ISSUE: In cost-effectiveness research, an age-old debate surrounds whether to impose cost-effectiveness thresholds within or alongside cost-effectiveness findings to support value-based policy making. And, if imposed, what threshold(s)? The purpose of this issue panel is to debate cost-effectiveness threshold framing solutions with the goal of aiding health technology policy making for US health systems and society.

OVERVIEW: The expert panel will explore the question: how best to frame cost-effectiveness thresholds for policy making in the US? More specifically, the panelists and moderator will debate threshold framing solutions that are aligned with gains for health systems and society. Jon Campbell will introduce the topic of US cost-effectiveness thresholds and share current threshold solutions practiced within the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. The panelists will share and debate threshold framing solutions with a focus on perspective (the health care system perspective with a fixed budget and k opportunity-cost thresholds vs. the societal perspective with v willingness-to-pay thresholds) and other considerations for modifying thresholds. Tara Lavelle will argue for threshold considerations consistent with the broader societal perspective. David Vanness will argue for threshold considerations based on health opportunity costs. Charles Phelps will share ideas for when (and how much) thresholds should vary by severity of untreated disease. Core to the issue, each panelist will opine on threshold framing solutions that aim to improve (i.e., provide a surplus to) US health systems and society rather than pricing technologies to achieve neutrality where the entire surplus is transferred to the suppliers. Differences in expert opinion will be explored and debated. Finally, we will poll the audience to test threshold framing solutions while protecting ten minutes for audience questions.