Budget impact analysis of medicines: Updated systematic review and implications

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 257-266

  Faleiros, Daniel Resende ^a   Álvares, Juliana ^a   Almeida, Alessandra Maciel ^a   De Araújo, Vânia Eloisa ^b   Andrade, Eli Iola Gurgel ^a   Godman, Brian B ^c,d,e   Acurcio, Francisco A ^a   Júnior, Augusto A Guerra ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

^b PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF MINAS GERAIS   (Brazil)

^c UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

^d KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^e UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Budget impact analyses; drugs; guidelines; medicines; systematic review

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CARDIOVASCULAR AGENT; HORMONE DERIVATIVE; IMMUNOMODULATING AGENT; INFLIXIMAB; NATALIZUMAB; ROSUVASTATIN; TRASTUZUMAB; DRUG;

BUDGET; BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG INDICATION; EUROPE; GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT; HEMATOLOGIC DISEASE; HEMATOPOIETIC SYSTEM; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEDICINE; METABOLIC DISORDER; MONTE CARLO METHOD; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLICATION; REIMBURSEMENT; RESPIRATORY DISTRESS; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED STATES; VALIDATION STUDY; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ECONOMICS; HEALTH INSURANCE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

BUDGETS; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; HUMANS; INSURANCE, PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84961205742     PISSN: 14737167     EISSN: 17448379     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/14737167.2016.1159958     Document Type: Review

References (108)

1. Godman B, Acurcio FA, Guerra Junior AA, et al. Initiatives among authorities to improve the quality and efficiency of prescribing and the implications. J Pharma Care Health Sys. 2014; 1 (3): 1-15.
2. Godman B, Malmström RE, Diogene E, et al. Are new models needed to optimise the utilisation of new medicines to sustain healthcare systems? Expert Review Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Jan; 8 (1): 77-94.
3. Wettermark B, Persson M, Wilking N, et al. For the regional drug expert consortium. Forecasting drug utilization and expenditure in a metropolitan health region. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010; 10: 128.
4. Mauskopf JA, Earnshaw S, Mullins CD. Budget impact analysis: review of the state of the art. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2005 Feb; 5 (1): 65-79.
5. Orlewska E, Gulácsi L. Budget-impact analyses: a critical review of published studies. PharmacoEconomics. 2009; 27 (10): 807-827.
6. Garattini L, van de Vooren K. Budget impact analysis in economic evaluation: a proposal for a clearer definition. Eur J Health Econ. 2011; 12: 499-502.
7. Marshall DA, Douglas PR, Drummond MF, et al. Guidelines for conducting pharmaceutical budget impact analyses for submission to public drug plans in Canada. PharmacoEconomics. 2008; 26 (6): 477-495.
8. van de Vooren K, Duranti S, Curto A, et al. A critical systematic review of budget impact analyses on drugs in the EU countries. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2014 Feb; 12 (1): 33-40.
9. Green S, Higgins JPT, Alderson P, et al. In:, Higgins JPT, Green S., editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. 2011. [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane collaboration. Available from: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
10. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009; 6 (7). doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700.
11. Sullivan SD, Mauskopf JA, Augustovski F, et al. Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis II: report of the ISPOR task force on good research practices-budget impact analysis. Value Health. 2014; 17: 5-14.
12. Dee A, Hutchinson M, De-La-Harpe D. A budget impact analysis of natalizumab use in Ireland. Ir J Med Sci. 2012; 181 (2): 199-204.
13. Duerden M, Tabberer M. A budget impact model for a drug in heart failure: eplerenone. Br J Cardiol. 2008; 15: 101-105.
14. Malone DC. A budget-impact and cost-effectiveness model for second-line treatment of major depression. J Manag Care Pharm. 2007; 13 (6 Supp A): S8-S18.
