A Meta-Regression Analysis of Utility Weights for Breast Cancer: The Power of Patients' Experience.

To summarize utility estimates of breast cancer and to assess the relative impacts of study characteristics on predicting breast cancer utilities. We searched Medline, Embase, RISS, and KoreaMed from January 1996 to April 2019 to find literature reporting utilities for breast cancer. Thirty-five articles were identified, reporting 224 utilities. A hierarchical linear model was used to conduct a meta-regression that included disease stages, assessment methods, respondent type, age of the respondents, and scale bounds as explanatory variables. The utility for early and late-stage breast cancer, as estimated by using the time-tradeoff with the scales anchored by death to perfect health with non-patients, were 0.742 and 0.525, respectively. The severity of breast cancer, assessment method, and respondent type were significant predictors of utilities, but the age of the respondents and bounds of the scale were not. Patients who experienced the health states valued 0.142 higher than did non-patients (P <0.001). Besides the disease stage, the respondent type had the highest impact on breast cancer utility.

Are Recently Evaluated Drugs More Likely to Receive Positive Reimbursement Recommendations in South Korea? 11-year Experience of the South Korean Positive List System.

PURPOSE: The South Korean government in 2014 introduced various policies to enhance accessibility of pharmaceuticals. This study sought to examine whether positive reimbursement recommendations of pharmaceuticals have increased since 2014. METHODS: Industry submissions evaluated from January 2007 to December 2018 were identified, and characteristics relevant to reimbursement recommendations were extracted. Logistic regression analyses with robust SEs were used to quantify the likelihood of positive recommendations for pharmaceuticals, after controlling for relevant factors influencing the recommendations. FINDINGS: During the study period, 355 (72.9%) of 487 submissions were positively recommended; the drugs evaluated after 2014 (77.8%) were significantly more likely to receive positive reimbursement recommendations than the drugs evaluated before 2014 (69.5%). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, several factors (labeled a noncancer drug, priced less than alternatives, considered clinically superior, and having budget impact >10 billion South Korean won) were significantly associated with positive recommendations (P < 0.05). When considering interaction effects between evaluation year and other variables, only the interaction between comparative clinical benefit and evaluation year was significant. Specifically, clinically noninferior drugs evaluated after 2014 had 2.85 times the odds of receiving positive recommendations compared with the clinically noninferior drugs evaluated earlier. IMPLICATIONS: Recently evaluated drugs are more likely to receive positive reimbursement recommendations, especially those drugs whose comparative clinical benefits are noninferior.

Assessment of pharmacoeconomic evaluations submitted for reimbursement in Korea.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of pharmacoeconomic evaluations (PEs) submitted with new drug applications for reimbursement and to investigate the role of PEs for coverage decisions in Korea. METHODS: Forty-seven PEs that were submitted by pharmaceutical companies for coverage decisions between June 2005 and December 2009 were included in this study. To assess their appropriateness with regard to the PE guidelines, we used the Health Insurance Review and Assessment services (HIRA) checklist consisting of 20 items based on the PE guidelines. We also evaluated the results for coverage decisions, as "recommended," "recommended with restricted use," or "not recommended," based on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and the range of uncertainty. RESULTS: On average, 14 of the 20 items on the HIRA checklist were fulfilled (70.9%, range 35.0%-100%). The compliance rate for the following items was above 70%: presentation of perspectives and evaluation methods, a sufficient time horizon, and appropriateness of comparators and health outcomes. The compliance rate for the following items was below 70%: omission of objectives for the study, inappropriate target population, unclear selection process for effectiveness and cost, inappropriate cost estimation, insufficient justification of generalizability, and description of study limitations. The range of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life-years of PEs from a societal perspective varied from dominant to 59K USD (n = 13): it consisted of dominant to 28K USD for "recommended" submissions (n = 6), 8K to 20K USD for "recommended with restricted use" submissions (n = 4), and 13K to 59K for "not recommended" ones (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that most PEs in this study have reached an adequate level for coverage decisions. Overall barriers associated with a lack of relevant evidence could account for the low compliance rate with specific items in the PE guidelines. PEs with good quality submitted for coverage decisions have played an important role for selecting cost-effective drugs.