Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-qpj69 Total loading time: 0.315 Render date: 2021-03-07T22:25:06.595Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Cost-effectiveness of new drugs: A systematic review of published evidence for new chemical entity drugs introduced on the Swedish market 1987–2000

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2005

Jonas Lundkvist
Affiliation:
Karolinska Institute
Bengt Jönsson
Affiliation:
Stockholm School of Economics
Clas Rehnberg
Affiliation:
Karolinska Institute

Abstract

Objectives: The number of published economic evaluations has increased dramatically during the past decades, but the number of studies performed for different drugs varies substantially. The objective of this study was to analyze the amount of cost-effectiveness evidence for new drugs, by systematically reviewing the published evidence of cost-effectiveness.

Methods: The study included 442 new chemical entities, approved in Sweden between 1987 and 2000. The amount of cost-effectiveness evidence was rated and analyzed together with information about sales and the therapeutic benefit of the drugs. Information about cost-effectiveness was obtained from the Health Economic Evaluation Database.

Results: The results showed that most cost-effectiveness evidence was published approximately 1 to 5 years after the approval year and that very few articles were published before or during the approval year. More than half of the drugs did not have any evidence of their cost-effectiveness. A total of 51 of the evaluated drugs were considered having much evidence of cost-effectiveness, 84 drugs were considered having some evidence, and the remaining 307 drugs had little evidence. The analyses indicated that drugs with improved effectiveness or safety compared with other marked drugs had more evidence of cost-effectiveness and that drugs with low sale were likely to have less evidence of cost-effectiveness than drugs with high sale.

Conclusions: The study indicated that the publication of cost-effectiveness information for new drugs introduced between 1987 and 2000 may be considered rather rational, that is, the economic evaluations were performed for drugs for which this information was most important.

Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

CCOHTA. Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Canada. 2nd ed. Ottawa: CCOHTA; November 1997.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance for manufacturers and sponsors. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; June 2001.
National Corporation of Swedish Pharmacies. 2002. Sale statistics. Uppsala: National Corporation of Swedish Pharmacies
The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU). Available at: www.sbu.se. Accessed: 2004.
DiMasi JA, Caglarcan E, Wood-Armany M. 2001 Emerging role of pharmacoeconomics in the research and development decision-making process. Pharmacoeconomics. 19: 753766.Google Scholar
Drummond M, Brown R, Fendrick AM, et al. 2003 Use of pharmacoeconomics information–report of the ISPOR Task Force on use of pharmacoeconomic/health economic information in health-care decision making. Value Health. 6: 407416.Google Scholar
Drummond M, Jonsson B, Rutten F. 1997 The role of economic evaluation in the pricing and reimbursement of medicines. Health Policy. 40: 199215.Google Scholar
Drummond MF. 2003 The use of health economic information by reimbursement authorities. Rheumatology (Oxford). 42 (Suppl 3): iii60iii63.Google Scholar
Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. 1996 Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ. 313: 275283.Google Scholar
Eklund M, Persson B. 1999. Pharmaceutical pricing in a regulated market. Stockholm: Department of Economics, Stockholm School of Economics
Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, Fendrick AM, Weissert WG. 2000 Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: In search of a standard. Med Decis Making. 20: 332342.Google Scholar
Hjelmgren J, Berggren F, Andersson F. 2001 Health economic guidelines-similarities, differences and some implications. Value Health. 4: 225250.Google Scholar
Hoffmann C, Stoykova BA, Nixon J, et al. 2002 Do health-care decision makers find economic evaluations useful? The findings of focus group research in UK health authorities. Value Health. 5: 7178.Google Scholar
Johannesson M. 1995 Economic evaluation of drugs and its potential uses in policy making. Pharmacoeconomics. 8: 190198.Google Scholar
Johannesson M. 1995 Economic evaluation of health care and policymaking. Health Policy. 33: 179190.Google Scholar
Jönsson B, Lundkvist J. 2002 Hälsoekonomiska utvärderingar som underlag för beslut om pris och subventionering. Riktlinjer och beslutskriterier. SSE/EFI Working Paper No 504
Jönsson B, Lundkvist J. 2002 Kostnadseffektivitet hos nya läkemedel. En systematisk genomgång av publicerade studier för NCEs registrerade i Sverige 1987-2000. [Cost-effectiveness of new drugs. A systematic review of published studies for NCEs approved in Sweden 1987-2000]. SSE/EFI Working Paper No 503.
Newhouse JP. 1998 US and UK health economics: Two disciplines separated by a common language? Health Econ. (Suppl 1)7: S79S92.Google Scholar
Office of Health Economics. 2002. Health Economic Evaluation Database (HEED). In: OHE-IFPMA Databse Ltd. London: Office of Health Economics
Rosen A, Beermann B. 1999 Rating innovative therapeutic benefits of medicines licensed in Sweden 1987-1997. International journal of pharmaceutical medicine. 13: 123126.Google Scholar
Rutten F. 1996 Economic evaluation and health care decision-making. Health Policy. 36: 215229.Google Scholar
Weinstein M. 1995 From cost-effectiveness ratios to resource allocation: Where to draw the line? In: Sloan FA, ed. Valuing health care: Costs, benefits, and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals and other medical technologies. New York: Cambridge University Press

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 8 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 7th March 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Cost-effectiveness of new drugs: A systematic review of published evidence for new chemical entity drugs introduced on the Swedish market 1987–2000
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Cost-effectiveness of new drugs: A systematic review of published evidence for new chemical entity drugs introduced on the Swedish market 1987–2000
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Cost-effectiveness of new drugs: A systematic review of published evidence for new chemical entity drugs introduced on the Swedish market 1987–2000
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *