Budget impact analysis of medicines: estimated values versus real-world evidence and the implications

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Resende Faleiros ◽  
Juliana Alvares-Teodoro ◽  
Everton Nunes da Silva ◽  
Brian B. Godman ◽  
Ramon Gonçalves Pereira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Budget Impact Analysis ◽  
Real World Evidence

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of infliximab and its biosimilar in patients with refractory moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease using real world evidence in Thailand

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 1302-1310
Author(s):  
Pochamana Phisalprapa ◽  
Chayanis Kositamongkol ◽  
Julajak Limsrivilai ◽  
Satimai Aniwan ◽  
Phunchai Charatcharoenwitthaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Real World ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Budget Impact Analysis ◽  
Real World Evidence

scholarly journals Budget Impact Analysis of Diabetes Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zejun Luo ◽  
Zhen Ruan ◽  
Dongning Yao ◽  
Carolina Oi Lam Ung ◽  
Yunfeng Lai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Model Validation ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Real World ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Budget Impact Analysis ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data

Background: Budget impact analysis (BIA) is an economic assessment that estimates the financial consequences of adopting a new intervention. BIA is used to make informed reimbursement decisions, as a supplement to cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs).Objectives: We systematically reviewed BIA studies associated with anti-diabetic drugs and assessed the extent to which international BIA guidelines were followed in these studies.Methods: We conducted a literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Econlit, Medline, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data knowledge Service platform from database inception to June 30, 2021. ISPOR good practice guidelines were used as a methodological standard for assessing BIAs. We extracted and compared the study characteristics outlined by the ISPOR BIA Task Force to evaluate the guideline compliance of the included BIA.Results: A total of eighteen studies on the BIA for anti-diabetic drugs were identified. More than half studies were from developed countries. Seventeen studies were based on model and one study was based on real-world data. Overall, analysis considered a payer perspective, reported potential budget impacts over 1–5 years. Assumptions were mainly made about target population size, market share uptake of new interventions, and scope of cost. The data used for analysis varied among studies and was rarely justified. Model validation and sensitivity analysis were lacking in the current BIA studies. Rebate analysis was conducted in a few studies to explore the price discount that was required for new interventions to demonstrate cost equivalence to comparators.Conclusion: Existing studies evaluating budget impact for anti-diabetic drugs vary greatly in methodology, some of which showed low compliance to good practice guidelines. In order for the BIA to be useful for assisting in health plan decision-making, it is important for future studies to optimize compliance to national or ISPOR good practice guidelines on BIA. Model validation and sensitivity analysis should also be improved in future BIA studies. Continued improvement of BIA using real-world data is necessary to ensure high-quality analyses and to provide reliable results.

scholarly journals PIN150 Economic VALUE of Treatment and Vaccine Technologies to Address the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cost-Effectiveness and Budget IMPACT Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S568
Author(s):  
W. Padula ◽  
S. Malaviya ◽  
N. Reid ◽  
F. Chingcuanco ◽  
J. Ballreich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Budget Impact Analysis

scholarly journals AB0634 BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF BIOLOGICAL THERAPY COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS TREATMENT, IN A FOURTH LEVEL HOSPITAL IN BOGOTA COLOMBIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1612.2-1613
Author(s):  
J. M. Bello-Gualtero ◽  
O. J. Calixto ◽  
G. Salguedo ◽  
Y. M. Chamorro-Melo ◽  
C. A. Camargo Rodríguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Annual Cost ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Biological Therapy ◽  
Biologic Therapy ◽  
Disease Diagnosis ◽  
Budget Impact Analysis ◽  
Military Hospital ◽  
Number Of Patients

Background:Spondyloarthritis refers to a family of diseases, of which ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis are responsible for axial impairment. Previously, the only treatment available were NSAIDs, which control activity and stop radiological progression, but at the expense of increased adverse effects, such as cardiovascular risk, dyspepsia and chronic renal failure. For the past 2 decades, biological therapy has been available, which means an increase in care costs.Objectives:The objective of this study is to perform a budget impact analysis of biologic therapy.Methods:To do a budget impact analysis from the perspective of the payer, comparing biological therapy with coventional therapy for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Demographic characterization of the population attended at the Central Military Hospital. Time horizon from 2012 to 2018, taking the activity count according to the hospital’s billing and the prices of the activities of the state body SISMED. Exchange rates at the end of 2018.Results:The patients attended were 117, mostly men (63, 25%), average age 46, 4 years (SD 13), with disease diagnosis time of 9, 8 years (SD 9, 6). In the budget impact analysis, it is observed that 25% of patients were on DMARDs therapy, 22% with NSAIDs and 96% with biologic therapy. The average year/patient cost with NSAIDs alone would be EUR 381, with DMARDs only EUR 9,318 and, if only biological therapy was used, EUR 423. Within the total number of patients, the average annual cost, including the possibility of combining these drugs, amounted to EUR 5,403Conclusion:Including biological therapy in the care of patients with spondyloarthritis can increase up to 24 times the annual cost per patient. This increase is not only due to higher market value, it also relates to the need for more medical procedures and diagnostic follow-up tests.References:[1]Strömbeck, et al. Cost of Illness from the Public Payers’ Perspective in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis in Rheumatological Care. J Rheumatol 2010;37;2348-2355.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document