15. Colombo GL, Di-Matteo S, Bruno G. Acamprosate in the treatment of alcoholism: a budget impact analysis for the National Health Service in Italy. Subst Abuse Rehabil. 2012; 3: 73-79.
16. Pfeil AM, Kressig RW, Szucs TD. Alzheimers dementia: budget impact and cost-utility analysis of a combination treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor and memantine in Switzerland. Swiss Med Wkly. 2012; 142: w13676.
17. De-Salas M, De Bobadilla JF, Ferro B, et al. Análisis del impacto presupuestario para el Sistema Nacional de Salud de la combinación fija de amlodipino 5 o 10 mg y atorvastatina 10 mg. Farmacia Hospitalaria. 2010; 34 (4): 170-180.
18. Moellmann-Coelho A, Asano EF, Nita ME, et al. Budget impact analysis of chronic myeloid leukemia treatment in patients with imatinib failure from the Brazilian public health system perspective: supporting health care decisions on central and local levels. Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia. 2010; 56 (4): 471-487.
19. Chanjaruporn F, Roughead EE, Sooksriwong C, et al. Budget impact analysis of pemetrexed introduction: case study from a teaching hospital perspective, Thailand. J Med Assoc Thailand. 2011; 94 (9): 1026-1034.
20. Darbà J, Kaskens L, de-la-Rosa RS. Budget impact analysis of the fentanyl buccal tablet for treatment of breakthrough cancer pain. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2013; 6: 1-9.
21. Truong HL, Nellesen D, Ludlam WH, et al. Budget impact of pasireotide for the treatment of Cushings disease, a rare endocrine disorder associated with considerable comorbidities. J Med Econ. 2014; 17 (4): 288-295.
22. Nikolaidi E, Hatzikou M, Geitona M. Budget impact analysis on erythropoiesis-stimulating agents use for the management of chemotherapy-induced anaemia in Greece. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2013;11(1):16.
23. Jiménez-Ruiz CA, Solano-Reina S, Signes-Costa J, et al. Budgetary impact analysis on funding smoking-cessation drugs in patients with COPD in spain. Int J Chronic Obstr. 2015; 24 (10): 2027-2036.
24. Rey MBF, Cusachs AR, Mainar AS, et al. Fixed drug combinations in hypertension: a budget impact analysis for the Spanish Health System on the marketing of a fixed combination of olmesartan/amlodipine. Atencion Primaria. 2011; 43 (7): 345-355.
25. Colin X, Lafuma A, Costagliola D, et al. Modelling the budget impact of darunavir in the treatment of highly treatment-experienced, HIV-infected adults in France. PharmacoEconomics. 2010; 28 (Supp. 1): 183-197.
26. Guest JF, Jenssen T, Houge G, et al. Modelling the resource implications of managing adults with Fabry disease in Norway favours home infusion. Eur J Clin Invest. 2010; 40 (12): 1104-1112.
27. Bakhai A, Flather MD, Collinson JR, et al. National economic impact of tirofiban for unstable angina and myocardial infarction without ST elevation; example from the United Kingdom. Int J Cardiol. 2003 Oct; 91 (2-3): 163-167.
28. Kanters TA, Steenhoek A, Hakkaart L. Orphan drugs expenditure in the Netherlands in the period 2006-2012. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014; 9: 154.
29. Blak BT, Mullins CD, Shaya FT, et al. Prescribing trends and drug budget impact of the ARBs in the UK. Value Health. 2009; 12 (2): 302-308.
30. Hutton D, Newman-Casey PA, Tavag M, et al. Switching to less expensive blindness drug could save medicare part B $18 billion over a ten-year period. Health Aff. 2014; 33 (6): 931-939.
31. Buja A, Perissinotto E, Compostella A, et al. Taking decisions on expenditure for high-cost drugs at the regional level: a model for evaluating the overall impact of trastuzumab in the Veneto Region of Italy. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011; 17 (2): 298-303.
