Guidelines for conducting pharmaceutical budget impact analyses for submission to public drug plans in Canada

Enhancing Primary Care for Nursing Home Patients with an Artificial Intelligence-Aided Rational Drug Use Web Assistant

Polypharmacy can result in drug-drug interactions, severe side-effects, drug-disease interactions, inappropriate medication use in the elderly, and escalating costs. This study aims to evaluate nursing home residents' medication regimens using a rational drug use web assistant developed by researchers to mitigate unnecessary medication usage. This analytical, cross-sectional study included data from nursing home residents recently recorded in a training family health center. Sociodemographic information, medical conditions, and prescribed medications of all patients in the nursing home (n = 99) were documented. Medications were assessed using an artificial intelligence-aided rational drug use web assistant. Instances of inappropriate drug use and calculations of contraindicated drug costs were also recorded. The study revealed that 88.9% (n = 88) of patients experienced polypharmacy, with a mean value of 6.96 ± 2.94 drugs per patient. Potential risky drug-drug interactions were present in 89.9% (n = 89) of patients, contraindicated drug-drug interactions in 20.2% (n = 20), and potentially inappropriate drug use in 86.9% (n = 86). Plans to discontinue 83 medications were estimated to reduce total direct medication costs by 9.1% per month. After the assessment with the rational drug use web assistant, the number of drugs that patients needed to use and polypharmacy decreased significantly. This study concludes that the rational drug use web assistant application, which is more cost-effective than the traditional manual method, assisted by artificial intelligence, and integrated into healthcare services, may offer substantial benefits to family physicians and their geriatric patients.

Reimbursement decision-making system in Poland systematically compared to other countries

Introduction: Our objective was to analyze and compare systematically and structurally reimbursement systems in Poland and other countries. Methods: The systems were selected based on recommendations issued by the Polish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Tariffication (AHTAPol), which explicitly referred to other countries and agencies). Consequently, apart from Poland, the countries included in the analysis were England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, France, Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Relevant information and data were collected through a systematic search of PubMed (Medline), Embase and The Cochrane Library as well as competent authority websites and grey literature sources. Results and discussion: In most of the countries, the submission of a reimbursement application is initiated by a pharmaceutical company, and only a few countries allow it before a product is approved for marketing. All of the agencies analyzed are independent and some have regulatory function of reimbursement decision making body. A key criterion differentiating the various agencies in terms of HTA is the cost-effectiveness threshold. Most of the countries have specific mechanisms to improve access to expensive specialty drugs, including cancer drugs and those used for rare diseases. Reimbursement systems often lack consistency in appreciating the same stages, leading to heterogeneous decision-making processes. The analysis of recommendations issued in different countries for the same medicinal product will allow a better understanding of the relations between the reimbursement system, HTA assessment, stakeholders involvement and decision on reimbursement of innovative drugs.

Budget impact analysis of breast cancer medications: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer globally among women, with 2,261,419 new cases in 2020; systemic treatment may be neo-adjuvant, adjuvant, or both. BC subtype guides the standard systemic therapy administered, which consists of endocrine therapy for all HR + tumors, trastuzumab-based HER2-directed antibody therapy plus chemotherapy for all HER2 + tumors (with endocrine therapy given in addition, if concurrent HR positivity), and chemotherapy alone for the triple-negative subtype. This study aimed to identify, evaluate, and systematically review all budget impact analyses (BIAs) of BC medications worldwide.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases were thoroughly searched up to 26th March 2022 to identify original published studies which evaluate BIA of BC medications. ISPOR Task Force guidelines were used to assess the quality of included studies. This study was conducted and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

In total, 17 BIAs were included in the study. About half of the studies were conducted in Europe. The results of the BIAs showed that most of the included BIAs are conducted from the payer's perspective; they have different methodological frameworks for recommended chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy agents to treat BC. For the same medications, the results of budgetary effects are not consistent in diverse countries. Nine out of the 17 studies were focused on trastuzumab, in which the biosimilar form reduced costs, but the brand form increased costs, especially in a 52-week treatment period.

CONCLUSION

Researchers should conduct the budget impact analysis of high-value medications such as anti-tumor drugs more objectively, and the accuracy of parameters needs to be more strictly guaranteed. Furthermore, it is worthy of declaring that the budgetary impact of the same drug is not always consistent over time, so the researchers should measure access to medication in the long run.

Economic Value of Fosaprepitant-Containing Regimen in the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in China: Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of fosaprepitant (FosAPR)-containing regimen for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving high emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) from the Chinese payer's perspective.

Methods

A decision tree model was established to measure the 5-day costs and health outcomes between the APR-containing regimen (aprepitant, granisetron, and dexamethasone) and FosAPR-containing regimen (fosaprepitant, granisetron, and dexamethasone). Clinical data were derived from a randomized, double-blind controlled trial on Chinese inpatients who received HEC. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to estimate the utility outcomes and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated to assess the economics of FosAPR. A static budget impact model was developed to assess the impact of FosAPR as a new addition to the National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) on the medical insurance fund within 3 years in Nanjing, China.

Results

Compared with APR, FosAPR had a mean health-care savings of ¥121.56 but got a reduction of 0.0001815 QALY, resulting in an ICER of ¥669926.19 per QALY. Deterministic sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost of APR was the most influential factor to the ICER. The cost of FosAPR and the complete control rate of the delayed period also had a high impact on the results. According to the probabilistic analysis, the acceptability of FosAPR was more than 80% when the Chinese willingness-to-pay (WTP) was ¥215,999. FosAPR would lead to a 3-year medical insurance payment increase of ¥1.84 million compared with ¥1.49 million before FosAPR entered NRDL in Nanjing. The total budget increased with a cumulative cost of ¥694,829 and covered an additional 341 patients who benefited from FosAPR in Nanjing. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that the model of budget impact analysis was stable.

Conclusion

FosAPR had a similar treatment effect to APR but was cost-effective in China at the current WTP threshold. The total budget of medical insurance payments of Nanjing slightly increased year by year after the inclusion of FosAPR. Its inclusion in the NRDL would be acceptable and also expand the coverage of patients who benefited from FosAPR.

Budget Impact Analysis of Pharmacist-Led Medication Management in Cardiovascular and Type 2 Diabetic Patients

The paper aims to identify and measure the costs and savings associated with the delivery of Comprehensive Medication Management (CMM) services in Croatia in patients diagnosed with hypertension accompanied by at least one additional established cardiovascular disease (CVD) and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (DMT2) who use five or more medicines daily. The budget impact analysis (BIA) employed in this study compares the total costs of CMM to the cost reductions expected from CMM. The cost reductions (or savings) are based on the reduced incidence of unwanted clinical events and healthcare service utilisation rates due to CMM. The BIA model is populated by data on medication therapy costs, labour, and training from the pilot CMM intervention introduced in Zagreb’s main Health Centre, while relevant international published sources were used to estimate the utilisation, incidence, and unwanted clinical events rates. Total direct costs, including pharmacists’ labour and training (EUR 2,667,098) and the increase in the cost of prescribed medication (EUR 5,182,864) amounted to EUR 7,849,962 for 3 years, rendering the cost per treated patient per year EUR 57. CMM is expected to reduce the utilisation rates of healthcare services and the incidence of unwanted clinical events, leading to a total 3-year reduction in healthcare costs of EUR 7,787,765. Given the total CMM costs of EUR 7,849,962, CMM’s 3-year budget impact equals EUR 92,869, rendering per treated patient an incremental cost of CMM EUR 0.67. Hence, CMM appears to be an affordable intervention for addressing medication mismanagement and irrational drug use.

