Diemen, The Netherlands - Increased sharing of information across jurisdictions regarding the assessments of pharmaceuticals may save costs and reduce duplication of efforts.
Assessment of the clinical effectiveness of (new) pharmaceuticals compared to alternative treatment(s) is important in many jurisdictions for determining the reimbursement status of pharmaceuticals. This type of assessment is also known as relative effectiveness assessment (REA). We have studied the main similarities and differences in the major methodological aspects of REA in 29 jurisdictions. There seem to be substantial similarities on the choice of the comparator, the role of indirect comparisons, and preferred clinical endpoints.
This article, “
Relative Effectiveness Assessment of Pharmaceuticals: Similarities and Differences in 29 Jurisdictions” will be published in
Value in Health, the official journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR).
Wim Goettsch, project leader of work package five of EUnetHTA, says that, “if we want to move forward with European collaboration, shared methods and best practices for REA between jurisdictions will be a necessary first step. Our study shows that important methodological aspects are approached in a similar way in many jurisdictions, indicating that there is a basis for advanced collaboration.”
Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) publishes papers, concepts, and ideas that advance the field of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research as well as policy papers to help health care leaders make evidence-based decisions. The journal is published bi-monthly and has over 8,000 subscribers (clinicians, decision makers, and researchers worldwide).
International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) is a nonprofit, international, educational and scientific organization that strives to increase the efficiency, effectiveness, and fairness of health care resource use to improve health.
For more information:
www.ispor.org