32. Machado M, Iskedjian M, Ruiz IA, et al. The economic impact of introducing serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors into the Brazilian national drug formulary: cost-effectiveness and budget-impact analyses. PharmacoEconomics. 2007; 25 (11): 979-990.
33. Annemans L, Eijgelshoven I, Smet A, et al. The impact of treatment with risperidone long-acting injection on the Belgian healthcare system: results from a budget impact model. Acta Clin Belg. 2012; 67 (2): 108-119.
34. Brodszky V, Rencz F, Péntek M, et al. A budget impact model for biosimilar infliximab in Crohns disease in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2016;16(1):119-125.
35. Mosegui GBG, Vianna CMM, Rodrigues MPS, et al. Alfa-pegylated interferons (2a and 2b) and ribavirin for treatment chronic hepatitis C, genotype 1: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Physis: Revista de Saúde Coletiva. 2011; 21 (2): 377-393.
36. Athanasakis K, Petrakis I, Ollandezos M, et al. Antibacterial treatment of meticillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft tissue infections: a cost and budget impact analysis in greek hospitals. Infect Dis Ther. 2014; 3: 257-268.
37. Simoens S. Budget impact analysis of adjunctive therapy with lacosamide for partial-onset epileptic seizures in Belgium. J Med Econ. 2011; 14 (3): 299-304.
38. Skornicki M, Clements KM, OSullivan AK. Budget impact analysis of antiepileptic drugs for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. J Manag Care Pharm. 2014; 20 (4): 400-406.
39. Restelli U, Andreoni M, Antinori A, et al. Budget impact analysis of antiretroviral less drug regimen simplification in HIV-positive patients on the Italian national health service. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2014; 6: 409-414.
40. Brodszky V, Baji P, Balogh O, et al. Budget impact analysis of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in six Central and Eastern European countries. Eur J Health Econ. 2014; 15 (Suppl 1): S65-S71.
41. Foroutan N, Rasekh HR, Salamzadeh J, et al. Budget impact analysis of conversion from cyclosporine to sirolimus as immunosuppressive medication in renal transplantation therapy. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2013; 5: 545-553.
42. Schlander M, Adarkwah CC, Gandjour A. Budget impact analysis of drugs for ultra-orphan non-oncological diseases in Europe. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015; 15 (1): 171-179.
43. Villa G, Hernández-Pastor L-J. Budget impact analysis of first-line treatment with pazopanib for advanced renal cell carcinoma in Spain. BMC Cancer. 2013; 13: 399.
44. Ho J, Zhang L, Todorova L, et al. Budget impact analysis of ixabepilone used according to FDA approved labeling in treatment-resistant metastatic breast cancer. J Manag Care Pharm. 2009; 15 (6): 467-475.
45. Yang H, Chaudhari P, Zhou Z-Y, et al. Budget impact analysis of liposomal amphotericin B and amphotericin B lipid complex in the treatment of invasive fungal infections in the United States. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2014; 12 (1): 85-93.
46. Denis A, Mergaert L, Fostier C, et al. Budget impact analysis of orphan drugs in Belgium: estimates from 2008 to 2013. J Med Econ. 2010; 13 (2): 295-301.
47. Merchant S, Noe LL, Howe A, et al. Budget impact analysis of tapentadol extended release for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic noncancer pain. Clin Ther. 2013; 35 (5): 659-672.
48. de-la-Rosa RS, Sabater E, Casado MA. Budget impact analysis of the first-line treatment of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis in Spain. Revista Neurologia. 2011; 53 (3): 129-138.
49. Gómez MAC, Álvarez-Rubio L, Manero SN, et al. Budget impact analysis of the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in a hospital. Farmacia Hospitalaria. 2006; 30 (5): 291-299.
50. Benjamin L, Buthion V, Iskedjian M, et al. Budget impact analysis of the use of oral and intravenous anti-cancer drugs for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. J Med Econ. 2013; 16 (1): 96-107.