Adoption of new therapies in the treatment of Hepatitis: a verification of the accuracy of budget impact analysis to guide investment decisions

OBJECTIVES

While there are good Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) guidelines, studies still register potential bias. To do this, we compared the results between theoretical and real-world evidence (RWE) expenditures for medicines for Hepatitis C: boceprevir (BOC) and telaprevir (TVR). While both are not currently recommended in treatment guidelines following recent developments, this is an emblematic case because for 4 years these medicines consumed considerable resources.

METHODS

Theoretical results and RWE expenditures were compared regarding the incorporation of BOC and TVR in 2013-2014 into the Brazilian Public Health System. Theoretical values were extracted from Commission for Technology Incorporation Report and RWE expenditures were extracted from the administrative data records using deterministic-probabilistic linkage.

RESULTS

The estimated number of patients treated (BOC+TVR) was 13,012 versus 7,641 (real). The estimated purchase price for BOC was US$6.20 versus US$11.07 (real) and for TVR was US$42.21 versus US$84.09 (average/real). The estimated budget impact was US$285.16 million versus US$128.58 million (real).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates appreciable divergence (US$156.58 million) between the theoretical budget impact and RWE expenditures due to underestimated purchase prices and overestimated populations. The greater the degree of accuracy the more reliable and usable BIAs become for decision-making.

Budget Impact Analysis of Diabetes Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review

Background: Budget impact analysis (BIA) is an economic assessment that estimates the financial consequences of adopting a new intervention. BIA is used to make informed reimbursement decisions, as a supplement to cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). Objectives: We systematically reviewed BIA studies associated with anti-diabetic drugs and assessed the extent to which international BIA guidelines were followed in these studies. Methods: We conducted a literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Econlit, Medline, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data knowledge Service platform from database inception to June 30, 2021. ISPOR good practice guidelines were used as a methodological standard for assessing BIAs. We extracted and compared the study characteristics outlined by the ISPOR BIA Task Force to evaluate the guideline compliance of the included BIA. Results: A total of eighteen studies on the BIA for anti-diabetic drugs were identified. More than half studies were from developed countries. Seventeen studies were based on model and one study was based on real-world data. Overall, analysis considered a payer perspective, reported potential budget impacts over 1-5 years. Assumptions were mainly made about target population size, market share uptake of new interventions, and scope of cost. The data used for analysis varied among studies and was rarely justified. Model validation and sensitivity analysis were lacking in the current BIA studies. Rebate analysis was conducted in a few studies to explore the price discount that was required for new interventions to demonstrate cost equivalence to comparators. Conclusion: Existing studies evaluating budget impact for anti-diabetic drugs vary greatly in methodology, some of which showed low compliance to good practice guidelines. In order for the BIA to be useful for assisting in health plan decision-making, it is important for future studies to optimize compliance to national or ISPOR good practice guidelines on BIA. Model validation and sensitivity analysis should also be improved in future BIA studies. Continued improvement of BIA using real-world data is necessary to ensure high-quality analyses and to provide reliable results.

Is the Scope of Costs Considered in Budget Impact Analyses for Anticancer Drugs Rational? A Systematic Review and Comparative Study

Background: With the increasing disease burden of cancer worldwide, more and more anticancer drugs have been approved in many countries, and the results of budget impact analyses (BIAs) have become important evidence for related reimbursement decisions.

Objectives: We systematically reviewed whether BIAs for anticancer drugs consider the scope of costs rationally and compared the results of different cost scopes to provide suggestions for future analyses and decision-making.

Methods: Eligible BIAs published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from 2016 to 2021 were identified based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We extracted 15 terms from the included studies and analyzed how they considered the scope of costs. In addition, a budget impact model was developed for the introduction of geptanolimab to China's National Reimbursement Drug List to enable a comparison of two cost-scope scenarios.

Results: A total of 29 studies were included in the systematic review. All 29 studies considered the costs of anticancer drugs, and 25 (86%) also considered condition-related costs, but only 11 (38%) considered subsequent treatment costs. In the comparative study, the predicted budget impacts from 2022 to 2024 were significantly impacted by subsequent treatment costs, with annual differences between the two cost-scope scenarios of $39,546,664, $65,866,161, and $86,577,386, respectively.

Conclusions: The scope of costs considered in some existing BIAs for anticancer drugs are not rational. The variations between different cost scopes in terms of budget impact were significant. Thus, BIAs for anticancer drugs should consider a rational scope of costs that adheres to BIA guidelines. Researchers and decision-makers should pay more attention to the scope of costs to achieve better-quality BIAs for anticancer drugs and enhance reimbursement decision-making.

National Methodological Guidelines to Conduct Budget Impact Analysis for Health Technology Assessment in India

OBJECTIVE

Our paper aims to present Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) guidelines for health technology assessment (HTA) in India.

METHODOLOGY

A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted to retrieve information on existing BIA guidelines internationally. The initial set of principles for India were put together based on an interactive process between authors, taking into consideration the existing evidence on BIA and features of Indian healthcare system. These were reviewed by Technical Appraisal Committee (TAC) of Health Technology Assessment in India (HTAIn) for their inputs. Three rounds of consultations were held before finalising the guidelines. Finally, user feedback on the draft guidelines was obtained from the policy makers and programme managers involved in the budgeting decisions.

RESULTS

We recommend a payer's perspective, which will include both a multi-payer (depicting the current situation in India) and a single-payer scenario (which reflects a futuristic universal health care situation). A time horizon of 1-4 years is recommended. For estimation of eligible population, a top-down approach is considered appropriate. The future and current mix of interventions should be analysed for different utilisation and coverage patterns. We do not recommend discounting; however, inflation adjustments should be performed. The presentation of results should include total and disaggregated results, segregated year-wise throughout the chosen time horizon, as well as segregated by the type of resources. Deterministic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis are recommended to address uncertainty.

CONCLUSION

Our recommendations, which are tailored for the Indian healthcare and financing context, aim to promote consistency and transparency in the conduct as well as reporting of the BIA. BIA should be used along with evidence from economic evaluation for decision making, and not as a substitute to evidence on value for money.

Budget impact analysis of medicines: estimated values versus real-world evidence and the implications

Objectives: Budget Impact Analyses (BIA) of medicines helps managers in promoting health systems' sustainability when assessing the role and value of new medicines. However, it is not clear whether BIAs typically underestimate or overestimate the impact on real-world budgets. This retroactive analysis seeks to compare estimated values obtained by a BIA and Real-World Evidence (RWE) to guide discussions.Methods: The estimated values were obtained through a BIA concerning the incorporation of adalimumab for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis into the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) carried out retroactively and per international guidelines. RWE data was extracted from SUS computerized systems. We subsequently compared the number of treatments, costs, and Incremental Budget Impact (IBI).Results - The total number of treatments was underestimated by 10% (6,243) and the total expenditure was overestimated by 463% (US$ 4.7 billion). In five years, the total difference between the estimated values and real IBI reached US$ 1.1 billion. A current expenditure of US$ 1.0 was observed for every US$ 5.60 of estimated expenditure.Conclusion - The higher estimates from the BIA might cause decision makers to be more cautious with the introduction of a new medicine to reduce the opportunity costs for other interventions.

