A Health Economics Approach to US Value Assessment Frameworks—Introduction: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [1]

Value in Health

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 119-123

  Neumann, Peter J ^a   Willke, Richard J ^b   Garrison, Louis P ^c  

^a TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness analysis; QALYs; value assessment frameworks

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH ECONOMICS; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; UNITED STATES; ADVISORY COMMITTEE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHARMACOECONOMICS; PROCEDURES;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; ECONOMICS, PHARMACEUTICAL; HEALTH EXPENDITURES; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); UNITED STATES;

EID: 85042308304     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.012     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Anderson, J.L., Heidenreich, P.A., Barnett, P.G., et al. ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 63 (2014), 2304–2322.
2. Schnipper, L.E., Davidson, H.E., Wollins, D.S., et al. Updating the American Society of Clinical Oncology value framework: revisions and reflections in response to comments received. J Clin Oncol 34 (2016), 2925–2934.
3. Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Overview of the ICER value assessment framework and update for 2017–2019. 2017. Available from: https://icer-review.org/methodology/icers-methods/icer-value-assessment-framework/. [Accessed June 28, 2017].
4. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Drug Abacus FAQs. Available from: www.drugabacus.org/faqs. [Accessed December 4, 2016].
5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN Guidelines) with NCCN Evidence Blocks™. Available from: www.nccn.org/evidenceblocks/. [Accessed December 4, 2016].
6. Neumann, P.J., Cohen, J.T., Measuring the value of prescription drugs. N Engl J Med 373 (2015), 2595–2597.
7. Cherny, N.I., Sullivan, R., Dafni, U., et al. A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Ann Oncol 26 (2015), 1547–1573.
8. Gold, M.R., Siegel, J.E., Russell, L.B., Weinstein, M.C., (eds.) Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, 1996, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
9. Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. The AMCP Format for Formulary Submissions, version 4.0. Available from: http://www.amcp.org/FormatV4/. [Accessed August 16, 2017].
10. Neumann, P.J., Sanders, G.D., Russell, L.B., et al. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. 2016, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
11. The National Academies of Sciences Engineering Medicine. SMART Vaccines: Strategic Multi-Attribute Ranking Tool for Vaccines. Available from: https://www.nap.edu/smartvaccines/. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
12. U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. Methods and Processes. Available from: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
13. European Network for Health Technology Assessment. HTA Core Model Online. Available from: http://meka.thl.fi/htacore/. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
14. National Institute of Clinical and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. 2013. Available from: http://publications.nice.org.uk/pmg9. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
15. Avalere Health/FasterCures. Patient-Perspective Value Framework (PPVF). DRAFT Methodology, 2016, Avalere Health/FasterCures, Washington, DC.
16. Lieu T, Meltzer MJ, Messonnier ML. Guidance for Health Economics Studies Presented to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). November 2017. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/committee/downloads/economics-studies-guidance.pdf. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
17. Daniels, N., Porteny, T., Urritia, J., Expanded HTA: enhancing fairness and legitimacy. Int J Health Policy Manag 5 (2016), 1–3.
18. Norheim, O.F., Ottersen, T., Voorhoeve, A., et al. Making Fair Choices on the Path to Universal Health Coverage. 2014, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
19. Institute of Medicine. Ranking Vaccines: A Prioritization Software Tool, Phase II: Prototype of a Decision-Support System. 2013, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
20. Sullivan, S., Yeung, K., Vogeler, C., et al. Design, implementation, and first-year outcomes of a value-based drug formulary. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 21 (2015), 269–275.
21. AvaMed. A Framework for Comprehensive Assessment of Medical Technologies: Defining Value in the New Health Care Ecosystem. May 2017. Available from: https://www.advamed.org/sites/default/files/resource/advamedreport_11v3.pdf. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
22. Biotechnology Innovation Organization. BIO principle on the value of biopharmaceuticals. Available from: https://www.bio.org/sites/default/files/files/. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
23. National Health Council. Patient-Centered Value Model Rubric Released: National Health Council Shares Guidance for Assessing the Value of New Treatments. Available from: http://www.nationalhealthcouncil.org/patient-centered-value-model-rubric-released. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
24. PhRMA. Principles for Value Assessment Frameworks. Available from: http://www.phrma.org/codes-and-guidelines/principles-for-value-assessment-frameworks. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
25. Perfetto, E.M., Oehrlein, E.M., Boutin, M., et al. Value to whom? The patient voice in the value discussion. Value Health 20 (2017), 286–291.
26. Sorenson, C., Lavezzari, G., Daniel, G., et al. Advancing value assessment in the United States: a multistakeholder perspective. Value Health 20 (2017), 299–307.
27. Shiroiwa, T., Fukuda, T., Ikeda, S., et al. Development of an Official Guideline for the Economic Evaluation of Drugs/Medical Devices in Japan. Value Health 20:3 (2017), 372–378.
28. Lakdawalla D, Neumann PJ. Budget criteria and drug value assessment: A case of apples and oranges? 2016. Available from: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2016/09/22/budget-criteria-and-drug-value-assessments-a-case-of-apples-and-oranges/. [Accessed January 2, 2018].
29. Baumgardner JR, Neumann PJ. Balancing the use of cost-effectiveness analysis across all types of health care innovations. 2017. Available from: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/04/14/balancing-the-use-of-cost-effectiveness-analysis-across-all-types-of-health-care-innovations/. [Access January 2, 2018].
30. Boztepe, S., User value: competing theories and models. Int J Des 1 (2007), 55–63.
31. Arrow, K.J., Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. Am Econ Rev 53 (1963), 941–973.
32. Weinstein, M.C., Stason, W.B., Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 296 (1977), 716–721.
33. Drummond, M.F., Sculpher, M.J., Torrance, G.W., et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, 3rd ed., 2005, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
34. Airoldi, M., Morton, A., Adjusting life for quality or disability: Stylistic difference or substantial dispute?. Health Econ 18 (2009), 1237–1247.
35. Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health. The cost-effectiveness analysis registry. Available from: www.cearegistry.org. [Accessed on May 1, 2017].
36. Doshi, J.A., Willke, R.J., Advancing high-quality value assessments of health care interventions. Value Health 20 (2017), 181–184.
37. Garrison, L.P., Neumann, P.J., Willke, R.J., et al. A health economics approach to US value assessment frameworks–summary and recommendations of the ISPOR Special Task Force report [7]. Value Health 21 (2018), 161–165.
38. Garrison, L.P., Pauly, M.V., Willke, R.J., Neumann, P.J., An overview of value, perspective, and decision context—a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [2]. Value Health 21 (2018), 124–130.
39. Lakdawalla, D.N., Doshi, J.A., Garrison, L.P., Phelps, C.E., Basu, A., Danzon, P.M., Defining elements of value in health care—a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [3]. Value Health 21 (2018), 131–139.
40. Danzon, P.M., Drummond, M.F., Towse, A., Pauly, M.V., Objectives, budgets, thresholds, and opportunity costs—a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [4]. Value Health 21 (2018), 140–145.
41. Phelps, C.E., Lakdawalla, D.N., Basu, A., Drummond, M.F., Towse, A., Danzon, P.M., Approaches to aggregation and decision making—a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [5]. Value Health 21 (2018), 146–154.
42. Willke, R.J., Neumann, P.J., Garrison, L.P., Ramsey, S.D., Review of recent US value frameworks—a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force report [6]. Value Health 21 (2018), 155–160.