51. Rønborg SM, Svendsen UG, Micheelsen JS, et al. Budget impact analysis of two immunotherapy products for treatment of grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2012; 4: 253-260.
52. Mori AT, Norheim OF, Robberstad B. Budget impact analysis of using dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine to treat uncomplicated malaria in children in Tanzania. PharmacoEconomics. 2016;34(3):303-314.
53. Avgerinou G, Bassukas I, Chaidemenos G, et al. Budget impact analysis of ustekinumab in the management of moderate to severe psoriasis in Greece. BMC Dermatol. 2012; 1471-5945: 12-10.
54. Danese MD, Reyes C, Northridge K, et al. Budget impact model of adding erlotinib to a regimen of gemcitabine for the treatment of locally advanced, nonresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Clin Ther. 2008; 30 (4): 775-784.
55. Launois R, Payet S, Saidenberg-Kermanach N, et al. Budget impact model of rituximab after failure of one or more TNFalpha inhibitor therapies in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine. 2008; 75: 688-695. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2008.04.012.
56. Woodward TC, Brown R, Sacco P, et al. Budget impact model of tobramycin inhalation solution for treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis patients. J Med Econ. 2010; 13 (3): 492-499.
57. Kuan R, Holt RJ, Johnson KE, et al. Budget impact modeling for a single-tablet formulation of ibuprofen and famotidine for prevention of upper gastrointestinal ulcers in patients with osteoarthritis and/or rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Ther. 2013; 35 (3): 321-332.
58. Oyagüez I, Casado MA, Cotarelo M, et al. Budget impact of a set-dose combination of efavirenz-emtricitabine-tenofovir in the treatment of patients infected with HIV-1. Farmacia Hospitalaria. 2009; 33 (5): 247-256.
59. Carlson JJ, Wong WB, Veenstra DL, et al. Budget impact of erlotinib for maintenance therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Med Econ. 2011; 14 (2): 159-166.
60. Montouchet C, Ruff L, Balu S. Budget impact of rosuvastatin initiation in high-risk hyperlipidemic patients from a US managed care perspective. J Med Econ. 2013; 16 (7): 907-916.
61. Purmonen TT, Auvinen PK, Martikainen JA. Budget impact analysis of trastuzumab in early breast cancer: a hospital district perspective. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010; 26 (2): 163-169.
62. Mennini F, Russo S, Marcellusi A. Budget impact analysis resulting from the use of dabigatran etexilate in preventing stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Italy. Farmeconomia. 2012; 13 (3): 121-131.
63. Raga JM, Saiz FG, Oñate J, et al. Budgetary impact analysis of buprenorphine-naloxone combination (Suboxone®) in Spain. Health Econ Rev. 2012; 2: 1-9.
64. Arrayas IG, Fernandez CS, Cerezo JFG, et al. Budgetary impact for the National Health System of apixaban prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing total knee or hip replacement. Revista Española de Salud Pública. 2012; 86 (6): 601-612.
65. Caro JJ, Huybrechts KF, Xenakis JG, et al. Budgetary impact of treating acute bipolar mania in hospitalized patients with quetiapine: an economic analysis of clinical trials. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006; 22 (11): 2233-2242.
66. Taylor DCA, Chu P, Rosen VM, et al. Budgetary impact of varenicline in smoking cessation in the United Kingdom. Value Health. 2009; 12 (1): 28-33.
67. Giusti M, Banfi F, Perrone F, et al. Community-acquired pneumonia: a budget impact model. Le Infezioni in Medicina. 2010; 18 (3): 143-153.
68. Chiao E, Meyer K. Cost effectiveness and budget impact of natalizumab in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009; 25 (6): 1445-1454.
69. Marchetti M, Caruggi M, Colombo G. Cost utility and budget impact of third-generation aromatase inhibitors for advanced breast cancer: a literature-based model analysis of costs in the Italian National Health Service. Clin Ther. 2004; 26 (9): 1546-1561.