Real-World Health-Economic Considerations Around Aortic-Valve Replacement in a Publicly Funded Health System

Herein, we describe the unique interplay among biomedical ethics, principles of distributive justice, and economic theory to highlight the role of health technology assessments to compare therapeutic options for aortic valve replacement. From the perspective of the Canadian health care system, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation is associated with higher costs but also higher incremental health benefits compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement. At current willingness to pay thresholds, transcatheter aortic-valve replacement is likely cost effective across the spectrum of risk, from inoperable patients to those at low surgical risk. However, we highlight the nuances within each subgroup of surgical risk that merit careful consideration by the heart team. Moreover, incorporation of patients and their preferences in decision-making is key. In particular, in young, low-risk patients, there remains uncertainty regarding the optimal treatment, with unique concerns around valve durability, selection of valve prosthesis, and consideration for special procedures such as the Ross procedure. Nonetheless, current research suggests that, universally, patients prefer a less invasive approach compared with a more invasive approach. Finally, we highlight that there remain critical issues around timeliness of access to care and unacceptable geographic inequities across Canada. Further research into alternative funding mechanisms and integrated cross-sector care pathways is necessary to address these issues.

Methodological Quality Assessment of Budget Impact Analyses for Orphan Drugs: A Systematic Review

Objectives: This research aims to evaluate the methodological quality of budget impact analyses for orphan drugs and to provide suggestions for future analyses. Methods: Conference abstracts and peer-reviewed literature on budget impact analyses were collected through searches of Pubmed and Embase. ISPOR good practice guidelines were used as a methodological standard for budget impact analyses. Examined parameters encompassed: perspective, target population, data sources, intervention and comparator(s), time horizon, scope of costs, discounting, validation, assumptions and sensitivity analysis. Results: Seventy studies on individual orphan drugs and 21 studies on a combination of orphan drugs analyzing budget impact were identified. Overall, analyses considered a third-party payer perspective, reported periodic budget impacts over a one-to-five-year time horizon, and did not apply discounting. A dynamically fluctuating population and costs beyond drug costs were accounted for in 18.7% and 51.7% of studies, respectively. Input data were retrieved from published literature, clinical trials, registries, claims databases, expert opinions, historical data and market research. Assumptions were mostly made about population size and intervention/comparator(s) market uptake, but these assumptions were rarely justified and their impact was insufficiently explored through sensitivity analyses. Budget impact results were rarely validated. Conclusion: Existing budget impact analyses for orphan drugs are concise, vary greatly and are of substandard methodological quality. To eliminate possible bias in future budget impact analyses, future studies should adhere to national or ISPOR good practice guidelines on budget impact analysis.

A systematic review of the budget impact analyses for antitumor drugs of lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Budget impact analyses (BIAs) are used for reimbursement decisions and drug access medical insurance, as a supplement to cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs).

OBJECTIVES

We systematically reviewed BIAs for antitumor drugs of lung cancer to provide reference for high-value drug budget impact analyses and decision making.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform from 2010 to 2019. The methodological indicators and result information of the budget impact analyses were extracted and evaluated for quality.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies on the budget impact for antitumor drugs of lung cancer were included, and the overall quality was good. Half of studies were from developed countries. Nine of the studies were designed using the BIA cost calculation model, and two were simulated using the Markov model Monte Carlo model. From all studies, only 14.3% reported model validation. The budget impact results of the same drug in different countries were inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Included studies evaluating budget impact analyses for anti-tumor drugs of lung cancer showed variability in the methodological framework for BIAs. The budget impact analyses of high-value drugs need to be more stringent to ensure the accuracy of the parameters, and should provide reliable results based on real data to decision-making departments, which should carefully consider access to lung cancer drugs.

Real-World Experience With Apremilast in the Treatment of Adults With Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis in Québec: A Claims-Based Analysis of Drug Utilization and Healthcare Resource Utilization

BACKGROUND

In Québec, targeted biologic therapies for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis are restricted to patients who have not responded to phototherapy or conventional systemic treatment, primarily due to high drug costs. Apremilast, an oral treatment for plaque psoriasis, was added to the Québec provincial health insurance plan (Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec; RAMQ) formulary in 2015, making this the only province in Canada with public drug plan reimbursement for apremilast.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to describe patients' characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and associated costs and to measure real-world budget impact of using apremilast before biologics in plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

This study was performed using RAMQ drug claims and medical services data. Patients diagnosed with psoriasis between January 2015 and December 2017 were identified. Medical services and prescription claims were categorized as all-cause and psoriasis-related. Using RAMQ database estimates, a 3-year budget impact analysis was developed comparing treatment cost with and without the addition of apremilast to the formulary.

RESULTS

In all, 540 patients were identified (apremilast: n = 92; biologics: n = 448). Comorbidity burden and treatment persistence and adherence were comparable between apremilast and biologic users. The year following the index date, all-cause HCRU was lower for apremilast versus biologic users (CAN$19 763 vs CAN$28 025; P < .01), mainly driven by drug cost. Using apremilast before biologics resulted in an estimated RAMQ net savings of CAN$49 290 (2015), CAN$746 856 (2016), and CAN$1 216 512 (2017), and a total savings of CAN$2 012 658 since apremilast's addition to the formulary.

CONCLUSION

Adding apremilast to the drug formulary of other Canadian provinces could result in significant healthcare savings.

Budget impact analysis of osteoporosis medications for primary prevention of fractures in Taiwan

INTRODUCTION

Taiwan's national health insurance currently only covers the use of osteoporosis drugs for the secondary prevention of fractures and does not provide coverage for primary prevention. The purpose of this study is to develop a model for analyzing the budgetary impact of the use of osteoporosis medications of primary prevention.

METHODS

The budget impact model in this study is the "actual medication cost" minus the "medical expenses for all types of fractures that can be avoided by taking osteoporosis medications." We developed six possible insurance payment plans for primary prevention based on the age of the patients and T-scores and performed eleven steps to estimate the budget impact of each payment plan.

RESULTS

The results of this study indicated that there may be 71,220 (T-score ≤ - 3.0, 75 + y/o) to 157,515 (T-score ≤ - 2.5, 65 + y/o) people using the drugs, and the budget impact may be US$26.28-58.98 million in 2019. However, the payment plans may avoid 492-766 fracture events and save medical expenditures for fracture treatment by US$1.30-2.02 million. The average costs for primary prevention within a year will be US$53,386-77,006.

CONCLUSION

The budget impact of using osteoporosis medications to primary prevention of fractures is significant, but it can be compensated due to savings in fracture treatment costs.

Stakeholders' feedback on the proposed recommendations for updating the patented medicine prices review board (pmprb) budget impact analysis guidelines

INTRODUCTION

The present study aimed to obtain Canadian stakeholders' feedback on a list of proposed recommendations for updating the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB)'s 2007 budget impact analysis (BIA) guidelines.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study was designed to obtain feedback from two stakeholder perspectives-(public and private) payers and manufacturers-on the proposed BIA recommendations. We obtained policymakers' opinion through one-on-one interviews and collected feedback from manufacturers and their consultants using a survey. The interview guide and the survey were developed based on the list of recommendations related to BIA key elements, which were either not discussed or addressed differently in the PMPRB 2007 BIA guidelines. The list was derived from 16 Canadian or other national and transnational BIA guidelines. A thematic analysis was applied for analysis of the qualitative (interview) data.

RESULTS

Thirty-five policymakers and manufacturers participated in the study. Stakeholders supported the inclusion of 56% of the proposed recommendations into the guidelines pertaining to the use of expert opinions, data extrapolated from the payers' database, scenario analysis, and dynamic population. Inclusion of indirect costs, and cost transfers from other jurisdictions, were not approved. There was no consensus regarding the inclusion of patients' adherence/compliance and cost offsets.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study has provided sufficient insights to enable the creation of a penultimate version for updating the PMPRB BIA guidelines. This penultimate version will be subject to a broader consultation among stakeholders prior to a final revision and approval. Further Canadian stakeholder feedback is required for reaching consensus on inconclusive recommendations.

