Historical lifetimes of drugs in England: Application to value of information and cost-effectiveness analyses

Value in Health

Volumn 13, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 885-892

  Hoyle, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness analysis; decision modeling; ICER; technology assessment; time horizon; value of information analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG FORMULARY; DRUG MARKETING; HISTORY; INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 78650131484     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00778.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Danzon P, Kim J,. The life cycle of pharmaceuticals: a cross-national perspective. Whitehall: Office of Health Economics, 2002. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
2. Salomon JA, Weinstein MC, Goldie SJ,. Taking account of future technology in cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ 2004; 329: 733-6.
3. Claxton K,. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999; 18: 324-64.
4. Philips Z, Claxton K, Palmer S, et al. Priority setting for research in health care: an application of value of information analysis to glycoprotein llb/llla antagonists in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2006; 22: 379-87.
5. Claxton K, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, et al. A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment programme. Health Technol Assess 2004; 8: 1-103.
6. Claxton K, Sculpher M,. Using value of information analysis to prioritise health research-some lessons from recent UK experience. Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24: 1055-68.
7. Briggs A, Sculpher M, Claxton K,. Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
8. Stinnett A, Mullahy J,. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998; 18 (Suppl. 2): S68-80.
9. Ades A, Lu G, Claxton K,. Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modeling. Med Decis Making 2004; 24: 207-27.
10. NICE. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2008.
11. Sculpher M, Claxton K, Akehurst R,. It's just evaluation for decision-making: recent developments in, and challenges for, cost-effectiveness research. In:, Smith P, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, eds. Health Policy and Economics: Opportunities and Challenges. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2005.
12. Philips Z, Claxton K, Palmer S,. The half-life of truth: what are appropriate time horizons for research decisions? Med Decis Making 2008; 28: 287-99.
13. Eckermann S, Willan A,. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ 2007; 16: 195-209. (Pubitemid 46206613)
14. Hall J, Platell C,. Half-life of truth in surgical literature. Lancet 1997; 350: 1752.
15. Hoyle M, Anderson R,. Whose costs and benefits? Why economic evaluations should simulate both prevalent and all future incident patient cohorts. Med Decis Making 2010; 30: 426-37.
16. Palmer S, Smith PC,. Incorporating option values into the economic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 2000; 19: 755-66.
17. Department of Health. PCA Prescription Cost Analysis data. 2008. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
18. OFT. The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme. An OFT Market Study. London: Office of Fair Trading, 2007. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
19. NICE. Published Appraisals. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2008. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
20. Ihaka R, Gentleman R,. R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat 1996; 5: 299-314.
21. ISPOR. Country-specific guidelines. Lawrenceville, NJ: International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2008. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
22. Furberg CD, Pitt B,. Withdrawal of cerivastatin from the world market. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med 2001; 2: 205-07.
23. FDA. Voluntary Market Withdrawal All Lots: Posicor 50 mg and 100 mg Tablets. Silver Spring, MD: US Food & Drug Administration, 1998. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
24. Merck. Merck Announces Voluntary Worldwide Withdrawal of VIOXXÂ. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck, 2004. Available from: [Accessed December 1, 2009.
25. Gravelle H, Smith D,. Discounting for health effects in cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 2001; 10: 587-99.
26. Gravelle H, Brouwer W, Niessen L, et al. Discounting in economic evaluations: stepping forward towards optimal decision rules. Health Econ 2007; 16: 307-17.
27. Brouwer WBF, Niessen LW, Postma MJ, Rutten FFH,. Need for differential discounting of costs and health effects in cost effectiveness analyses. BMJ 2005; 331: 446-8.