70. Araujo DV, Bahia L, Souza CPR, et al. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin for LDL-cholesterol and cardiovascular events lowering within the SUS scenario. Int J Atheroscler. 2007; 2 (3): 189-194.
71. Chhatwal J, Kanwal F, Roberts MS, et al. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of hepatitis C virus treatment with sofosbuvir and ledipasvir in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2015; 162 (6): 397-406.
72. Heeg BMS, Antunes J, Figueira ML, et al. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of long-acting risperidone in Portugal: a modeling exercise. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008; 24 (2): 349-358.
73. Dal-Nero R, Eandi M, Pradelli L, et al. Cost-effectiveness and healthcare budget impact in Italy of inhaled corticosteroids and brochodilators for severe and very severe COPD patients. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2007; 2 (2): 169-176.
74. Gazzard B, Hill A, Anceau A. Cost-efcacy analysis of the MONET trial using UK antiretroviral drug prices. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2011; 9 (4): 217-223.
75. Thongprasert S, Tinmanee S, Permsuwan U. Cost-utility and budget impact analyses of gefitinib in second-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer from Thai payer perspective. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2012; 8 (1): 53-61.
76. Purmonen T, Nuttunen P, Vuorinen R. Current and predicted cost of metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Finland. Acta Oncol. 2010; 49: 837-843.
77. Nita ME, Eliaschewitz FG, Ribeiro E, et al. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of saxagliptine as additional therapy to metformin for the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 2 in the Brazilian private health system. Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. 2012; 58 (3): 294-301.
78. Gani R, Griffin J, Kelly S, et al. Economic analyses comparing tiotropium with ipratropium or salmeterol in UK patients with COPD. Prim Care Respir J. 2010; 19 (1): 68-74.
79. Ruggeri M, Coretti S, Carletto A, et al. Economic evaluation and budget impact analysis of S-1 (tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil) in patients with advanced gastric cancer. PharmacoEconomics. 2013; 25 (2): ii16-ii17.
80. Fragoulakis V, Kourlaba G, Maniadakis N. Economic evaluation of statins in high-risk patients treated for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Greece. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2012; 4: 35-143.
81. Corral MJ, Clopès A, Navarro M, et al. Impact on budget of new drugs for colorectal cancer treatment. Medicina Clínica. 2007; 129 (4): 134-136.
82. Park H, Rascati KL, Keith MS. Managing oral phosphate binder medication expenditures within the medicare bundled end-stage renal disease prospective payment system: economic implications for large U.S. dialysis organizations. J Manag Care Pharm. 2015; 21 (6): 507-514.
83. Guest JF, Concolino D, Di Vito R, et al. Modelling the resource implications of managing adults with Fabry disease in Italy. Eur J Clin Invest. 2011; 41 (7): 710-718.
84. Restelli U, Scolari F, Bonfanti P, et al. New Highly Active Antiretroviral drugs and generic drugs for the treatment of HIV infection: a budget impact analysis on the Italian National Health Service (Lombardy Region, Northern Italy). BMC Infect Dis. 2015; 11 (323): 15.
85. Brosa M, García Del Muro X, Mora J, et al. Orphan drugs revisited: cost-effectiveness analysis of the addition of mifamurtide to the conventional treatment of osteosarcoma. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015; 15 (2): 331-340.
86. Simoens S, Laekeman G, Decramer M. Preventing COPD exacerbations with macrolides: a review and budget impact analysis. Respir Med. 2013; 107 (5): 637-648.
87. Walt JG, Wilensky JT, Fiscella R, et al. Refill rates and budget impact of glaucoma lipid therapy: a retrospective database analysis. Clin Drug Investig. 2007; 27 (12): 819-825.
88. Martínez-Raga J, Saiz FG, Pascual C, et al. Suboxone (buprenorphine/naloxone) as an agonist opioid treatment in Spain: a budgetary impact analysis. Eur Addict Res. 2010; 16 (1): 31-42.