A Comparison of Pharmaceutical Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) Recommendations Amongst the Canadian Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB), Public and Private Payers

The Canadian budget impact analysis (BIA) guidelines were published by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) in 2007. Some Canadian federal, provincial and territorial (F/P/T) drug plans have updated their BIA guidelines since then. The aim of the present review was to provide a comprehensive list of the key BIA recommendations from the various Canadian F/P/T drug plans and private payers and to highlight the differences between those guidelines and the recommendations that were in the Canadian PMPRB 2007 BIA guidelines. We searched the websites of fifteen F/P/T public drug benefit programs including the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) and Non-Insured Health Benefits Program (NIHBP) and five private payers' websites. An Excel-based data abstraction form was designed to highlight differences between recommendations relating to the BIA key elements made by different guidelines. Eight BIA guidelines (PMPRB 2007, Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, CADTH, and Medavie Blue Cross) were identified and reviewed, and a comprehensive list of recommendations was abstracted. Recommendations were similar to the 2007 guidelines in terms of time horizon duration, comparators, target population assessment and use of direct drug costs in BIAs. Differences were mostly related to actual acquisition cost, such as whether or not to include markups and dispensing fees, the patients' perspective, cost of supplies, cost of health care utilization, and scenario analysis. The recommendations that were not included in the PMPRB 2007 guidelines but were included in at least one of the Canadian F/P/T or private guidelines were related to the inclusion of the patients' perspective (i.e., co-payment), the costing, the handling of uncertainty and the reporting format. The present study is a comparative review of recommendations between the Canadian PMPRB 2007 guidelines and the F/P/T or private payers' BIA guidelines, and provides a most up-to-date list of recommendations for revising the Canadian BIA guidelines, with applicability for both public and private plan new drug submissions in Canada.

A methodological review of national and transnational pharmaceutical budget impact analysis guidelines for new drug submissions

INTRODUCTION

Budget impact analysis (BIA) in health care, sometimes referred to as resource impact, is the financial change in the use of health resources associated with adding a new drug to a formulary or the adoption of a new health technology. Several national and transnational organizations worldwide have updated their BIA guidelines in the past 4 years. The aim of the present review was to provide a comprehensive list of the key recommendations of BIA guidelines from different countries that may be of interest for those who wish to build or to update BIA guidelines.

METHODS

National and transnational BIA guidelines were searched in databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, EconLit, CINAHL, Business Source Premier, HealthSTAR, and the gray literature including regulatory agency websites. Data were reviewed and abstracted based on key elements in a standard BIA model (analytical model structure, input and data sources, and reporting format).

RESULTS

Eight national (Australia, UK, Belgium, Ireland, France, Poland, Brazil, and Canada) and one transnational (International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research) BIA guidelines were included in this review, and a comprehensive list of BIA recommendations was identified. The review showed that certain recommendations such as patient population assessment, drug-related direct costs, discounting, and disaggregated results were common across the various jurisdictions. BIA guidelines differed from each other in terms of the number and scope of recommendations, the terminology used (eg, the definition of comparators or cost offsets) and the direction of the recommendations (ie, to include or not to include with respect to such items as off-label indications, indirect costs, clinical outcomes, and resource utilization).

CONCLUSION

While there was a common purpose for all of the BIA guidelines that were identified, substantial differences did occur in the specific recommendations. The pharmaceutical financing system structure might explain why guidelines from the UK, Australia, and Canada have more country-specific recommendations. The desire to be consistent with adopted economic evaluation assumptions might be another reason for some observed differences between countries. Further research is required to assess the source of the heterogeneity between BIA recommendations are identified in different guidelines.

Budget Impact Analysis of a Pharmacist-Provided Transition of Care Program

BACKGROUND

Postdischarge medication management services have been shown to reduce the incidence of medication-related problems during the transition from inpatient to outpatient care. A pharmacist-run transition of care (TOC) program has been developed to reduce the unplanned readmissions of a high-risk managed Medicaid population after hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the budget impact of adding an outpatient pharmacy-based TOC program to a medical benefit from the payer perspective.

METHODS

A budget impact analysis was conducted using a decision-tree model developed in Microsoft Excel. The effect on inpatient and total health care costs from the payer perspective was estimated for the 2-year period following initial hospital discharge. Inputs were based on a total plan population of 240,000 lives, with a high-risk population of 7.5%, of whom 37% were hospitalized and potentially qualified for TOC services, resulting in an eligible population of 6,660 patients. The TOC program was assumed to initially cover 30% of the eligible population, with expansion to 60% over the 2 years. We previously reported that this program reduced the risk of readmission by 32% within 6 months and saved the health plan $2,139 per patient referred to the program, inclusive of program cost, compared with patients receiving usual discharge care. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the impact of uncertainty of model inputs on the results, with the cost of TOC services ranging from $99 to $2,000 per patient referred.

RESULTS

The model showed that the TOC program was cost saving at over $3 per member per month in the first 6 months, which translates to over $25 million in total health care cost savings over 2 years. These results were primarily driven by the estimated reduction in inpatient costs associated with the program, which were estimated at $20 million over the 2 years. Sensitivity analyses illustrated that within all the reasonable ranges of model input parameters, including the upper limit of TOC services set to $2,000 per patient referred, the TOC program resulted in cost savings to the health plan.

CONCLUSIONS

The TOC program resulted in potential cost savings of over $25 million to the managed Medicaid plan over a period of 2 years, corresponding to over $4 per member per month.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was contributed by the Komoto Family Foundation, which provided fellowships to Ni and McCombs during the time of this study. Colayco is employed by Synergy Pharmacy Solutions and by the Komoto Family Foundation. Hashimoto and Komoto are employed by Synergy Pharmacy Solutions. Gowda and Wearda report no relationship or financial interest with any entity that would pose a conflict of interest with the subject matter of this article. Study concept and design were contributed by Ni, Colayco, and McCombs, along with the other authors. Hashimoto, Komoto, and Wearda took the lead in data collection, assisted by Ni, Colayco, and Gowda. Data interpretation was performed by Ni, Colayco, and McCombs, along with the other authors. The manuscript was written by Ni and Colayco and revised by Gowda and McCombs, along with the other authors.

The French National Authority for Health (HAS) Guidelines for Conducting Budget Impact Analyses (BIA)

BACKGROUND

Budget impact analysis (BIA) provides short- and medium-term estimates on changes in budgets and health outcomes resulting from the adoption of new health interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to present the newly developed French National Authority for Health (HAS) guidelines on budget impact analysis as follows: process, literature review, recommendations and comparisons with other guidelines.

METHODS

The development process of the HAS guidelines included a literature review (search dates: January 2000 to June 2016), a retrospective investigation of BIA previously submitted to HAS, a public consultation, international expert reviews and approval from the HAS Board and the Economic and Public Health Evaluation Committee of HAS.

RESULTS

Documents identified in the literature review included 12 national guidelines, 5 recommendations for good practices developed by national and international society of health economics and 14 methodological publications including recommendations for conducting BIA. Based on its research findings, HAS developed its first BIA guidelines, which include recommendations on the following topics: BIA definition, perspective, populations, time horizon, compared scenarios, budget impact models, costing, discounting, choice of clinical data, reporting of results and uncertainty exploration.

CONCLUSION

It is expected that the HAS BIA guidelines will enhance the usefulness, quality and transparency of BIA submitted by drug manufacturers to HAS. BIA is becoming an essential part of a comprehensive economic assessment of healthcare interventions in France, which also includes cost-effectiveness analysis and equity of access to healthcare.

