Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation in Ireland
Tóm tắt
Objective: To describe the pharmacoeconomic assessment process in Ireland and to provide examples of recent appraisals and the subsequent impact on pricing and reimbursement decisions.
Method: The pharmacoeconomic appraisals conducted by the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) between September 2006 and February 2009 were reviewed. The NCPE recommendations and subsequent reimbursement decisions by the Health Service Executive (HSE) were recorded. Recommendations made by the NCPE were compared with those of UK agencies. The duration of the NCPE pharmacoeconomic process and the time from marketing authorization to reimbursement was estimated. The budget impact assessments from the pharmaceutical companies were reviewed and compared for consistency.
Results: The NCPE conducted 12 single technology appraisals during the study period. Eight of the medicines assessed were either recommended as a cost-effective use of resources or recommended with certain restrictions, and were funded by the HSE. Of the four medicines that were not considered cost effective, two were reimbursed after a price reduction was negotiated and the remaining two were not. The NCPE recommendations concurred with those of the UK agencies for the majority of appraisals, with the exception of sunitinib and lapatinib. The average duration of the NCPE process was 2.7 months. The average time from marketing authorization to reimbursement was 7 months. The review of budget impact assessments highlighted a high degree of variability between submissions.
Conclusions: The findings of this review highlight the efficiency of the pharmacoeconomic process and the acceptance of the NCPE recommendations by the HSE for pricing and reimbursement decisions. NCPE recommendations broadly concurred with those of UK agencies for the majority of appraisals.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Central Statistics Office. Census 2006: principal demographic results [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/Amended%20Final%20Principal%20Demographic%20Results%202006.pdf [Accessed 2009 Nov 30]
Primary Care Reimbursement Service. Statistical analysis of claims and payments 2007. Finglas: Health Services Executive [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hse.ie/eng/Staff/PCRS/PCRS_Publications/2007_Report.pdf [Accessed 2009 Nov 30]
Tilson L, Usher C, Butler K, et al. Economic evaluation of a universal childhood pneumococcal conjugate vaccination strategy in Ireland. Value Health 2008; 11: 898–903
Barry M, Heerey A. Cost-effectiveness of statins for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in Ireland. Ir Med J 2002; 95: 133–5
Walshe V, Nash A, Barry M. Cost effectiveness of statin therapy for the primary prevention of coronary heart disease. Ir Med J 2006; 99: 144–5
Barry M, Molloy D, Usher C, et al. Drug expenditure in Ireland 1997-2007. Ir Med J 2008; 101: 299–302
Barry M, Tilson L. Recent developments in pricing and reimbursement of medicines in Ireland. Expert Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res 2007; 76: 605–11
Agreement between the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association and the Health Services Executive on the supply terms, conditions and prices of medicines supplied to the health services September 2006 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hse.ie/eng/About_the_HSE/Whos_Who/IPHA_Agreement_2006.pdf [Accessed 2009 Mar 1]
National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics. Irish healthcare technology assessment guidelines 2000 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ncpe.ie [Accessed 2009 Mar 1]
Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, et al. Critical assessment of economic evaluation. In: Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 2005: 27–53
Office of Fair Trading. Annexe B: review of NICE, SMC, and AWMSG, Feb 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/comp_policy/oft885b.pdf [Accessed 2009 Apr 15]
Drummond M, Sorenson C. Nasty or nice? A perspective on the use of health technology assessment in the United Kingdom. Value Health 2009; 12: S8–13
Irish Medicines Board [online]. Available from URL: http://www.imb.ie [Accessed 2009 Nov 30]
Scottish Medicines Consortium Evaluation Project Team. An evaluation of manufacturers’ budget impact estimates with resource use over time in NHS Scotland 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.scottishmedicines.org [Accessed 2009 Mar 1]
Marshall D, Douglas P, Drummond M, et al. Guidelines for conducting pharmaceutical budget impact analyses for submission to public drug plans in Canada. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (6): 477–95
National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics. A review of the cost-effectiveness of sunitinib under the High Tech Drug Scheme in Ireland, October 2006 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ncpe.ie [Accessed 2009 Mar 26]
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Sunitinib for the first line treatment of advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, March 2009. NICE technology appraisal guidance 169 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/TA169Guidance.pdf [Accessed 2009 Apr 15]
National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics. Cost effectiveness of lapatinib (Tyverb) for the treatment of women with previously treated advanced or metastatic HER2 positive breast cancer, January 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ncpe.ie/u_docs/doc_137.pdf [Accessed 2009 Apr 15]
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Lapatinib for the treatment of women with previously treated advanced or metastatic breast cancer: final appraisal determination, February 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/BreastCancerLapatinibFAD.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jun 29]
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Breast cancer (advanced or metastatic): lapatinib appeal decision, July 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=download&o=44808 [Accessed 2009 Nov 30]
Health Information and Quality Authority. Health Technology Assessment of the role of human papillomavirus vaccines in reducing the risk of cervical cancer in Ireland 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hiqa.ie [Accessed 2009 Mar 1]
Usher C, Tilson L, Olsen J, et al. Cost effectiveness of HPV vaccine in reducing the risk of cervical cancer in Ireland due to HPV types 16 & 18 using a transmission dynamic model. Vaccine 2008; 26: 5654–61
Department of Health and Children. Economies in drug usage in the Irish healthcare setting [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/economies_drug_usage.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jun 29]
Mauskopf J, Sullivan S, 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: 336–47
Orlewska E. Budget-impact analyses: a critical review of published studies. Pharmacoeconomics 2009; 27 (10): 807–27