COMPARISON OF ECONOMIC EVALUATION GUIDELINES BETWEEN JAPAN AND OTHER COUNTRIES

Author(s)

Millier A1, Cheng X2, Onishi Y3, Aballéa S1, Toumi M1, Doley J1
1Creativ-Ceutical, Paris, France, 2Creativ-Ceutical, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 3Creativ-Ceutical K.K., Tokyo, Japan

OBJECTIVES: The Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) is implementing HTA evaluation for the NHI (National Health Insurance) drug price system, as a pilot phase from April 2016. The cost-effectiveness committee at the Central Social Insurance Medical Concil (Chuikyo) released the guideline for economic evaluation in Oct. 2015. As economic evaluation is expected to be mandatory for selected medicines applying for an inclusion in pharmaceutical benefits scheme, we aimed at comparing these guidelines to existing guidelines in other Asian countries, United Kingdom (UK), Australia and Sweden, to support future models adaptations. METHODS: We searched for and reviewed guidelines published in Japan, China, Taiwan, Thailand and South Korea, up to March 2016. We also checked guidelines from UK, Australian and Sweden, as these countries were chosen as examples by the Chuikyo. Similarities and differences between Japanese guidelines and those from other countries guidelines were identified. RESULTS: Japanese guidelines are relatively open, leaving much room for decision from analysts. Guidelines from different countries were broadly consistent in terms of need of systematic reviews of evidence and consideration of effectiveness data as well as efficacy, preferred analytical technique (cost-utility analysis preferred but cost-effectiveness accepted in Japan), preferred outcome measure  (QALY standard and life-years accepted if targeted technology influence survival time, in Japan), sensitivity analysis methods (probabilistic sensitivity analysis recommended), and but varied in terms of perspective (third-party payer preferred, although societal allowed in Japan) and financial impact analysis (not requested in Japan). CONCLUSIONS: This comparative exercise provides an overview of economic evaluation guidelines adopted by 5 Asian countries and 3 other countries. The recommendations differed in some aspects, but Japanese guidelines are relatively in line with other ones and open which should facilitate adaptations of models between countries.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2016-09, ISPOR Asia Pacific 2016, Singapore

Value in Health, Vol. 19, No. 7 (November 2016)

Code

PHP111

Topic

Health Technology Assessment

Topic Subcategory

Decision & Deliberative Processes

Disease

Multiple Diseases

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×