Towards a Transparent, Credible, Evidence-Based Decision-Making Process of New Drug Listing on the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Drug Formulary: Challenges and Suggestions

The aim of this article is to describe the process, evaluation criteria, and possible outcomes of decision-making for new drugs listed in the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Drug Formulary in comparison to the health technology assessment (HTA) policy overseas. Details of decision-making processes including the new drug listing submission, Drug Advisory Committee (DAC) meeting, and procedures prior to and following the meeting, were extracted from the official Hong Kong Hospital Authority drug formulary management website and manual. Publicly-available information related to the new drug decision-making process for five HTA agencies [the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), the Australia Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), and the New Zealand Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC)] were reviewed and retrieved from official documents from public domains. The DAC is in charge of systemically and critically appraising new drugs before they are listed on the formulary, reviewing submitted applications, and making the decision to list the drug based on scientific evidence to which safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness are the primary considerations. When compared with other HTA agencies, transparency of the decision-making process of the DAC, the relevance of clinical and health economic evidence, and the lack of health economic and methodological input of submissions are the major challenges to the new-drug listing policy in Hong Kong. Despite these challenges, this review provides suggestions for the establishment of a more transparent, credible, and evidence-based decision-making process in the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Drug Formulary. Proposals for improvement in the listing of new drugs in the formulary should be a priority of healthcare reforms.

When cost-effective interventions are unaffordable: Integrating cost-effectiveness and budget impact in priority setting for global health programs

Potential cost-effective barriers in cost-effectiveness studies mean that budgetary impact analyses should also be included in post-2015 Sustainable Development Goal projects says Joshua Salomon and colleagues.

A Methodological Review of US Budget-Impact Models for New Drugs

A budget-impact analysis is required by many jurisdictions when adding a new drug to the formulary. However, previous reviews have indicated that adherence to methodological guidelines is variable. In this methodological review, we assess the extent to which US budget-impact analyses for new drugs use recommended practices. We describe recommended practice for seven key elements in the design of a budget-impact analysis. Targeted literature searches for US studies reporting estimates of the budget impact of a new drug were performed and we prepared a summary of how each study addressed the seven key elements. The primary finding from this review is that recommended practice is not followed in many budget-impact analyses. For example, we found that growth in the treated population size and/or changes in disease-related costs expected during the model time horizon for more effective treatments was not included in several analyses for chronic conditions. In addition, all drug-related costs were not captured in the majority of the models. Finally, for most studies, one-way sensitivity and scenario analyses were very limited, and the ranges used in one-way sensitivity analyses were frequently arbitrary percentages rather than being data driven. The conclusions from our review are that changes in population size, disease severity mix, and/or disease-related costs should be properly accounted for to avoid over- or underestimating the budget impact. Since each budget holder might have different perspectives and different values for many of the input parameters, it is also critical for published budget-impact analyses to include extensive sensitivity and scenario analyses based on realistic input values.

Rapid diagnostic test for G6PD deficiency in Plasmodium vivax-infected men: a budget impact analysis based in Brazilian Amazon

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the incremental budget impact (IBI) of a rapid diagnostic test to detect G6PDd in male patients infected with Plasmodium vivax in the Brazilian Amazon, as compared with the routine protocol recommended in Brazil which does not include G6PDd testing.

METHODS

The budget impact analysis was performed from the perspective of the Brazilian health system, in the Brazilian Amazon for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015. The analysis used a decision model to compare two scenarios: the first consisting of the routine recommended in Brazil which does not include prior diagnosis of dG6PD, and the second based on the use of RDT CareStart™ G6PD (CS-G6PD) in all male subjects diagnosed with vivax malaria. The expected implementation of the diagnostic test was 30% in the first year, 70% the second year and 100% in the third year.

RESULTS

The analysis identified negative IBIs which were progressively smaller in the 3 years evaluated. The sensitivity analysis showed that the uncertainties associated with the analytical model did not significantly affect the results.

CONCLUSION

A strategy based on the use of CS-G6PD would result in better use of public resources in the Brazilian Amazon.

Factors associated with the diffusion rate of innovations: a pilot study from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified National Health System

Budget Impact Analyses require a set of essential information on health technology innovation, including expected rates of adoption. There is an absence of studies investigating trends, magnitude of budgetary effects and determinants of diffusion rates for health technology innovations worldwide during the last decades. The present study proposes a pilot assessment on main determinants influencing diffusion rates of pharmaceutical innovations within the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). Data from the Brazilian Health Informatics Department (DATASUS) was gathered to establish the main determinants of diffusion rates of health technology innovations in Brazil, specifically referring to pharmaceutical innovations incorporated in the Brazilian Program for Specialized Pharmaceutical Services (CEAF) at SUS. Information was retrieved on DATASUS relating to patients who had used one of the medicines incorporated into CEAF at least three years prior to the beginning of the study (2015) for treatment of each health condition available. Thus, data from patients adopting 10 different medicines were analyzed in the study. Results from the zero-one inflated beta model showed a higher influence on diffusion rates of pharmaceutical innovations due to: number of pharmaceutical competitors for treatment of the same disease available at CEAF (negative); medicine used in combination with other medication (positive); and innovative medicine within the SUS (positive). Further research on diffusion rates of health technology innovations is required, including wider scope of diseases and medications, potential confusion factors and other variables that may influence rates of adoption in different health systems.

Assessing the Value of New Treatments for Hepatitis C: Are International Decision Makers Getting this Right?

Health systems worldwide are facing difficult choices about the use of a series of highly effective but costly new treatments for hepatitis C. In this paper we discuss how the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England and Wales, the Common Drug Review in Canada and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) in Australia have approached the appraisal of these drugs. We argue that with the exception of the PBAC, assessments of the new drugs have not adequately accounted for their large financial burden. Given the potential health system impact of reimbursing these drugs, the use of lower cost-effectiveness thresholds should be considered. None of the decision-making processes included a comparison of the full range of treatment pathways. In particular, comparisons of using the new drugs as first- versus second-line drugs were omitted from all appraisals, as were comparisons with delayed treatment strategies whereby treatment is withheld until more severe disease stages. Omission of comparators leads to inaccurate estimates of cost effectiveness and potentially sub-optimal decision making. Lessons learned from these appraisals should be considered in future appraisals, particularly the upcoming assessments of the 'blockbuster' PCSK9 inhibitors for hypercholesterolaemia.

Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications

This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001-2015 on 'budget impact analysis' with 'drug' interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, and their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1,984 studies, 92 were subsequently identified for review. Of these, 95% were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16%) with a decline thereafter. 48% met up to 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22% stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions.

Diabetic retinopathy screening with pharmacy-based teleophthalmology in a semiurban setting: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetic eye complications are the leading cause of visual loss among working-aged people. Pharmacy-based teleophthalmology has emerged as a possible alternative to in-person examination that may facilitate compliance with evidence-based recommendations and reduce barriers to specialized eye care. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of mobile teleophthalmology screening compared with in-person examination (primary care) for the diabetic population residing in semiurban areas of southwestern Ontario.

METHODS

A decision tree was constructed to compare in-person examination (comparator program) versus pharmacy-based teleophthalmology (intervention program). The economic model was designed to identify patients with more than minimal diabetic retinopathy, manifested by at least 1 microaneurysm at examination (modified Airlie House classification grade of ≥ 20). Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per case detected (true-positive result) and cost per case correctly diagnosed (including true-positive and true-negative results).

RESULTS

The cost per case detected was $510 with in-person examination and $478 with teleophthalmology, and the cost per case correctly diagnosed was $107 and $102 respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $314 per additional case detected and $73 per additional case correctly diagnosed. Use of pharmacologic dilation and health care specialists' fees were the most important cost drivers.

