scholarly journals Cancer Drug Prices in Argentina and United Kingdom: A Comparison Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement 2) ◽  
pp. 72s-72s
Author(s):  
J . ◽  
V .
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Drug Price ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Good Decision ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
The Difference

Background: Cancer drugs challenge health-care systems because of their high prices. Drugs prices, health-care systems and GDP are no uniform throughout the world. United Kingdom (UK) has a 320% better GDP than Argentina (ARG). Aim: We aimed to compare the prices of cancer drugs in both countries, including originals, generics/copies and biosimilars available in ARG by July 2017. Methods: We surveyed official list prices per unit at ex-factory price level of 52 original cancer drugs in UK and ARG. Drugs were grouped in low (LPD) (10), medium (MPD) (7) and high prices (HPD) (35). We included prices of generics/copies (74 generics brands of 7 LPD and 46 generics brands of 6 MPD and HPD) and biosimilars (2) available in ARG and compared with those from originals. Surveyed prices did not include negotiated discounts as authorities and third payers use these undiscounted official lists to set health care. We calculated appropriate discounts to equate prices. Results: In ARG the difference of a drug price between generics/copies and originals has an average of 10.6% less for nonoriginals (range +5% to −24%). No nonoriginals drugs cost less than 24% of originals. Great variations of prices (57%) among generics. The difference of price between biosimilars and originals was 13.8% less for biosimilars. The differences of a drug price between UK and ARG showed that: a) LPD prices in ARG were 53% (−39% to +68%) more expensive than in UK, b) 86% of MPD are more expensive in ARG than in UK, with an average of 222% (−49% to +707%), c) 100% of HPD are more expensive in ARG than in UK, with an average of 123% (+8% to +408%). When translating to currency (all in US$) differences were an average of: a) LPD +141 (−353 to +412), b) MPD +1295 (−164 to +2531), and c) HPD +2649 (+471 to +10,359) more expensive in ARG than in UK per unit. Average discounts necessary to equate undiscounted official ARG list to undiscounted official UK list are: LPD 45% (24-64), MPD 71% (60-87), HPD 51% (13-80). Conclusion: a) Our results show great variations in prices between both countries. b) Prices are inversely related to GDP. c) 100% of HPD and 86% of MPD have overprices in ARG respect to UK with an average of 123% and 222% respectively. d) In currency these represent an average overpayment of US$ 2649 and US$ 1295 per unit respectively. e) Appropriate discounts to equate ARG list to UK list should be around 50%–70%. f) In ARG, differences of prices between generics/copies/biosimilars and originals are less than 24%, with an average of 10%–13%. g) By using undiscounted lists there is a high risk of overpayment. Unpublished final prices list may preclude a good decision making process even at physician level, considering that many of MPD and HPD are directed to stage IV noncurative patients with marginal quality of life advantages for some of these treatments. h) Our findings provide an evidence base for policy makers in nonhigh income countries.

Continental Divide? The Attitudes of US and Canadian Oncologists on the Costs, Cost-Effectiveness, and Health Policies Associated With New Cancer Drugs

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (27) ◽  
pp. 4149-4153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott R. Berry ◽  
Chaim M. Bell ◽  
Peter A. Ubel ◽  
William K. Evans ◽  
Eric Nadler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Drug Costs ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Effective Treatments

