nach oben

PharmacoEconomics

Erschienen in:

01.01.2005 | Leading Article

Role of pharmacoeconomic analysis in R&D decision making

When, Where, How?

verfasst von: Paul Miller

Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics | Ausgabe 1/2005

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Pharmacoeconomics is vitally important to drug manufacturers in terms of communicating to external decision-makers (payers, prescribers, patients) the value of their products, achieving regulatory and reimbursement approval and contributing to commercial success. Since development of new drugs is long, costly and risky, and decisions must be made how to allocate considerable research and development (R&D) resources, pharmacoeconomics also has an essential role informing internal decision-making (within a company) during drug development.

The use of pharmacoeconomics in early development phases is likely to enhance the efficiency of R&D resource use and also provide a solid foundation for communicating product value to external decision-makers further downstream, increasing the likelihood of regulatory (reimbursement) approval and commercial success. This paper puts the case for use of pharmacoeconomic analyses earlier in the development process and outlines five techniques (clinical trial simulation [CTS], option pricing [OP], investment appraisal [IA], threshold analysis [TA] and value of information [VOI] analysis) that can provide useful input into the design of clinical development programmes, portfolio management and optimal pricing strategy.

CTS can estimate efficacy and tolerability profiles before clinical data are available. OP can show the value of different clinical programme designs, sequencing of studies and stop decisions. IA can compare expected net present value (NPV) of different product profiles or study designs. TA can be used to understand development drug profile requirements given partial data. VOI can assist risk management by quantifying uncertainty and assessing the economic viability of gathering further information on the development drug.

No amount of pharmacoeconomic data can make a bad drug good; what it can do is enhance the drug developers understanding of the characteristics of that drug. Decision-making, in light of this information, is likely to be better than that without it, whether it leads to faster termination of uneconomic projects or the allocation of more appropriate resources to attractive projects.

Noyce R. Ch. 11. Project strategy. In: Matheson D, Matheson J, editors. The smart organisation: creating value through strategic R&D. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press, 1998: 221

Grabowski H. The effect of pharmacoeconomics on company research and development decisions. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (5): 389–97CrossRef

Clemens K, Garrison LP, Jones A, et al. Strategic use of pharmacoeconomic research in early drug development and global pricing. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 4 (5): 315–22CrossRef

Datamonitor. Optimizing pharmacoeconomic return on investment. Benefits throughout the product life cycle. Datamonitor (report ref: DMHC1478) 2000

DiMasi JA, Caglarcan E, Wood-Armany M. Emerging role of pharmacoeconomics in the research and development decision-making process. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (7): 753–66CrossRef

DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 2003 Mar; 22 (2): 151–85CrossRef

DiMasi JA. The value of improving the productivity of the drug development process: faster times and better decisions. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 Suppl. 3: 1–10CrossRef

Grabowski H, Vernon J, DiMasi J. Returns on research and development for 1990s new drug introductions. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 Suppl. 3: 11–29CrossRef

Annemans L, Geneste B, Jolain B. Early modelling for assessing health and economic outcomes of drug therapy. Value Health 2000; 3 (6: 427–34CrossRef

10.

O’Hagan A, Luce B. A primer on Bayesian statistics in health economics and outcomes research. Bethesda (MD): Medtap International, 2003

11.

Briggs A. Statistical methods for cost-effectiveness research: a guide to current issues and future developments. London: OHE, 2003

12.

Shih Y-CT. Bayesian approach in pharmacoeconomics: relevance to decision-makers. Expert Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res 2003; 3 (3): 237–50CrossRef

13.

O’Hagan A, Stevens JW. Bayesian methods for design and analysis of cost-effectiveness trials in the evaluation of health care technologies. Stat Methods Med Res 2002; 11: 469–90CrossRef

14.

O’Hagan A, Stevens JW. Bayesian assessment of sample size for clinical trials of cost effectiveness. Med Decis Making 2001; 21: 219–30CrossRef

15.

Bonate PL. Clinical trial simulation in drug development. Pharm Res 2000; 17: 252–6CrossRef

16.