INTERPRETATION

The study showed that a compound teleophthalmology program in a semiurban community would be more effective but more costly than in-person examination. The findings raise the question of whether the benefits of pharmacy-based teleophthalmology in semiurban areas, where in-person examination is still available, are equivalent to those observed in remote communities. Further study is needed to investigate the impact of this program on the prevention of severe vision loss and quality of life in a semiurban setting.

Budget impact from the incorporation of positron emission tomography - computed tomography for staging lung cancers

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the budget impact from the incorporation of positron emission tomography (PET) in mediastinal and distant staging of non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

The estimates were calculated by the epidemiological method for years 2014 to 2018. Nation-wide data were used about the incidence; data on distribution of the disease´s prevalence and on the technologies’ accuracy were from the literature; data regarding involved costs were taken from a micro-costing study and from Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) database. Two strategies for using PET were analyzed: the offer to all newly-diagnosed patients, and the restricted offer to the ones who had negative results in previous computed tomography (CT) exams. Univariate and extreme scenarios sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the influence from sources of uncertainties in the parameters used.

RESULTS

The incorporation of PET-CT in SUS would imply the need for additional resources of 158.1 BRL (98.2 USD) million for the restricted offer and 202.7 BRL (125.9 USD) million for the inclusive offer in five years, with a difference of 44.6 BRL (27.7 USD) million between the two offer strategies within that period. In absolute terms, the total budget impact from its incorporation in SUS, in five years, would be 555 BRL (345 USD) and 600 BRL (372.8 USD) million, respectively. The costs from the PET-CT procedure were the most influential parameter in the results. In the most optimistic scenario, the additional budget impact would be reduced to 86.9 BRL (54 USD) and 103.8 BRL (64.5 USD) million, considering PET-CT for negative CT and PET-CT for all, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The incorporation of PET in the clinical staging of non-small cell lung cancer seems to be financially feasible considering the high budget of the Brazilian Ministry of Health. The potential reduction in the number of unnecessary surgeries may cause the available resources to be more efficiently allocated.

Economic Value of Improved Accuracy for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Devices for Type 1 Diabetes in Canada

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to simulate and compare clinical and economic outcomes of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) devices along error ranges and strip price.

METHODS

We programmed a type 1 diabetes natural history and treatment cost-effectiveness model. In phase 1, using past evidence from in silico modeling validated by the Food and Drug Administration, we associated changes in SMBG error to changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and separately, changes in severe hypoglycemia requiring an inpatient stay. In phase 2, using Markov cohort simulation modeling, we estimated clinical and economic outcomes from the Canadian payer perspective. The primary comparison was a SMBG device with strip price $0.73 Canadian dollars (CAD) and 10% error (exceeding accuracy requirements by International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2013) versus a SMBG device with strip price $0.60 CAD and 15% error (accuracy meeting ISO 15197:2013). Outcomes for the average patient, were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and budget impact.

RESULTS

Assuming benefits translate into HbA1c improvements only, the ICER with 10% error versus 15% was $11 500 CAD per QALY. Assuming the benefits translate into reduced severe hypoglycemia requiring an inpatient stay only, an SMBG device with 10% error dominated (ie, less costly, more effective) an SMBG device with 15% error. The 3-year budget impact findings ranged from $0.004 CAD per member per month for HbA1c improvements to cost-savings for severe hypoglycemia reductions.

CONCLUSIONS

From efficiency (cost-effectiveness) and affordability (budget impact) payer perspectives, investing in devices with improved accuracy (less error) appears to be an efficient and affordable strategy.

Economic impact of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in Finnish adults ≥50 years with underlying chronic medical conditions

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPD) are associated with substantial burden in adults (≥50 years). Moreover, adults with vascular, metabolic or respiratory diseases have been shown to have a 3-6 times higher risk of IPD when compared with their healthy controls. These persons at higher risk are likely to benefit most from pneumococcal vaccinations. The 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) was recently introduced to prevent the 13 most prevalent serotypes causing invasive pneumococcal disease in adults. The objective of this study was to estimate the expected 5-year economic impact of targeted PCV13 vaccination compared with no vaccination in Finnish adults (≥50 years) at moderate or high risk for IPD.

METHODS

A budget impact model was developed to predict the impact of PCV13 vaccination in terms of the costs and IPD events avoided for years 2012-2016.

RESULTS

Approximately 35% of the 2.2 million Finns over 50 years of age can be considered to be at moderate or high risk for IPD because of underlying chronic medical conditions. Vaccination of these people with PCV13 could provide an estimated net budget savings of about €218 million compared with the current no-vaccination situation over the next 5 years. Among the risk groups considered, the largest absolute net savings (€66.2 million) could be expected to be obtained by vaccinating people with heart disease, due to its high prevalence in the target population.

CONCLUSION

In Finland, the immunization with PCV13 vaccine, of adults (≥50 years) at moderate and high risk of IPD, is estimated to lead to substantial cost savings in the 5 years after vaccination.

A critical systematic review of budget impact analyses on drugs in the EU countries

BACKGROUND

Budget impact analysis (BIA) is a relatively recent technique that is supposed to be complementary to more established economic evaluations (EEs).

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the BIAs published on drugs in the EU since December 2008, to assess whether these studies have improved in quality in the last few years.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on the international databases PubMed and EMBASE. The selected articles were screened using a two-step approach to assess (1) their main methodological characteristics and (2) the level of adherence to the latest BIA definition. The assessment was made by two independent reviewers and any disagreement was resolved through discussion.

RESULTS

Eventually, 17 articles were reviewed. Thirteen referred to a stand-alone BIA not accompanying a full EE, only nine focussed on a new treatment, 15 were sponsored by the manufacturer of the drug of reference, all but one claiming savings for healthcare budgets. The quality of methods was poor in many of the studies, and only a few of them attempted to estimate real local costs in a credible way. Therefore, the crucial items that in theory make a BIA different from other types of EEs were often the major points of weakness of the studies reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review confirmed that the BIA is not yet a well-established technique in the literature and many published studies still fail to reach an acceptable quality. In particular, BIAs funded by pharmaceutical companies appear to be tailored to show short-term savings induced by new, highly priced products.

Budget impact analysis of conversion from cyclosporine to sirolimus as immunosuppressive medication in renal transplantation therapy

Objectives

The aim of this study was to determine budget impact of conversion from cyclosporine (CsA) to sirolimus (SRL) in renal transplant therapy (RTT) from the perspective of insurance organizations in Iran.

Methods

An Excel-based model was developed to determine cost of RTT, comparing current CsA based therapy to an mTOR inhibitor-based therapy regimen. Total cost included both cost of immunosuppressive agents and relative adverse events. The inputs were derived from database of Ministry of Health and insurance organizations, hospital and pharmacy based registries, and available literature that were varied through a one-way sensitivity analysis. According to the model, there were almost 17,000 patients receiving RTT in Iran, out of which about 2,200 patients underwent the operation within the study year. The model was constructed based on the results of a local RCT, in which test and control groups received CsA, SRL, and steroids over the first 3 months posttransplantation and, from the fourth month on, CsA, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and steroids were used in the CsA group and SRL, MMF, and steroids were administered in the SRL group, respectively.

Results

The estimated cost of RTT with CsA was US$4,850,000 versus US$4,300,000 receiving SRL. These costs corresponded to the cost saving of almost US$550,000 for the payers.

Conclusion

To evaluate the financial consequence of adding mTOR inhibitors to the insurers’ formulary, in the present study, a budget impact analysis was conducted on sirolimus. Fewer cases of costly adverse events along with lower required doses of MMF related to SRL based therapies were major reasons for this saving budgetary impact.

