Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
-
In 2012, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence assessed dasatinib, nilotinib, and standard-dose imatinib as first-line treatment of chronic phase chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). Licensing of these alternative treatments was based on randomized controlled trials assessing complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response (MMR) at 12 months as primary end points. We use this case study to illustrate the validation of CCyR and MMR as surrogate outcomes for overall survival in CML and how this evidence was used to inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's recommendation on the public funding of these first-line treatments for CML. ⋯ This case study illustrates the consideration of surrogate outcome evidence in health technology assessment. Although it is often recommended that the acceptance of surrogate outcomes be based on randomized controlled trial data demonstrating an association between the treatment effect on both the surrogate outcome and the final outcome, this case study shows that policymakers may be willing to accept a lower level of evidence (i.e., observational association).
-
Comparative Study
Cost-utility of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compared to conventional total hip replacement in young active patients with osteoarthritis.
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM HRA) has emerged as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA) for younger active patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Birmingham hip resurfacing is the most common MoM HRA in Alberta, and is therefore compared with conventional THA. ⋯ The results show that, on average, MoM HRA was preferred to THA for younger and male patients, but THA is still a reasonable option if the patient or clinician prefers given the small absolute differences between the options and the confidence ellipses around the cost-effectiveness estimates.
-
The decade since the completion of the sequencing of the human genome has witnessed significant advances in the incorporation of genomic information in diagnostic, treatment, and reimbursement practices. Indeed, as case in point, there are now several dozen commercially available genomic tests routinely applied across a wide range of disease states in predictive or prognostic applications. Moreover, many involved in the advancement of personalized medicine would view emerging approaches to stratify patients in meaningful ways beyond genomic information as a signal of the progress made. ⋯ Starting with a framework with which to characterize personalized medicine, this Special Issue proceeds to illuminate issues related to the intersection of personalized medicine and comparative effectiveness; use of personalized medicine approaches in drug development; methodological challenges; and payer approaches to evaluation and reimbursement of pharmacodiagnostics in the United States and Europe. It concludes with a look ahead, underscoring current controversies yet to be resolved along with their implications for further research and policy. It is hoped that these articles will help inform the daily challenges faced by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) community as it collectively addresses what promises to be a new era in drug development and health care delivery.
-
There is a need for methodological scrutiny in the economic assessment of personalized medicine. In this article, we present a list of 10 specific issues that we argue pose specific methodological challenges that require careful consideration when designing and conducting robust model-based economic evaluations in the context of personalized medicine. Key issues are related to the correct framing of the research question, interpretation of test results, data collection of medical management options after obtaining test results, and expressing the value of tests. ⋯ Finally, it is important to understand that a test strategy does not necessarily lead to more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). It is possible that the test will lead to not only fewer QALYs but also fewer costs, which can be defined as "decremental" cost per QALYs. Different decision criteria are needed to interpret such results.
-
There is undisputed evidence that personalized medicine, that is, a more precise assessment of which medical intervention might best serve an individual patient on the basis of novel technology, such as molecular profiling, can have a significant impact on clinical outcomes. The field, however, is still new, and the demonstration of improved effectiveness compared with standard of care comes at a cost. How can we be sure that personalized medicine indeed provides a measurable clinical benefit, that we will be able to afford it, and that we can provide adequate access? The risk-benefit evaluation that accompanies each medical decision requires not only good clinical data but also an assessment of cost and infrastructure needed to provide access to technology. ⋯ Health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) emerges as an approach that can satisfy both needs. Although HEOR represents a well-established approach to demonstrate the effectiveness of interventions in many areas of medical practice, few HEOR studies exist in the field of personalized medicine today. It is reasonable to expect that this will change over the next few years.