Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines: China Mainland
Country/Region: China Mainland
Published PE Recommendations
China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations (2020)
PDF in English
PDF in English
Information current as of Thursday, April 22, 2021
Key Features
| Key Features | |
|---|---|
| Type of Guidelines | Published PE Recommendations |
| Title and year of the document | China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations (2020) |
| Affiliation of authors | Peking University, Fudan University, Tianjin University, China Pharmaceutical University, Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MHRSS), PLA 306 Hospital, and many others |
| Purpose of the document | Provide scientific basis for researchers to conduct economic analysis of medicines for pricing and reimbursement policy making in China |
| Standard reporting format included | Yes |
| Disclosure | Yes |
| Target audience of funding/ author's interests | Both public and private payers, healthcare industries, clinicians, and research communities |
| Perspective | Primarily society and healthcare systems, followed by payers, health care provider, patients |
| Indication | Primarily approved indications |
| Target population | Both insured and uninsured populations, defined by inclusion and exclusion criteria |
| Subgroup analysis | Yes |
| Choice of comparator | Primarily standard care or conventional treatment |
| Time horizon | Long enough to capture the major costs and outcomes related to the interventions. |
| Assumptions required | Yes |
| Preferred analytical technique | Primarily CUA |
| Costs to be included | Primarily direct medical costs, followed by direct non-medical cost and indirect cost if data available |
| Source of costs | Best available, including data from National Healthcare Security Administation (NHSA), and National Health Commission (NHC) |
| Modeling | Yes, both decision-tree and econometric frameworks |
| Systematic review of evidences | Yes |
| Preference for effectiveness over efficacy | Efficacy should be based on the best available evidence (i.e., the best evidence among the clinical efficacy studies and effectiveness studies). For new drugs, if available and applicable, clinical efficacy data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is preferred; for drugs which have been in the market for years, when it is not possible to obtain new efficacy data or data is not applicable, effectiveness data from a real-world study should be used. |
| Preferred outcome measure | Final Endpoints; QALY; WTP |
| Preferred method to derive utility | EQ-5D (EuroQol-5 Dimensions), SF-6D (Short-Form Six-Dimensions), are recommended |
| Equity issues stated | Yes |
| Discounting costs | Base case: 5%; sensitivity analysis: 0-8% |
| Discounting outcomes | Base case: 5%; sensitivity analysis: 0-8% |
| Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range | All assumptions should be subject to sensitivity analysis. |
| Sensitivity analysis-methods | One-way, multi-way, threshold analysis, analysis of extremes, scenario analysis, Monte Carlo simulation |
| Presenting results | Reports both in disaggregated and aggregated form. |
| Incremental analysis | Yes |
| Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio) | Yes |
| Portability of results (Generalizability) | Yes, PE study should address the extent to which both the input data and the results can be applied from one setting to another, both domestically and internationally if cross-country data is involved |
| Financial impact analysis | Yes, budget impact analysis is recommended when data is available |
| Mandatory or recommended or voluntary | Voluntary for now to start, expecting to be recommended in a few years |
Acknowledgement: