Suppr超能文献

药物成本测量在成本效果分析中的良好研究实践:问题与建议:ISPOR 药物成本工作组报告——第一部分。

Good research practices for measuring drug costs in cost effectiveness analyses: issues and recommendations: the ISPOR Drug Cost Task Force report--Part I.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Economics & Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-9004, USA.

出版信息

Value Health. 2010 Jan-Feb;13(1):3-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00663.x. Epub 2009 Oct 28.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The assignment of prices or costs to pharmaceuticals can be crucial to results and conclusions that are derived from pharmacoeconomic cost effectiveness analyses (CEAs). Although numerous pharmacoeconomic practice guidelines are available in the literature and have been promulgated in many countries, these guidelines are either vague or silent about how drug costs should be established or measured. This is particularly problematic in pharmacoeconomic studies performed from the "societal" perspective, because typically the measured cost of a brand name pharmaceutical is not a true economic cost but also includes transfer payments from some members of society (patients and third party payers) to other members of society (pharmaceutical manufacturer stockholders) in large part as a reward for biomedical innovation. Moreover, there are numerous and complex institutional factors that influence how drug costs should be measured from other CEA perspectives, both internationally and within the domestic US context. The objective of this report is to provide guidance and recommendations on how drug costs should be measured for CEAs performed from a number of key analytic perspectives.

METHODS

ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices-Use of Drug Costs for Cost Effectiveness Analysis (Drug Cost Task Force [DCTF]) was appointed with the advice and consent of the ISPOR Board of Directors. Members were experienced developers or users of CEA models, worked in academia, industry, and as advisors to governments, and came from several countries. Because how drug costs should be measured for CEAs depend on the perspectives, five Task Force subgroups were created to develop drug cost standards from the societal, managed care, US government, industry, and international perspective. The ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices-Use of Drug Costs for Cost Effectiveness Analysis (DCTF) subgroups met to develop core assumptions and an outline before preparing six draft reports. They solicited comments on the outline and drafts from a core group of 174 external reviewers and more broadly from the membership of ISPOR at two ISPOR meetings and via the ISPOR web site.

RESULTS

Drug cost measurements should be fully transparent and reflect the net payment most relevant to the user's perspective. The Task Force recommends that for CEAs of brand name drugs performed from a societal perspective, either 1) CEA analysts use a cost that more accurately reflects true societal drug costs (e.g., 20-60% of average sales price), or when that is too unrealistic to be meaningful for decision-makers, 2) refer to their analyses as from a "limited societal perspective." CEAs performed from a payer perspective should use drug prices actually paid by the relevant payer net of all rebates, copays, or other adjustments. When such price adjustments are confidential, the analyst should apply a typical or average discount that preserves this confidentiality.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug transaction prices not only ration current use of medication but also ration future biomedical research and development. CEA researchers should tailor the appropriate measure of drug costs to the analytic perspective, maintain clarity and transparency on drug cost measurement, and report the sensitivity of CEA results to reasonable drug cost measurement alternatives.

摘要

目的

药品定价或成本分配对于药物经济学成本效果分析(CEA)得出的结果和结论可能至关重要。尽管文献中有许多药物经济学实践指南,并在许多国家颁布,但这些指南要么对如何确定或衡量药物成本含糊不清,要么对此保持沉默。对于从“社会”角度进行的药物经济学研究来说,这尤其成问题,因为品牌药物的测量成本通常不是真正的经济成本,而是还包括社会某些成员(患者和第三方付款人)向社会其他成员(制药商股东)的转移支付,部分原因是对生物医学创新的奖励。此外,在国际上和美国国内的其他 CEA 视角下,有许多复杂的制度因素会影响药物成本的衡量方式。本报告的目的是为从多个关键分析角度进行的 CEA 提供关于如何衡量药物成本的指导和建议。

方法

ISPOR 药物成本用于成本效果分析良好研究实践任务组(药物成本任务组[DCTF])是在 ISPOR 董事会的建议和同意下任命的。成员是 CEA 模型的有经验的开发者或使用者,在学术界、行业和政府顾问中工作,来自多个国家。因为对于 CEA 来说,如何衡量药物成本取决于视角,所以创建了五个任务组小组,以从社会、管理式医疗、美国政府、行业和国际视角制定药物成本标准。ISPOR 药物成本用于成本效果分析良好研究实践任务组(DCTF)小组在准备六份报告草案之前,开会制定了核心假设和大纲。他们就大纲和草案向 174 名核心外部评论员和更广泛的 ISPOR 成员征求意见,在两次 ISPOR 会议上以及通过 ISPOR 网站征求意见。

结果

药物成本的衡量应该完全透明,并反映出最符合用户视角的净支付。任务组建议,对于从社会角度进行的品牌药物的 CEA,如果 1)CEA 分析人员使用更准确地反映真实社会药物成本的成本(例如,平均售价的 20-60%),或者对于决策者来说,这太不切实际而没有意义,则 2)将其分析称为“有限的社会视角”。从支付者角度进行的 CEA 应使用相关支付者实际支付的药物价格,减去所有回扣、共付额或其他调整。当此类价格调整是机密时,分析师应应用典型或平均折扣来保护这种机密性。

结论

药物交易价格不仅影响当前药物使用的配给,还影响未来的生物医学研发。CEA 研究人员应根据分析视角调整适当的药物成本衡量标准,保持药物成本衡量的清晰性和透明度,并报告 CEA 结果对合理药物成本衡量替代方案的敏感性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验