Good Research Practices for Measuring Drug Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: An International Perspective: The ISPOR Drug Cost Task Force Report-Part VI

被引:19
作者
Shi, Lizheng [1 ]
Hodges, Meredith [2 ]
Drummond, Michael [3 ]
Ahn, Jeonghoon [4 ]
Li, Shu Chuen [5 ]
Hu, Shanlian [6 ]
Augustovski, Federico [7 ]
Hay, Joel W. [4 ]
Smeeding, Jim [8 ]
机构
[1] Tulane Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Trop Med, Dept Hlth Syst Management, New Orleans, LA 70112 USA
[2] Univ Texas Austin, Sch Pharm, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[3] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[4] Univ So Calif, Dept Pharmaceut Econ & Policy, Los Angeles, CA USA
[5] Univ Newcastle, Sch Biomed Sci, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
[6] Fudan Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China
[7] Inst Clin Effectiveness & Hlth Policy IECS, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[8] JestaRx Grp, Dallas, TX USA
关键词
drug cost; health technology assessment; pharmacoeconomics; ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; PHARMACEUTICALS; REIMBURSEMENT;
D O I
10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00662.x
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Objective: The pharmacoeconomic guidelines available in the literature or promulgated in many countries are either vague or silent about how drug costs should be established or measured so an international comparison of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) results can be made. The objective of this report is to provide guidance and recommendations on how drug costs should be measured for CEAs done from an internationally comparative perspective. Methods: Members of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Task Force on Good Research Practices-Use of Drug Costs for Cost Effectiveness Analysis (Drug Cost Task Force [DCTF]) subgroup from several countries were experienced developers or users of CEA models, and worked in academia, industry, and as advisors to governments. They solicited comments on drafts from a core group of 174 external reviewers and more broadly, from the members of the ISPOR at the ISPOR 12th Annual International meeting and via the ISPOR Web site. Results: Drug units should be standardized in terms of volume of active ingredient, regardless of packaging and dosing strength variations across countries. Drug costs should be measured in local currency per unit of active ingredient and should be converted to other currencies using sensitivity analyses of purchasing power parities (PPP) and exchange rates, whichever is more appropriate. When using drug prices from different years, the consumer price index for the local currency should be applied before the PPP and/or exchange rate conversion. Conclusion: CEA researchers conducting international pharmacoeconomic analysis should tailor the appropriate measure of drug costs to the international perspective, to maintain clarity and transparency on drug cost measurement in the context of international drug comparison and report the sensitivity of CEA results to reasonable cost conversions.
引用
收藏
页码:28 / 33
页数:6
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], INT PHARM PRIC DIFF
[2]  
[Anonymous], International Drug Price Indicator Guide - s18714en.pdf
[3]  
[Anonymous], NAT DRUG POL
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2003, Introduction to drug utilisation research
[5]  
*AUM PREC CREAC OB, DRUGS B
[6]   Variability of cost-effectiveness estimates for pharmaceuticals in Western Europe: Lessons for inferring generalizability [J].
Barbieri, M ;
Drummond, M ;
Willke, R ;
Chancellor, J ;
Jolain, B ;
Towse, A .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2005, 8 (01) :10-23
[7]   OFT, VBP: QED? [J].
Claxton, Karl .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2007, 16 (06) :545-558
[8]   Differential Pricing for Pharmaceuticals: Reconciling Access, R&D and Patents [J].
Patricia M. Danzon ;
Adrian Towse .
International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics, 2003, 3 (3) :183-205
[9]   International price comparisons for pharmaceuticals - Measurement and policy issues [J].
Danzon, PM ;
Kim, JD .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 1998, 14 (Suppl 1) :115-128
[10]  
Danzon PM, 2003, HEALTH AFFAIR, V22, pW521