Cargando…
Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop guidance contributing to improved consistency and quality in economic evaluations of personalised medicine (PM), given current ambiguity about how to measure the value of PM as well as considerable variation in the methodology and reporting in ec...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8200346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33860928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-021-01010-z |
_version_ | 1783707586109898752 |
---|---|
author | Vellekoop, Heleen Huygens, Simone Versteegh, Matthijs Szilberhorn, László Zelei, Tamás Nagy, Balázs Koleva-Kolarova, Rositsa Tsiachristas, Apostolos Wordsworth, Sarah Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen |
author_facet | Vellekoop, Heleen Huygens, Simone Versteegh, Matthijs Szilberhorn, László Zelei, Tamás Nagy, Balázs Koleva-Kolarova, Rositsa Tsiachristas, Apostolos Wordsworth, Sarah Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen |
author_sort | Vellekoop, Heleen |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop guidance contributing to improved consistency and quality in economic evaluations of personalised medicine (PM), given current ambiguity about how to measure the value of PM as well as considerable variation in the methodology and reporting in economic evaluations of PM. METHODS: A targeted literature review of methodological papers was performed for an overview of modelling challenges in PM. Expert interviews were held to discuss best modelling practice. A systematic literature review of economic evaluations of PM was conducted to gain insight into current modelling practice. The findings were synthesised and used to develop a set of draft recommendations. The draft recommendations were discussed at a stakeholder workshop and subsequently finalised. RESULTS: Twenty-two methodological papers were identified. Some argued that the challenges in modelling PM can be addressed within existing methodological frameworks, others disagreed. Eighteen experts were interviewed. They believed large uncertainty to be a key concern. Out of 195 economic evaluations of PM identified, 56% addressed none of the identified modelling challenges. A set of 23 recommendations was developed. Eight recommendations focus on the modelling of test-treatment pathways. The use of non-randomised controlled trial data is discouraged but several recommendations are provided in case randomised controlled trial data are unavailable. The parameterisation of structural uncertainty is recommended. Other recommendations consider perspective and discounting; premature survival data; additional value elements; patient and clinician compliance; and managed entry agreements. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive list of recommendations to modellers of PM and to evaluators and reviewers of PM models. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40273-021-01010-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8200346 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82003462021-06-28 Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine Vellekoop, Heleen Huygens, Simone Versteegh, Matthijs Szilberhorn, László Zelei, Tamás Nagy, Balázs Koleva-Kolarova, Rositsa Tsiachristas, Apostolos Wordsworth, Sarah Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen Pharmacoeconomics Systematic Review OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop guidance contributing to improved consistency and quality in economic evaluations of personalised medicine (PM), given current ambiguity about how to measure the value of PM as well as considerable variation in the methodology and reporting in economic evaluations of PM. METHODS: A targeted literature review of methodological papers was performed for an overview of modelling challenges in PM. Expert interviews were held to discuss best modelling practice. A systematic literature review of economic evaluations of PM was conducted to gain insight into current modelling practice. The findings were synthesised and used to develop a set of draft recommendations. The draft recommendations were discussed at a stakeholder workshop and subsequently finalised. RESULTS: Twenty-two methodological papers were identified. Some argued that the challenges in modelling PM can be addressed within existing methodological frameworks, others disagreed. Eighteen experts were interviewed. They believed large uncertainty to be a key concern. Out of 195 economic evaluations of PM identified, 56% addressed none of the identified modelling challenges. A set of 23 recommendations was developed. Eight recommendations focus on the modelling of test-treatment pathways. The use of non-randomised controlled trial data is discouraged but several recommendations are provided in case randomised controlled trial data are unavailable. The parameterisation of structural uncertainty is recommended. Other recommendations consider perspective and discounting; premature survival data; additional value elements; patient and clinician compliance; and managed entry agreements. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive list of recommendations to modellers of PM and to evaluators and reviewers of PM models. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40273-021-01010-z. Springer International Publishing 2021-04-16 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8200346/ /pubmed/33860928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-021-01010-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Vellekoop, Heleen Huygens, Simone Versteegh, Matthijs Szilberhorn, László Zelei, Tamás Nagy, Balázs Koleva-Kolarova, Rositsa Tsiachristas, Apostolos Wordsworth, Sarah Rutten-van Mölken, Maureen Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine |
title | Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine |
title_full | Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine |
title_fullStr | Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine |
title_full_unstemmed | Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine |
title_short | Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine |
title_sort | guidance for the harmonisation and improvement of economic evaluations of personalised medicine |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8200346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33860928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-021-01010-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vellekoopheleen guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT huygenssimone guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT versteeghmatthijs guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT szilberhornlaszlo guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT zeleitamas guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT nagybalazs guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT kolevakolarovarositsa guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT tsiachristasapostolos guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT wordsworthsarah guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT ruttenvanmolkenmaureen guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine AT guidancefortheharmonisationandimprovementofeconomicevaluationsofpersonalisedmedicine |