• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

最近评估的药物在韩国更有可能获得积极的报销推荐吗?韩国正面清单系统 11 年的经验。

Are Recently Evaluated Drugs More Likely to Receive Positive Reimbursement Recommendations in South Korea? 11-year Experience of the South Korean Positive List System.

机构信息

Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Wonju, South Korea; College of Pharmacy, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, South Korea.

Department of Statistics, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, South Korea.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2020 Jul;42(7):1222-1233. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.05.006. Epub 2020 May 31.

DOI:10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.05.006
PMID:32487429
Abstract

PURPOSE

The South Korean government in 2014 introduced various policies to enhance accessibility of pharmaceuticals. This study sought to examine whether positive reimbursement recommendations of pharmaceuticals have increased since 2014.

METHODS

Industry submissions evaluated from January 2007 to December 2018 were identified, and characteristics relevant to reimbursement recommendations were extracted. Logistic regression analyses with robust SEs were used to quantify the likelihood of positive recommendations for pharmaceuticals, after controlling for relevant factors influencing the recommendations.

FINDINGS

During the study period, 355 (72.9%) of 487 submissions were positively recommended; the drugs evaluated after 2014 (77.8%) were significantly more likely to receive positive reimbursement recommendations than the drugs evaluated before 2014 (69.5%). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, several factors (labeled a noncancer drug, priced less than alternatives, considered clinically superior, and having budget impact >10 billion South Korean won) were significantly associated with positive recommendations (P < 0.05). When considering interaction effects between evaluation year and other variables, only the interaction between comparative clinical benefit and evaluation year was significant. Specifically, clinically noninferior drugs evaluated after 2014 had 2.85 times the odds of receiving positive recommendations compared with the clinically noninferior drugs evaluated earlier.

IMPLICATIONS

Recently evaluated drugs are more likely to receive positive reimbursement recommendations, especially those drugs whose comparative clinical benefits are noninferior.

摘要

目的

韩国政府于 2014 年出台了多项政策,以提高药品的可及性。本研究旨在考察自 2014 年以来,药品的正面报销推荐是否有所增加。

方法

确定了 2007 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月期间评估的行业提交材料,并提取了与报销推荐相关的特征。使用稳健标准误的逻辑回归分析来量化在控制了影响推荐的相关因素后,药品获得正面推荐的可能性。

发现

在研究期间,487 份提交材料中有 355 份(72.9%)获得了正面推荐;与 2014 年之前评估的药物相比(69.5%),2014 年之后评估的药物(77.8%)更有可能获得正面的报销推荐。在多变量逻辑回归分析中,一些因素(非癌症药物、价格低于替代药物、被认为具有临床优势、预算影响超过 100 亿韩元)与正面推荐显著相关(P<0.05)。在考虑评估年度与其他变量之间的交互效应时,只有比较临床效益与评估年度之间的交互效应是显著的。具体来说,与 2014 年之前评估的具有临床非劣效性的药物相比,2014 年之后评估的具有临床非劣效性的药物获得正面推荐的可能性增加了 2.85 倍。

结论

最近评估的药物更有可能获得正面的报销推荐,尤其是那些具有临床非劣效性的药物。

相似文献

1
Are Recently Evaluated Drugs More Likely to Receive Positive Reimbursement Recommendations in South Korea? 11-year Experience of the South Korean Positive List System.最近评估的药物在韩国更有可能获得积极的报销推荐吗?韩国正面清单系统 11 年的经验。
Clin Ther. 2020 Jul;42(7):1222-1233. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.05.006. Epub 2020 May 31.
2
A comparative analysis of the impact of a positive list system on new chemical entity drugs and incrementally modified drugs in South Korea.韩国对纳入正面清单的新化学实体药物和改良型新药的影响进行对比分析。
Clin Ther. 2011 Jul;33(7):926-32. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2011.05.089. Epub 2011 Jun 29.
3
National reimbursement listing determinants of new cancer drugs: a retrospective analysis of 58 cancer treatment appraisals in 2007-2016 in South Korea.国家癌症新药报销目录的决定因素:对2007 - 2016年韩国58项癌症治疗评估的回顾性分析。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2017 Aug;17(4):401-409. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2017.1276828. Epub 2017 Jan 3.
4
Evaluation on the first 2 years of the positive list system in South Korea.韩国“肯定列表制度”实施 2 年评价
Health Policy. 2012 Jan;104(1):32-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.09.006. Epub 2011 Oct 15.
5
Eight-year experience of using HTA in drug reimbursement: South Korea.韩国药物报销中应用卫生技术评估的八年经验
Health Policy. 2016 Jun;120(6):612-20. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.03.013. Epub 2016 Apr 1.
6
Role of economic evidence in coverage decision-making in South Korea.韩国医保覆盖决策中的经济证据的作用。
PLoS One. 2018 Oct 24;13(10):e0206121. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206121. eCollection 2018.
7
Comparing patient access to pharmaceuticals in the UK and US.比较英国和美国患者获取药品的情况。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2006;5(3):177-87. doi: 10.2165/00148365-200605030-00004.
8
Pharmacoeconomic guidelines and their implementation in the positive list system in South Korea.韩国药品经济指南及其在正面清单制度中的实施。
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12 Suppl 3:S36-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00625.x.
9
Trends in the pricing and reimbursement of new anticancer drugs in South Korea: an analysis of listed anticancer drugs during the past three years.韩国新型抗癌药物的定价和报销趋势:过去三年上市抗癌药物的分析。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Jun;21(3):479-488. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2021.1860023. Epub 2020 Dec 17.
10
Improving Patient Access to New Drugs in South Korea: Evaluation of the National Drug Formulary System.提高韩国患者获取新药的可及性:国家药物处方集系统的评估。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jan 21;16(2):288. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16020288.

引用本文的文献

1
Expanding access to high-cost medicines under the Universal Health Coverage scheme in Thailand: review of current practices and recommendations.泰国全民健康覆盖计划下扩大高成本药品的可及性:当前实践回顾与建议
J Pharm Policy Pract. 2023 Nov 7;16(1):138. doi: 10.1186/s40545-023-00643-z.
2
Introduction of managed entry agreements in Korea: Problem, policy, and politics.韩国引入管理式准入协议:问题、政策与政治
Front Pharmacol. 2023 Apr 13;14:999220. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.999220. eCollection 2023.
3
Regenerative Medicine in South Korea: Bridging the Gap Between Authorization and Reimbursement.
韩国的再生医学:弥合授权与报销之间的差距。
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021 Aug 30;9:737504. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.737504. eCollection 2021.
4
Should We Consider Value Frameworks for Cancer Drugs as Oncology's Landscape Evolves?; from an Oncologist Perspective in Korea.在肿瘤学领域不断发展的背景下,我们是否应该考虑为癌症药物制定价值框架?; 来自韩国肿瘤学家的观点。
J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Jul 26;36(29):e191. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e191.
5
Value Frameworks: Adaptation of Korean Versions of Value Frameworks for Oncology.价值框架:肿瘤学中韩国版价值框架的适应性。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Mar 18;18(6):3139. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18063139.