methodological and parameter inputs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40273-019-00860-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7081651
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70816512020-03-23 Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma Gorry, Claire McCullagh, Laura Barry, Michael Pharmacoeconomics Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Differing methodological requirements and decision-making criteria are recognised as barriers to transferability of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) across jurisdictions. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the generic and specific transferability of published CEAs of systemic treatments for advanced melanoma to the Irish setting. METHODS: CEAs of treatments for melanoma were identified by systematic review. Transferability to the Irish setting was assessed using the EUnetHTA transferability tool for Economic Evaluation. We present a narrative discussion comparing the differences in key parameter inputs and the likely impact of these differences on the model outcomes and the reimbursement recommendation. Transferability is considered within the context of the Irish cost-effectiveness threshold, using the net monetary benefit (NMB) framework. RESULTS: No published CEAs (n = 15) aligned with the Irish reference case for CEA. Changes to key parameters were unlikely to change the conclusions of the CEA when the cost-effectiveness threshold was considered. Ten studies (19 pairwise comparisons) were compared with findings by the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) using NMB. Without accounting for differences in the cost-effectiveness threshold, there was alignment between the study conclusions and NCPE recommendations in 73.7% cases. When the Irish cost-effectiveness threshold was applied in the estimation of NMB, there was agreement in 89.5% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Alignment in methodological requirements for CEA is important to facilitate joint health technology assessment (HTA) by regional collaborations in Europe. When parameter inputs are not exactly aligned, conclusions may still be comparable across jurisdictions. For international joint procurement initiatives, determining and implementing joint decision rules may be more important than trying to align rules regarding methodological and parameter inputs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40273-019-00860-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2019-11-25 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7081651/ /pubmed/31761996 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00860-y Text en © The Author(s) 2019 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
Gorry, Claire
McCullagh, Laura
Barry, Michael
Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma
title Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma
title_full Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma
title_fullStr Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma
title_full_unstemmed Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma
title_short Transferability of Economic Evaluations of Treatments for Advanced Melanoma
title_sort transferability of economic evaluations of treatments for advanced melanoma
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7081651/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31761996
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00860-y
work_keys_str_mv AT gorryclaire transferabilityofeconomicevaluationsoftreatmentsforadvancedmelanoma
AT mccullaghlaura transferabilityofeconomicevaluationsoftreatmentsforadvancedmelanoma
AT barrymichael transferabilityofeconomicevaluationsoftreatmentsforadvancedmelanoma