[Guidelines for budget impact analysis of health technologies in Brazil]

Budget impact analysis (BIA) provides operational financial forecasts to implement new technologies in healthcare systems. There were no previous specific recommendations to conduct such analyses in Brazil. This paper reviews BIA methods for health technologies and proposes BIA guidelines for the public and private Brazilian healthcare system. The following recommendations were made: adopt the budget administrator's perspective; use a timeframe of 1 to 5 years; compare reference and alternative scenarios; consider the technology's rate of incorporation; estimate the target population by either an epidemiological approach or measured demand; consider restrictions on technologies' indication or factors that increase the demand for them; consider direct and averted costs; do not adjust for inflation or discounts; preferably, integrate information on a spreadsheet; calculate the incremental budget impact between scenarios; and summarize information in a budget impact report.

The use of pharmacoeconomic evidence to support formulary decision making in Saudi Arabia: Methodological recommendations

In pharmacoeconomics the costs and consequences of alternative medications are compared. Many countries have begun to use pharmacoeconomic evidence to support decisions on licensing, pricing, reimbursement, or addition to the formulary. In Saudi Arabia, it is not mandatory to submit cost effectiveness evidence to support licensing or addition to the formulary decisions however, data will be considered if submitted. Previous evidence suggests that the use of pharmacoeconomic evidence by Saudi Pharmacy and Therapeutic (P&T) committee members in formulary decisions making process is limited mainly because of lack of expertise and lack of resources. This paper intended to provide Saudi P&T decision makers with a clear set of best practice methodological recommendations to help in increasing the utilisation of pharmacoeconomic evidence in the formulary decisions making process.

Incorporation of economic evidence in the Dutch guideline 'cardiovascular risk management'

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The consideration of economic evidence in guideline development may be particularly important in health care management when different (drug) therapies show similar efficacy on clinical endpoints, such as in cardiovascular diseases. This article investigates to what extent the Dutch guideline 'cardiovascular risk management' (2006) considers cost-effectiveness and budget impact according to the most recent economic evidence.

METHOD

We carried out a systematic review of economic evaluations on cholesterol-lowering drugs and antihypertensives followed by an assessment of guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline does not consider the most recent economic evidence but does consider cost-effectiveness based on economic evaluations performed in conjunction with clinical trials. Their conclusions are largely in agreement with the most recent economic evidence. An innovative aspect in the guideline is the application of a budget impact analysis to take accessibility and affordability constraints into account when considering cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the most recent economic evidence, the guideline could be improved by more firmly formulating recommendations in favour of cost-effective drug therapies (simvastatin, pravastatin and low-dose diuretics) to stimulate compliance to the guideline in clinical practice.

Health economic consequences of reducing salt intake and replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat in the adult Finnish population: estimates based on the FINRISK and FINDIET studies

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To predict the health economic consequences of modest reductions in the daily intake of salt (-1.0 g per day) and replacement of saturated fat (SFA, -1.0 energy percent (E%)) with polyunsaturated fat (PUFA, +1.0 E%) in the Finnish population aged 30-74 years.

SUBJECTS/METHODS

A Markov model with dynamic population structure was constructed to present the natural history of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) based on the most current information about the age- and sex-specific cardiovascular risk factors, dietary habits and nutrient intake. To predict the undiscounted future health economic consequences of the reduction of dietary salt and SFA, the model results were extrapolated for the years 2010-2030 by replacing the baseline population in the year 2007 with the extrapolated populations from the official Finnish statistics. Finnish costs (€2009, societal perspective) and EQ-5D utilities were obtained from published references.

RESULTS

During the next 20 years, a population-wide intervention directed at salt intake and dietary fat quality could potentially lead to 8000-13,000 prevented CVD cases among the Finnish adults compared the situation in year 2007. In addition, the reduced incidence of CVDs could gain 26,000-45,000 quality-adjusted life years and save €150-225 million over the same time period.

CONCLUSION

A modest reduction of salt and replacement of SFA with PUFA in food products can significantly reduce the burden of CVD in the adult Finnish population. This impact may be even larger in the near future due to the ageing of Finnish population.

Protocol for an economic evaluation alongside the University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial: cost-effectiveness of education and activation, a rehabilitation program, and the legislated standard of care for acute whiplash injury in Ontario

Background

Whiplash injury affects 83% of persons in a traffic collision and leads to whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). A major challenge facing health care decision makers is identifying cost-effective interventions due to lack of economic evidence. Our objective is to compare the cost-effectiveness of: 1) physician-based education and activation, 2) a rehabilitation program developed by Aviva Canada (a group of property and casualty insurance providers), and 3) the legislated standard of care in the Canadian province of Ontario: the Pre-approved Framework Guideline for Whiplash developed by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.

Methods/Design

The economic evaluation will use participant-level data from the University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial and will be conducted from the societal perspective over the trial's one-year follow-up. Resource use (costs) will include all health care goods and services, and benefits provided during the trial's 1-year follow-up. The primary health effect will be the quality-adjusted life year. We will identify the most cost-effective intervention using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and incremental net-benefit. Confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will represent uncertainty around these statistics, respectively. A budget impact analysis will assess the total annual impact of replacing the current legislated standard of care with each of the other interventions. An expected value of perfect information will determine the maximum research expenditure Canadian society should be willing to pay for, and inform priority setting in, research of WAD management.

Discussion

Results will provide health care decision makers with much needed economic evidence on common interventions for acute whiplash management.

Trial Registration

http://ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00546806 [Trial registry date: October 18, 2007; Date first patient was randomized: February 27, 2008]

[Fixed drug combinations in hypertension: a budget impact analysis for the Spanish Health System on the marketing of a fixed combination of olmesartan/amlodipine]

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a budget impact analysis (BIA) of olmesartan/amlodipine (20/5, 40/5 and 40/10mg) marketed as a fixed combination (FC) in its approved indication for the National Health System (NHS).

DESIG

We developed a decision tree model in order to estimate usual hypertension treatment algorithm in Spanish clinical practice.

SETTINGS

The BIA has been developed from the perspective of the NHS for a period of 3 years (years 2010-2012).

PARTICIPANTS

Spanish hypertensive population ≥ 35 years old.

INTERVENTIONS

Introduction into the market of a fixed combination (FC) olmesartan/amlodipine in Spain.

PRIMARY MEASURES

Expected costs to be assumed by the Spanish NHS (RRP-VAT) for hypertensive population able to be treated with the FC versus currently assumed costs by the NHS with free combination olmesartan and amlodipine.

RESULTS

Estimated pharmaceutical costs in hypertensive population treated with olmesartan and amlodipine (2 pills) would be €25.2M (1(st) year), €26.4M (2011), €27.6M (2012), with a total 3-year period of €79.2M. According to patient tree model, the population able to be treated with FC would be 71,283 patients (2010), with a growth rate of 4.8% in the successive years, which supposes an annual cost of €21.2M (2010), €21.8M (2011) and €22.4M (2012), with a total 3-year period of €65.4M. The BIA shows savings of €13.8M in a total 3-year period.

CONCLUSION

The BIA of FC olmesartan/amlodipine could generate net savings of €13.8M for the NHS in the period ranging from years 2010 to 2012.

Empirically evaluating decision-analytic models

OBJECTIVES

Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses support decision-making. To augment model credibility, evaluation via comparison to independent, empirical studies is recommended.

METHODS

We developed a structured reporting format for model evaluation and conducted a structured literature review to characterize current model evaluation recommendations and practices. As an illustration, we applied the reporting format to evaluate a microsimulation of human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. The model's outputs and uncertainty ranges were compared with multiple outcomes from a study of long-term progression from high-grade precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN]) to cancer. Outcomes included 5 to 30-year cumulative cancer risk among women with and without appropriate CIN treatment. Consistency was measured by model ranges overlapping study confidence intervals.