Purpose Oncologists in the United States and Canada work in different health care systems, but physicians in both countries face challenges posed by the rising costs of cancer drugs. We compared their attitudes regarding the costs and cost-effectiveness of medications and related health policy. Methods Survey responses of a random sample of 1,355 United States and 238 Canadian medical oncologists (all outside of Québec) were compared. Results Response rate was 59%. More US oncologists (67% v 52%; P < .001) favor access to effective treatments regardless of cost, while more Canadians favor access to effective treatments only if they are cost-effective (75% v 58%; P < .001). Most (84% US, 80% Canadian) oncologists state that patient out-of-pocket costs influence their treatment recommendations, but less than half the respondents always or frequently discuss the costs of treatments with their patients. The majority of oncologists favor more use of cost-effectiveness data in coverage decisions (80% US, 69% Canadian; P = .004), but fewer than half the oncologists in both countries feel well equipped to use cost-effectiveness information. Majorities of oncologists favor government price controls (57% US, 68% Canadian; P = .01), but less than half favor more cost-sharing by patients (29% US, 41% Canadian; P = .004). Oncologists in both countries prefer to have physicians and nonprofit agencies determine whether drugs provide good value. Conclusion Oncologists in the United States and Canada generally have similar attitudes regarding cancer drug costs, cost-effectiveness, and associated policies, despite practicing in different health care systems. The results support providing education to help oncologists in both countries use cost-effectiveness information and discuss drug costs with their patients.

A survey of U.S. and Canadian oncologists’ attitudes toward the cost, cost-effectiveness (CE), and reimbursement of cancer drugs

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9502-9502
Author(s):  
P. Neumann ◽  
S. R. Berry ◽  
E. Nadler ◽  
W. C. Evans ◽  
J. Palmer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Drug Costs ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Value For Money ◽  
Cancer Treatments ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
The U.S

9502 Background: Drug costs and reimbursement issues offer significant challenges to U.S. and Canadian oncologists even though they practice in substantially different health care systems. However, little is known about the attitudes of American and Canadian oncologists towards these issues. Methods: We surveyed 1,379 U.S. and 356 Cdn oncologists to assess their attitudes to cancer drug costs, CE and reimbursement policies. Results: Response rate was 57% in the U.S. and 48% in Canada. Oncologists in both countries stated that patients' “out-of-pocket” drug costs influenced their treatment recommendations (84% U.S., 80% Cdn respondents). Most respondents felt that every patient should have access to effective cancer treatments regardless of cost (66% US; 54% Cdn), while 59% of U.S. and 72% of Cdn and respondents believed that patients should only have access to effective cancer treatments that provided “good value for money.” 70% of U.S. and 64% Cdn respondents felt that <$100,000 per life year gained was a reasonable definition of “good value for money” but less than half of respondents (42% US, 49% Cdn) felt well prepared to interpret and use CE information in their treatment decisions. A majority of respondents (57% US, 69% Cdn) felt government price controls for cancer drugs are needed while a minority felt that more cost-sharing by patients was needed (29% US, 37% Cdn). Most oncologists felt that evaluating whether a drug provides “good value” should be overseen by an independent non-profit agency (57% US, 71% Cdn) or physicians (61% US and Cdn); in contrast, few believed that government (21% US, 33% Cdn), patients (36% US, 37% Cdn) or insurance companies (6% US, 10% Cdn) should determine “good value”. 79% of U.S. and 69% of Cdn respondents felt more use of CE data in coverage and reimbursement decisions is needed. Conclusions: Oncologists in the U.S. and Canada share many similar attitudes to cancer drug costs, CE, and reimbursement policies despite differences in their health care systems. In both countries, oncologists favor more use of CE information. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Attitudes of British Psychiatrists to the Diagnosis of Somatisation Disorder

1993 ◽  
Vol 162 (4) ◽  
pp. 463-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Stern ◽  
Michael Murphy ◽  
Christopher Bass
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
North American ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Postal Questionnaire ◽  
Liaison Psychiatry ◽  
Diagnostic Practices ◽  
Somatisation Disorder ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
The Difference

A postal questionnaire was sent to 195 senior British psychiatrists who were asked about their attitudes towards the DSM-III-R diagnosis of somatisation disorder (SD) and the ICD-10 diagnosis of multiple somatisation disorder. Of the 148 respondents, 98 (66%) had experience of liaison psychiatry, and these psychiatrists used the diagnosis significantly more often than those without liaison sessions. More than half the respondents perceived SD as both a personality disorder and a mental state disorder, although 27% thought that patients with SD had an undiagnosed physical disease. The marked discrepancy between British and North American psychiatrists in diagnostic practices was perceived to be a consequence of both the difference in health care systems and the interest shown in the disorder by North American psychiatrists, rather than a reflection of genuine differences in prevalence.

