Concerns Around Budget Impact Thresholds: Not All Drugs Are the Same

Value in Health

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 230-233

  Ciarametaro, Michael ^a   Abedi, Susan ^b   Sohn, Adam ^b   Ge, Colin Fan ^b   Odedara, Neel ^b   Dubois, Robert ^a  

^a National Pharmaceutical Council   (United States)

^b IQVIA   (United States)

Author keywords

budget impact analysis; budget thresholds; budget triggers; spending caps

Indexed keywords

NEW DRUG; PRESCRIPTION DRUG;

ARTICLE; BUDGET; COST; DRUG COST; DRUG MARKETING; FORECASTING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; PURCHASING; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR;

BUDGETS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; PRESCRIPTION DRUGS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; UNITED STATES; VALUE-BASED PURCHASING;

EID: 85013674355     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.031     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. [1] Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER). ICER value assessment framework: 1.0 to 2.0. Available from: http://icer-review.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Value-Assessment-Framework-slides-for-July-29-webinar-FINAL.pdf. [Accessed August 15, 2016].
2. [2] Sullivan, S.D., Mauskopf, J.A., Augustovski, F., et al. Budget impact analysis—principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force. Value Health 17 (2014), 5–14.
3. [3] National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC). Guiding practices for patient-centered value assessment. Available from: http://www.npcnow.org/sites/default/files/npc-guiding-practices-for-patient-centered-value-assessment.pdf. [Accessed August 15, 2016].
4. [4] Thomas, A.A., Vernon, J.A., The cost of US pharmaceutical price regulation: a financial simulation model of R&D decisions. MDE Manage Decis Econ 28 (2007), 293–306.
5. [5] Becker, G., Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. 1993, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
6. [6] Lucas RE. Econometric policy evaluation: a critique. In: Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy. Vol. 1. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North Holland Publishing Co., 1976. p. 19–46.
7. [7] Juday, T., Correll, T., Anene, A., et al. Cost-effectiveness of the once-daily efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir tablet compared with the once-daily elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir tablet as first-line antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults in the US. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 5 (2013), 437–445.
8. [8] Duran, A., Sengupta, N., Diamantopoulos, A., et al. Cost effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for prevention of post-surgical venous thromboembolism from a US payer's perspective. Pharmacoeconomics 30 (2012), 87–101.
9. [9] Bungay K, Cohen J, Chambers JD, Salem MN, Ciarametaro M, Neumann PJ. Availability of cost effectiveness information on the highest-cost drugs and procedures in the United States. Poster presented at ISPOR 2016, 21st Annual Meeting; May 21–25, 2016; Washington, DC.
10. [10] Kohn, C.G., Parker, M.W., Limone, B.L., Coleman, C.I., Cost-effectiveness of ranolazine added to standard-of-care treatment in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 113 (2014), 1306–1311.
11. [11] Sinha, A., Rajan, M., Hoerger, T., Pogach, L., Costs and consequences associated with newer medications for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 33 (2010), 695–700.
12. [12] Hahn, R.W., Dudley, P.M., How well does the US government do benefit-cost analysis?. Rev Environ Econ Policy 1 (2007), 192–211.
13. [13] Tengs, T.O., Adams, M.E., Pliskin, J.S., et al. Five‐hundred life‐saving interventions and their cost‐effectiveness. Risk Anal 15 (1995), 369–390.