Suppr超能文献

多标准决策分析(MCDA)的实施对波兰罕见病药物定价和报销流程的潜在影响。

Potential impact of the implementation of multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) on the Polish pricing and reimbursement process of orphan drugs.

作者信息

Kolasa Katarzyna, Zwolinski Krzysztof M, Kalo Zoltan, Hermanowski Tomasz

机构信息

Department of Health Economics, Nicolaus Copernicus University Collegium Medicum, Sandomierska 16, 85-830, Bydgoszcz, Poland.

Advanced Management Training Programme in Pharmacoeconomics, Pharmaceutical Marketing and Law, Warsaw University of Technology Business School, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2016 Mar 10;11:23. doi: 10.1186/s13023-016-0388-0.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to assess the potential impact of the implementation of multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) on the Polish pricing and reimbursement (P&R) process with regard to orphan drugs.

METHODS

A four step approach was designed. Firstly, a systematic literature review was conducted to select the MCDA criteria. Secondly, a database of orphan drugs was established. Thirdly, health technology appraisals (HTA recommendations) were categorized and an MCDA appraisal was conducted. Finally, a comparison of HTA and MCDA outcomes was carried out. An MCDA outcome was considered positive if more than 50% of the maximum number of points was reached (base case). In the sensitivity analysis, 25% and 75% thresholds were tested as well.

RESULTS

Out of 2242 publications, 23 full-text articles were included. The final MCDA tool consisted of ten criteria. In total, 27 distinctive drug-indication pairs regarding 21 drugs were used for the study. Six negative and 21 positive HTA recommendations were issued. In the base case, there were 19 positive MCDA outcomes. Of the 27 cases, there were 12 disagreements between the HTA and MCDA outcomes, the majority of which related to positive HTA guidance for negative MCDA outcomes. All drug-indication pairs with negative HTA recommendations were appraised positively in the MCDA framework. Economic details were available for 12 cases, of which there were 9 positive MCDA outcomes. Amongst the 12 drug-indication pairs, two were negatively appraised in the HTA process, with positive MCDA guidance, and two were appraised in the opposite direction.

CONCLUSIONS

An MCDA approach may lead to different P&R outcomes compared to a standard HTA process. On the one hand, enrichment of the list of decision making criteria means further scrutiny of a given health technology and as such increases the odds of a negative P&R outcome. On the other hand, it may uncover additional values and as such increase the odds of positive P&R outcomes.

摘要

背景

本研究的目的是评估多标准决策分析(MCDA)的实施对波兰孤儿药定价和报销(P&R)流程的潜在影响。

方法

设计了一个四步方法。首先,进行系统的文献综述以选择MCDA标准。其次,建立孤儿药数据库。第三,对卫生技术评估(HTA建议)进行分类并进行MCDA评估。最后,对HTA和MCDA结果进行比较。如果达到最大点数的50%以上(基础情况),则MCDA结果被认为是积极的。在敏感性分析中,还测试了25%和75%的阈值。

结果

在2242篇出版物中,纳入了23篇全文文章。最终的MCDA工具由十个标准组成。总共使用了涉及21种药物的27对独特的药物-适应症对进行研究。发布了6项负面和21项正面的HTA建议。在基础情况下,有19项积极的MCDA结果。在这27个案例中,HTA和MCDA结果之间存在12项分歧,其中大多数与HTA对MCDA负面结果的积极指导有关。所有HTA建议为负面的药物-适应症对在MCDA框架中均被积极评估。有12个案例提供了经济细节,其中有9项积极的MCDA结果。在这12对药物-适应症对中,有两对在HTA过程中被负面评估,但MCDA给出了积极指导,还有两对评估结果相反。

结论

与标准的HTA流程相比,MCDA方法可能导致不同的P&R结果。一方面,决策标准列表的丰富意味着对特定卫生技术的进一步审查,因此增加了P&R结果为负面的几率。另一方面,它可能发现额外的价值,从而增加P&R结果为积极的几率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b6aa/4787054/cd855ce7c1a7/13023_2016_388_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

2
Revealed preferences towards the appraisal of orphan drugs in Poland - multi criteria decision analysis.
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018 Apr 27;13(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s13023-018-0803-9.
4
Using multi-criteria decision analysis to appraise orphan drugs: a systematic review.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Apr;18(2):135-146. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2018.1414603. Epub 2017 Dec 20.
5
International experiences in multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for evaluating orphan drugs: a scoping review.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2019 Aug;19(4):409-420. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1633918. Epub 2019 Jul 1.
7
Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for HTA across four EU Member States: Piloting the Advance Value Framework.
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Feb;246:112595. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112595. Epub 2019 Oct 15.

引用本文的文献

1
Contextual factors in value-based decision support to enhance health technologies adoption: the case of biosimilars.
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 13;16:1599013. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1599013. eCollection 2025.
3
Development of the Emirates Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool for Orphan Drugs.
Cureus. 2024 Feb 29;16(2):e55215. doi: 10.7759/cureus.55215. eCollection 2024 Feb.
4
What Does the Public Want? Structural Consideration of Citizen Preferences in Health Care Coverage Decisions.
MDM Policy Pract. 2018 Sep 25;3(2):2381468318799628. doi: 10.1177/2381468318799628. eCollection 2018 Jul-Dec.
5
Evaluation of criteria and COVID-19 patients for intensive care unit admission in the era of pandemic: A multi-criteria decision making approach.
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2021 Sep;209:106348. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106348. Epub 2021 Aug 8.
6
A systematic review of moral reasons on orphan drug reimbursement.
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021 Jun 30;16(1):292. doi: 10.1186/s13023-021-01925-y.
7
How to Value Orphan Drugs? A Review of European Value Assessment Frameworks.
Front Pharmacol. 2021 May 12;12:631527. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.631527. eCollection 2021.
9
A multi-stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis for the reimbursement of orphan drugs (FinMHU-MCDA study).
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021 Apr 26;16(1):186. doi: 10.1186/s13023-021-01809-1.

本文引用的文献

1
The paradox of public participation in the healthcare in Poland--what citizens want, and what they think.
Health Policy. 2014 Nov;118(2):159-65. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.09.015. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
2
Are pricing and reimbursement decision-making criteria aligned with public preferences regarding allocation principles in the Polish healthcare sector?
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014 Oct;14(5):751-62. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2014.940903. Epub 2014 Jul 23.
3
Application of a policy framework for the public funding of drugs for rare diseases.
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Aug;29 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S774-9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2885-y.
5
Shining a light in the black box of orphan drug pricing.
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014 Apr 27;9:62. doi: 10.1186/1750-1172-9-62.
6
Insight into reimbursement decision-making criteria in Bulgaria: implications for orphan drugs.
Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2013 Jul-Dec;55(3-4):80-6. doi: 10.2478/folmed-2013-0032.
7
Health technologies for rare diseases: does conventional HTA still apply?
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014 Jun;14(3):315-7. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2014.906903. Epub 2014 Apr 4.
8
Limits on use of health economic assessments for rare diseases.
QJM. 2014 Mar;107(3):241-5. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcu016. Epub 2014 Jan 22.
9
A pilot study of multicriteria decision analysis for valuing orphan medicines.
Value Health. 2013 Dec;16(8):1163-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.10.002. Epub 2013 Nov 14.
10
Attitudes toward supplementary criteria in the reimbursement process in Poland.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013 Oct;29(4):443-9. doi: 10.1017/S0266462313000482.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验