RESULTS

The structured reporting format included: matching baseline characteristics and follow-up, reporting model and study uncertainty, and stating metrics of consistency for model and study results. Structured searches yielded 2963 articles with 67 meeting inclusion criteria and found variation in how current model evaluations are reported. Evaluation of the cervical cancer microsimulation, reported using the proposed format, showed a modeled cumulative risk of invasive cancer for inadequately treated women of 39.6% (30.9-49.7) at 30 years, compared with the study: 37.5% (28.4-48.3). For appropriately treated women, modeled risks were 1.0% (0.7-1.3) at 30 years, study: 1.5% (0.4-3.3).

CONCLUSIONS

To support external and projective validity, cost-effectiveness models should be iteratively evaluated as new studies become available, with reporting standardized to facilitate assessment. Such evaluations are particularly relevant for models used to conduct comparative effectiveness analyses.

Health and economic impact of rotavirus vaccination in GAVI-eligible countries

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus infection is responsible for about 500,000 deaths annually, and the disease burden is disproportionately borne by children in low-income countries. Recently the World Health Organization (WHO) has released a global recommendation that all countries include infant rotavirus vaccination in their national immunization programs. Our objective was to provide information on the expected health, economic and financial consequences of rotavirus vaccines in the 72 GAVI support-eligible countries.

METHODS

We synthesized population-level data from various sources (primarily from global-level databases) for the 72 countries eligible for the support by the GAVI Alliance (GAVI-eligible countries) in order to estimate the health and economic impact associated with rotavirus vaccination programs. The primary outcome measure was incremental cost (in 2005 international dollars [I$]) per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. We also projected the expected reduction in rotavirus disease burden and financial resources required associated with a variety of scale-up scenarios.

RESULTS

Under the base-case assumptions (70% coverage), vaccinating one single birth cohort would prevent about 55% of rotavirus associated deaths in the 72 GAVI-eligible countries. Assuming I$25 per vaccinated child (approximately $5 per dose), the number of countries with the incremental cost per DALY averted less than I$200 was 47. Using the WHO's cost-effectiveness threshold based on per capita GDP, the vaccines were considered cost-effective in 68 of the 72 countries (approximately 94%). A 10-year routine rotavirus vaccination would prevent 0.9-2.8 million rotavirus associated deaths among children under age 5 in the poorest parts of the world, depending on vaccine scale-up scenarios. Over the same intervention period, rotavirus vaccination programs would also prevent 4.5-13.3 million estimated cases of hospitalization and 41-107 million cases of outpatient clinic visits in the same population.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that rotavirus vaccination would be considered a worthwhile investment for improving general development as well as childhood health level in most low-income countries, with a favorable cost-effectiveness profile even under a vaccine price ($1.5-$5.0 per dose) higher than those of traditional childhood vaccines.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Ireland: a review of the process

To describe the pharmacoeconomic assessment process in Ireland and to provide examples of recent appraisals and the subsequent impact on pricing and reimbursement decisions. The pharmacoeconomic appraisals conducted by the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) between September 2006 and February 2009 were reviewed. The NCPE recommendations and subsequent reimbursement decisions by the Health Service Executive (HSE) were recorded. Recommendations made by the NCPE were compared with those of UK agencies. The duration of the NCPE pharmacoeconomic process and the time from marketing authorization to reimbursement was estimated. The budget impact assessments from the pharmaceutical companies were reviewed and compared for consistency. The NCPE conducted 12 single technology appraisals during the study period. Eight of the medicines assessed were either recommended as a cost-effective use of resources or recommended with certain restrictions, and were funded by the HSE. Of the four medicines that were not considered cost effective, two were reimbursed after a price reduction was negotiated and the remaining two were not. The NCPE recommendations concurred with those of the UK agencies for the majority of appraisals, with the exception of sunitinib and lapatinib. The average duration of the NCPE process was 2.7 months. The average time from marketing authorization to reimbursement was 7 months. The review of budget impact assessments highlighted a high degree of variability between submissions. The findings of this review highlight the efficiency of the pharmacoeconomic process and the acceptance of the NCPE recommendations by the HSE for pricing and reimbursement decisions. NCPE recommendations broadly concurred with those of UK agencies for the majority of appraisals.

Global spending on orphan drugs in France, Germany, the UK, Italy and Spain during 2007

BACKGROUND

Orphan drugs are indicated for the treatment of rare diseases which, in the EU, are defined as those with a prevalence of <5 per 10000 inhabitants. Characteristically, these diseases negatively affect health-related quality of life and may be life threatening. The EU has passed legislation to encourage pharmaceutical companies to invest in research programmes into rare diseases, with the aim of developing new, safe and effective orphan drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the status of orphan drugs in five countries in the EU (France, Germany, the UK, Italy and Spain), estimate the mean annual cost per patient and indication of these orphan drugs, and determine the associated cost of these drugs in comparison with overall spending on drugs in each country (year 2007 values).

METHODS

The analysis was limited solely to costs of orphan drugs with sales data available for 2007. The mean annual cost per patient was estimated using recommended regimens for maintenance dose and duration from the summary of product characteristics. Likewise, the ratio between annual costs per patient for treatment of each disease and its prevalence was calculated. Sales data were available for at least one of the countries studied for 38 of the 44 orphan drugs authorized by the European Medicines Agency. Only 21 products had data available for all five countries studied.

RESULTS

Germany was the country with access to the largest number of orphan drugs (36), followed by the UK (34), Spain (28), France (27) and Italy (25). The mean annual cost per patient and indication of the 38 orphan drugs on the market ranged widely from €331 to €337,501. It appears that orphan drugs indicated to treat diseases with a prevalence of <2 per 10000 inhabitants have higher annual per-patient costs than those indicated to treat diseases with a higher prevalence. The percentage of total drug spending accounted for by orphan drugs in 2007 was 1.7% in France, 2.1% in Germany, 1.0% in the UK, 1.5% in Italy and 2.0% in Spain, with an average overall percentage of 1.7% for these five countries.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2007, spending on orphan drugs in five European countries was acceptable in terms of the percentage of these countries' overall drug expenditure. Mean annual costs per patient of orphan drugs varied widely, with costs being related to the prevalence of the disease for which the product is indicated.

Budget-impact analyses: a critical review of published studies

This article reviews budget-impact analyses (BIAs) published to date in peer-reviewed bio-medical journals with reference to current best practice, and discusses where future research needs to be directed. Published BIAs were identified by conducting a computerized search on PubMed using the search term 'budget impact analysis'. The years covered by the search included January 2000 through November 2008. Only studies (i) named by authors as BIAs and (ii) predicting financial consequences of adoption and diffusion of a new health intervention(s) within a specific healthcare setting were included. Relevant studies were evaluated according to the checklist that focuses on issues unique to BIA, highlighting areas of agreement or dissent between published studies and methodological guidelines. A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria, the majority published in 2007-8. Of these, 41% were from the US, 54% were prepared for pharmaceuticals and 65% had BIA as their main aim. The published BIAs were heterogeneous in respect of methods for deriving budget-impact estimates, time horizon and population. There is fairly good agreement between published studies and methodological guidelines within the scope of perspective, comparator, cost included and data sources. Specific issues that need to be addressed and/or improved are reporting format, sensitivity analysis and discounting. The results indicate that, recently, BIAs have appeared more frequently in peer-reviewed journals, providing stimulus to development, validation and dissemination of methods. Many published studies fail to reach the desired quality, but this situation should change with good research practice principles that will help codify and clarify important issues and promote standardization and transparency. Future research needs to be directed to quality assurance of published BIAs and investment in data collection for parameters specific to BIAs.