89. Sørensen J, Andersen LS. The case of tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a budget impact analysis. PharmacoEconomics. 2005; 23 (3): 289-298.
90. Bakhshai J, Bleu-Lainé R, Jung M, et al. The cost effectiveness and budget impact of natalizumab for formulary inclusion. J Med Econ. 2010; 13 (1): 63-69.
91. Huang E, Esrailian E, Spiegel MBR. The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of competing therapies in hepatic encephalopathy: a decision analysis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007; 26 (8): 1147-1161.
92. Ariza JG, Thuresson P-O, Machnicki G, et al. The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of introducing indacaterol into the Colombian health system. Value Health Reg Issues. 2012; 1 (2): 165-171.
93. Tran BX, Ohinmaa A, Duong AT, et al. The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of Vietnams methadone maintenance treatment programme in HIV prevention and treatment among injection drug users. Glob Public Health. 2012; 10 (7): 1080-1094.
94. Casciano J, Doyle J, Arikian S, et al. The health economic impact of antidepressant usage from a payers perspective: a multinational study. Int J Clin Pract. 2001; 55 (5): 292-299.
95. Smith DG, Cerulli A, Frech FH. Use of valsartan for the treatment of heart-failure patients not receiving ACE inhibitors: a budget impact analysis. Clin Ther. 2005; 27 (6): 951-959.
96. Thorlund K, Druyts E, El Khoury AC, et al. Budget impact analysis of boceprevir and telaprevir for the treatment of hepatitis C genotype 1 infection. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2012; 4: 349-359.
97. White AG, Birnbaum HG, Rothman DB, et al. Development of a budget-impact model to quantify potential cost savings from prescription opioids designed to deter abuse or ease of extraction. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2009; 7 (1): 61-70.
98. Hutchings A, Schey C, Dutton R, et al. Estimating the budget impact of orphan drugs in Sweden and France 2013-2020. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014; 9: 22.
99. Roy A, Kish JK, Bloudek L, et al. Estimating the costs of therapy in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma: a model framework. Am Health Drug Benefits. 2015; 8 (4): 204-215.
100. Gordon J, Evans M, McEwan P, et al. Evaluation of insulin use and value for money in type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom. Diabetes Ther. 2013; 4: 51-66.
101. Tran-Duy A, Boonen A, Van De Laar MA, et al. Impact on total population health and societal cost, and the implication on the actual costeffectiveness of including tumour necrosis factorα antagonists in management of ankylosing spondylitis: a dynamic population modelling study. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2015; 7: 13-18.
102. Jha A, Upton A, Dunlop WC, et al. The budget impact of biosimilar iniximab (remsima) for the treatment of autoimmune diseases in five European countries. Adv Ther. 2015; 32 (8): 742-756.
103. Schey C, Milanova T, Hutchings A. Estimating the budget impact of orphan medicines in Europe: 2010-2020. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011; 6: 62.
104. Mauskopf JA, Sullivan SD, Annemans L, et al. Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR task force on good research practices-budget impact analysis. Value Health. 2007; 10: 336-347.
105. Trueman P, Drummond M, Hutton J. Developing guidance for budget impact analysis. PharmacoEconomics. 2001; 19: 609-621.
106. Nuijten M, Mittendorf T, Persson U. Practical issues in handling data input and uncertainty in a budget impact analysis. Eur J Health Econ. 2011; 12: 231-241.
107. Godman B, Wettermark M, Van Woerkom M, et al. Multiple policies to enhance prescribing efficiency for established medicines in Europe with a particular focus on demand-side measures: findings and future implications. Front Pharmacol. Focused Review 2014; 5 (Article 106): 1-9.
108. Parkinson B, Sermet C, Clement F, et al. Value-based purchasing and disinvestment strategies for pharmaceuticals: an international review. PharmacoEconomics. 2015 Sep; 33 (9): 905-924.