Economic evaluation and cost-effectiveness thresholds: Signals to firms and implications for R & D investment and innovation

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 27, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 797-806

  Vernon, John A ^a,d   Goldberg, Robert ^b   Golec, Joseph ^c  

^a IL   (United States)

^b Center for Medicine in the Public Interest   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^d Campus Box 7411 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; INVESTMENT; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; INVESTMENTS; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS; RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 70349901230     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11313750-000000000-00000     Document Type: Note

References (40)

1. Vernon JA, Hughen WK, Johnson S. Mathematical modeling and pharmaceutical pricing for in-licensing and developmental go/no-go decisions. Health Care Manage Sci 2005; 8 (2): 167-179 (Pubitemid 40685120)
2. Vernon JA, Johnson S, Hughen K, et al. Economic and developmental considerations for pharmacogenomic technology. Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24 (4): 335-343
3. Neumann PJ, Rosen AB, Weinstein MC. Medicare and cost-effectiveness analysis. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1516-1522
4. Neumann PJ. Why don't Americans use cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Manag Care 2004; 10 (5): 308-312 (Pubitemid 38623521)
5. Orszag PR. The long-term budget outlook and options for slowing the growth of health care costs: CBO testimony [online]. Available fromURL: http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=9385&type=0 [Accessed 2009 Aug 28]
6. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [online]. Available from URL: https://www.ecri.org/Documents/CERC/HR1.pdf [Accessed 2009 Aug 28]
7. Baucus Comparative Effectiveness Research Act of 2008: section-by-section overview [online]. Available from URL: http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/leg/ LEG%202008/080108 %20CE%20Section-by-Section.pdf [Accessed 2009 Feb 5]
8. Enthoven AC. The history and principles of managed competition. Health Aff 1993; 12 Suppl.: 24-48
9. Sloan FA, editor. Valuing health care: costs, benefits, and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals and other medical technologies. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 1995
10. Iffe S. Thriving on challenge: NICE's dementia guidelines. Exp Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res 2007; 7 (6): 535-538
11. Kaduszkiewicz H, Zimmermann T, Beck-Bornholdt H-P, et al. Cholinesterase inhibitors for patients with Alzheimer's disease: systematic review of randomised clinical trials. BMJ 2005; 331 (7512): 321-327 (Pubitemid 41113141)
12. No to Alzheimer's drugs: NICE decision. Chem Ind 2006 Oct 16; 20: 8
13. Peters A. No QALY in Germany's cost-effectiveness draft: expert. APM Health Europe [online]. Available from URL: http://www.apmhealtheurope.com/ story.php?mots= REIMBURSEMENT&searchScope=1&searchType=0& depsPage=10&numero=L9389 [Accessed 2009 Jan 22]
14. Giacomini M. How good is good enough? Standards in policy decisions to cover new health technologies. Healthc Policy 2007; 3 (2): 91-101
15. Davis K. Slowing the growth of health care costs: learning from international experience. N Engl J Med 2008 Oct 23; 359 (17): 1751-1755
16. Kennedy I. Appraising the value of innovation and other benefits: a short study for NICE. July 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/ media/98F/ 5C/KennedyStudyFinalReport.pdf [Accessed 2009 Aug 28]
17. Gabb M. Is it time for NICE to revise its threshold? Health Outcomes Communicator 2009 Apr; 39 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.rxcomms.com/ HOC/HOC39web.htm [Accessed 2009 Sep 10]
18. Sculpher MJ. NICE's 2009 methods guide: sensible consolidation or opportunities missed? Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 721-724
19. Drummond MF, SculpherMJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997
20. Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socioecon Plann Sci 1976; 10: 129-136
21. Kingsbury K. The value of a human life: $129 000. Time 2008May 20 [online].Available fromURL: http://www.time. com/time/health/article/0,8599, 1808049,00.html [Accessed 2009 Aug 28]
22. Lee CP, Chertow GM, Zenios SA. An empiric estimate of the value of life: updating the renal dialysis cost-effectiveness standard. Value Health 2009; 12 (1): 80-88
23. Mossialos E, Oliver A. An overview of pharmaceutical policy in four countries: France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Int JHealth Plann Manage 2005; 20: 291-306
24. Jommi C. Pharmaceutical policy and organization of the regulatory authorities in the main EU countries. Milan: Egea Publishing, 2001
25. GoslingH. European pharmacoeconomics: the fourth hurdle global pharmaceutical reports. Dublin: SMi Publishing, 2000
26. Sorenson C, Drummond M, Kanavos P. Ensuring value for money in health care: the role of health technology assessment in the European Union, 2008, European Observatory on HC Systems [online]. Available from URL: http://www.euro.who.int/observatory/ [Accessed 2009 Feb 3]
27. Atkinson T. The global parallel trade outlook 2001-2006: a country-by-country analysis. REUTERS Business Insight, Healthcare, Spring, 2002 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.globalbusinessinsights.com/content/ rbhc0065t.pdf [Accessed 2009 Sep 10]
28. Meenan RT, Feeny D, Labby D, et al. Using health-related quality of life assessments to evaluate care support within Medicaid. Care Manag J 2008; 9 (2): 42-50
29. Jena AB, Philipson T. Cost-effectiveness as a price control. Health Aff (Millwood) 2007 May/June; 26 (3): 696-703
30. Jena AB, Philipson T. Cost-effectiveness analysis and innovation. J Health Econ 2008; 27: 1224-1236
31. Danzon P, Towse A. The economics of gene therapy and pharmacogenetics. Value Health 2002; 5 (1): 5-13
32. Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ 2004; 13 (5): 437-452 (Pubitemid 38660393)
33. Abbott TA, Vernon JA. The cost of US pharmaceutical price regulation: a financial simulation model of R&D decisions. Managerial Decision Econ 2007; 28 (4-5): 293-306
34. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, et al. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making 2000; 20 (3): 332-342 (Pubitemid 30479101)
35. Murphy KM, Topel RH. The economic value of medical research. In: Murphy KM, Topel RH, editors. Measuring the gains from medical research: an economic approach. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 2003
36. McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 733-744
37. National Academy of Science. Medical innovation in the changing healthcare market place. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2002
38. Macher JT, Mowery DC, editors. Innovation in global industries: US firms competing in a new world. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008
39. Hayek FA. The use of knowledge in society. American Econ Rev 1945; 35: 519-530
40. Moran N. Report blames NICE for hastening decline of UK biotech. Nat Biotechnol 2009; 27 (3): 215-217