Hale M, Gillespie WR, Gupta S, et al. Clinical trial simulation as a tool for increased drug development efficiency [online]. Available from URL: http://www.actmagazine.com/applied clinical trials. [Accessed 2004 May 31]

17.

Krall RL, Engleman KH, Ko HC, et al. Clinical trial modelling and simulation: work in progress. Drug Inf J 1998; 32: 971–6CrossRef

18.

Holford NH, Kimko HC, Monteleone JP, et al. Simulation of clinical trials. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2000; 40: 209–34CrossRef

19.

Hughes DA, Walley T. Economic evaluations during early (phase II) drug development: a role for clinical trial simulations? Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (11): 1069–77CrossRef

20.

Burman CF, Senn S. Examples of option values in drug development. Pharmaceut Statist 2003; 2: 113–25CrossRef

21.

Pearson A. The use of ranking formulae in R&D projects. R&D Management 1972; 2: 69–73CrossRef

22.

Senn S. Some statistical issues in project prioritization in the pharmaceutical industry. Stat Med 1996; 15: 2689–702CrossRef

23.

Senn S. Further statistical issues in project prioritization in the pharmaceutical industry. Drug Inf 1998; 32: 253–9CrossRef

24.

Palmer S, Smith P. Incorporating option values into the economic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 2000; 19: 755–66CrossRef

25.

Backhouse ME. An investment appraisal approach to clinical trial design. Health Econ 1998; 7: 605–19CrossRef

26.

Chilcott J, Brennan A, Booth A, et al. The role of modelling in the planning and prioritisation of clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 2003; 7 (23): iii, 1–125CrossRef

27.

Backhouse ME. Use of randomised controlled trials for producing cost-effectiveness evidence: potential impact of design choices on sample size and study duration. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20 (15): 1061–77CrossRef

28.

Backhouse ME. The use of discrete choice analysis in the design of randomised controlled trials [poster]. ISPOR; 2002 Nov 35; Rotterdam

29.

Poland B, Wada R. Combining drug-disease and economic modelling to inform drug development decisions. Drug Discov Today 2001; 6 (22): 1165–70CrossRef

30.

Thompson D, Bird A, Weinstein M. Decision analysis in the drug development process: use of pharmacoeconomics to inform “go/no-go” decision-making. ISPOR Seminar; 2002 May 20; Boston

31.

Claxton K. Bayesian approaches to the value of information: implications for regulation of new pharmaceuticals. Health Econ 1999; 8: 269–74CrossRef

32.

Claxton K, Neumann PJ, Araki S, Weinstein MC. Bayesian value-of-information analysis: an application to a policy model of Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2001 Winter; 17 (1): 38–55CrossRef

33.

Claxton K, Posnett J. An economic approach to clinical trial design and research priority setting. Health Econ 1996; 5: 51324CrossRef

34.

Claxton K, Thompson KM. A dynamic programming approach to the efficient design of clinical trials. J Health Econ 2001 Sep; 20 (5): 797–822CrossRef

35.

Hawkins N, Claxton K. Optimal drug development programmes and efficient licensing and reimbursement rules: the role of value of information analysis. Abstract presented at Society Medical Decision Making 2003

36.

Taylor RS, Drummond MF, Salkeld G, Sullivan SD. Inclusion of cost effectiveness in licensing requirements of new drugs: the fourth hurdle. BMJ 2004; 329: 972–5CrossRef

Titel: Role of pharmacoeconomic analysis in R&D decision making
When, Where, How?
verfasst von: Paul Miller
Publikationsdatum: 01.01.2005
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics / Ausgabe 1/2005
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200523010-00001

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2005

A randomised trial of the cost effectiveness of buprenorphine as an alternative to methadone maintenance treatment for heroin dependence in a primary care setting

Measuring productivity changes in economic evaluation

Pharmacoeconomic impact of non-compliance with statins

Household-based costs and benefits of vaccinating healthy children in daycare against influenza virus

Q-TWiST analysis of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, fluorouracil versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil treatment for premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer

Comorbidities and costs of adult patients diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder