National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Med Decis Making. 2020 Feb;40(2):144-155. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19900179. Epub 2020 Feb 2.
Economic evaluation is an important element of the decision making process for the reimbursement of drugs. Heterogeneity can be considered an explained variation in clinical or economic outcomes based on the clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of patients. However, to our knowledge, the relationship between price negotiations and population heterogeneity has not been considered in the literature to date. If a company offers a conditional discount that is dependent on obtaining reimbursement in 2 subgroups or indications, an interaction is generated between groups that should be accounted for in economic evaluations. Critically, where the drug has 2 indications but is only cost-effective in 1 indication at the full price (herein "indication 1"), the cost savings realized from implementation of the discount in indication 1 can be used to offset the incremental cost of extending reimbursement to indication 2 at the discounted price. This reduces the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and increases the probability of positive reimbursement compared to a stratified approach. Given the additional complexity that this introduces, we introduce a framework deemed the "hybrid approach" to guide the economic assessment. We present 2 worked examples. We show that failure to account for the interaction can lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding a drug's cost effectiveness and that adoption of strategic behavior could theoretically increase the reimbursement price of drugs. By adopting this framework, cost-effective interventions are identified that may have been previously misclassified as not being cost-effective and vice versa. Recognition of the interaction in the literature by pharmaceutical companies may influence the forms of discounts offered to decision makers. Therefore, we expect this research to have far-reaching effects on medical decision making.
经济评价是药品报销决策过程的一个重要组成部分。异质性可以被认为是基于患者的临床和社会人口统计学特征,对临床或经济结果的可解释变化。然而,据我们所知,迄今为止,文献中尚未考虑价格谈判与人群异质性之间的关系。如果公司提供有条件的折扣,该折扣取决于在 2 个亚组或适应证中获得报销,那么在经济评价中应考虑到组间的相互作用。至关重要的是,如果药物有 2 个适应证,但在全价时仅在 1 个适应证中具有成本效益(此处称为“适应证 1”),则在适应证 1 中实施折扣所实现的成本节约可用于抵消以折扣价扩大适应证 2 报销的增量成本。这降低了增量成本效益比,并增加了与分层方法相比获得正面报销的可能性。鉴于这引入了额外的复杂性,我们引入了一个被认为是“混合方法”的框架来指导经济评估。我们提出了 2 个实例。我们表明,不考虑相互作用可能会导致对药物成本效益的不准确结论,并且采用策略性行为理论上可以提高药物的报销价格。通过采用这个框架,确定了具有成本效益的干预措施,这些干预措施以前可能被错误地归类为没有成本效益,反之亦然。制药公司在文献中对相互作用的认识可能会影响向决策者提供的折扣形式。因此,我们预计这项研究将对医疗决策产生深远的影响。