scholarly journals Cancer Drugs: An International Comparison of Postlicensing Price Inflation

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. e538-e542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Savage ◽  
Sarah Mahmoud ◽  
Yogin Patel ◽  
Hagop Kantarjian
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Price Inflation ◽  
Drug Prices ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Price Increases

Purpose: The cost of cancer drugs forms a rising proportion of health care budgets worldwide. A number of studies have examined international comparisons of initial cost, but there is little work on postlicensing price increases. To examine this, we compared cancer drug prices at initial sale and subsequent price inflation in the United States and United Kingdom and also reviewed relevant price control mechanisms. Methods: The 10 top-selling cancer drugs were selected, and their prices at initial launch and in 2015 were compared. Standard nondiscounted prices were obtained from the relevant annual copies of the RED BOOK and the British National Formulary. Results: At initial marketing, prices were on average 42% higher in the United States than in the United Kingdom. After licensing in the United States, all 10 drugs had price rises averaging an overall annual 8.8% (range, 1.4% to 24.1%) increase. In comparison, in the United Kingdom, six drugs had unchanged prices, two had decreased prices, and two had modest price increases. The overall annual increase in the United Kingdom was 0.24%. Conclusion: Cancer drug prices are rising substantially, both at their initial marketing price and, in the United States, at postlicensing prices. In the United Kingdom, the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme, an agreement between the government and the pharmaceutical industry, controls health care costs while allowing a return on investment and funds for research. The increasing costs of cancer drugs are approaching the limits of sustainability, and a similar government-industry agreement may allow stability for both health care provision and the pharmaceutical industry in the United States.

Utilization of Health Care Coalitions and Resiliency Forums in the United States and United Kingdom: Different Approaches to Strengthen Emergency Preparedness

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Walsh ◽  
Allan Graeme Swan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Care Systems

ABSTRACTThe process for developing national emergency management strategies for both the United States and the United Kingdom has led to the formulation of differing approaches to meet similar desired outcomes. Historically, the pathways for each are the result of the enactment of legislation in response to a significant event or a series of events. The resulting laws attempt to revise practices and policies leading to more effective and efficient management in preparing, responding, and mitigating all types of natural, manmade, and technological hazards. Following the turn of the 21st century, each country has experienced significant advancements in emergency management including the formation and utilization of 2 distinct models: health care coalitions in the United States and resiliency forums in the United Kingdom. Both models have evolved from circumstances and governance unique to each country. Further in-depth study of both approaches will identify strengths, weaknesses, and existing gaps to meet continued and future challenges of our respective disaster health care systems. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2016;10:161–164)

scholarly journals Źródła finansowania ochrony zdrowia w Polsce i we Włoszech

2019 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 81-95
Author(s):  
Paweł Lenio
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Local Government ◽  
Health Care System ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Specific Model ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Financing Health Care ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Care System

SOURCES OF FINANCING OF THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IN POLAND AND IN ITALYThe study found that the majority of similarities and differences in the legal structure of Polish and Italian sources of financing of health care are the result of the adoption of a specific model of health care, and therefore there are fundamental differences between the catalogues of sources of financing health care in Poland and Italy. The basis for the difference between the Italian and Polish catalogues of sources of financing health care is the obligation of patients to contribute to the costs of the health care system in Italy by paying fees in return for receiving a certain type of service. In the reforms of the Polish and Italian health care systems one can see signs of transferring more and more responsibility to local government units. However, Italian and Polish local government units have no influence on the principles of functioning of the system and the shape of basic sources of financing health care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document