Document Sample
Asian Powered By Docstoc
					How Economic Evaluation is Used
  for Drug Reimbursement and
       Formulary Decisions
     Asia Pacific Perspective

    Gary M. Oderda, Pharm.D., M.P.H.
         Professor and Director
      University of Utah College of
                                   Current Status
 • At the ISPOR Seoul meeting in 2008 nearly
   every Asian country indicated they use a
   version of Health Technology Assessment in
   making drug use reimbursement and
   formulary decisions.
 • In most countries these decisions are made
   without considering cost effectiveness.
 • Pharmacoeconomic based Health
   Technology Assessment is growing but small
Yang, Bong-Min, The Future of Health Technology Assessment in
Healthcare Decision Making in Asia. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27(11):891-901
             Current Status
Formal HTA Programs   Informal HTA Programs
    •   Australia           •   Bangladesh
    •   Malaysia            •   Bhutan
    •   Singapore           •   Brunei
    •   Hong Kong           •   Cambodia
    •   New Zealand         •   India
    •   China               •   Indonesia
    •   Phillipines         •   Laos
    •   Korea               •   Maldives
    •   Thailand            •   Mongolia
    •   Taiwan              •   Nepal
    •   Iran                •   Pakistan
                            •   Sri Lanka
                            •   Vietnam
         Presentation Focus
• Four countries at varying phases of
  development will be discussed
  •   Australia
  •   Taiwan
  •   South Korea
  •   Thailand
• Population
• GDP $809.2
  billion (2008)
• GDP Per Capita
• Universal Health Insurance since 1984
• Government supports
  • Medicare
    • Hospitals
    • Providers (Physicians and Others)
  • Pharmacy Benefits Scheme (PBS)
    • All residents are eligible
    • Lower co-pays for low income patients
• PBS established by the National Health
  Act of 1953 and ammendments
  • Objective – To provide access to life
    enhancing medicines at an affordable price
    taking into account effectiveness, cost and
    cost-effectiveness of medicines
  • The Government may negotiate prices
• Pharmacy Benefits Advisory Committee
  • Provides advice to the Minister of Health
  • Considers
    • Clinical Effectiveness
    • Safety
    • Cost Effectiveness
  • Mandatory submission of economic
    information by manufacturers
• PBAC Economic Guidelines
  • Societal Perspective
  • Only direct costs required
  • Must include
     • Comparison with treatment to be replaced
     • Evidence of effectiveness
     • Incremental and Sensitivity Analyses
  • Strong Preference for
     • Head to head trials
     • Cost Utility Analyses
• Coverage provided for new drugs that are being
  considered for PBAC listing
• Evaluation of submissions to PBAC (1994-
  2004, N=858) that included QALY’s gained
  (N=116) or Life Years gained (N=138)
• Compared to average submissions, the
  change in likelihood of coverage was
  • Clinical significance +21%
  • Life threatening conditions +38%
  • Increase of $A10,000 from mean value of
    $A46,400 -6% in incremental cost/QALY

             Harris AH, 2009
• Population
• GDP $738.8
• GDP Per Capita
• Social health insurance modeled after Japan and
• NHI Scheme 2005 - Single Payer system
• Health Care 6.1% of GDP (2006)
• Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) established 2007
   – Provides evidence of comparative effectiveness and cost
   – Dossiers submitted to CDE undergo independent scientific
     assessment with additional input from the medical
   – Committee members and opinion leaders from medical
     associations serve as an external advisory board
• Bureau of NHI uses HTA evidence for listing and
• Deliberations and discussions are not made public
• Data submitters have opportunity for input
• Data submission is voluntary
• A guideline for submission exists (GMSPE) but it is
  not official
• Industry believe that conducting PE studies and
  confirmation of CE should guarantee a higher price
• Resource allocation depends more on negotiations
  than HTA evidence (Huang, N, Pricing and Reimbursement
    Meeting, Bangkok, 2008)
           South Korea
• Population
• GDP $1.344
• GDP Per Capita
              South Korea
• Launched a universal National Health
  Insurance system in 1989
• Operated at a deficit
• Guidelines for Economic Evaluation of
  Pharmaceuticals in Korea (KPEG)
• Policy using economic evaluation data in
  making drug reimbursement decisions (2006)
• Positive List System (PLS) created in 2008.
  Lists covered drugs selected utilizing economic
  evaluation data.
                South Korea
• Prior to the PLS
  – Large number of drugs on reimbursement list
     • 21,000
     • Cost effectiveness and budget impact rarely
     • Contained many substitutable drugs and a large
       number of small and medium sized companies
       competing strongly
  – Quick Adoption
     • Second in the world to review 25 of 61 new drugs in
     • Lack of adequate clinical and pricing data available
                South Korea
• All new drugs – PE HTA
• Existing drugs evaluated over time
• HTA Implementing Organization (HIRA)
  •   Company submits PE data
  •   Staff critique and prepare HTA report
  •   Reviewed by government appointed expert panel
  •   Concerns about bias, transparency, and staffing
  •   78 drugs evaluated from January 2007 to June
          South Korea
• Detailed information shared between HIRA
  and manufacturer but is not published
• ICER threshold is a key criterion used
• Population
• GDP $553.4 billion
• GDP Per Capita
• Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) (30
  Baht Plan) implemented in 2001
• 3.5% of GDP related to health care
• Introduction of HTA viewed as key to
• HTA unit as part of the Ministry of Public
• National List of Essential Medicines
• Drugs approved by the Thai FDA based
  on efficacy, safety and quality
• Public health insurance pays for NLEM
• Public sector drug prices negotiated at
  central and hospital levels.
• Ministry of Commerce – price controls
  with ceiling prices
• Rapid Growth of HTA
• Health Intervention and Technology Assessment
  Program (HITAP) 2006
  • National guidelines for HTA (2008)
  • Introductory and Advanced training in economic
    evaluation issues provided
  • Working to increase staffing and infrastructure
  • Completed ~12 HTA evaluations
  • Revision of NLEM in 2008 was the first time that
    pharmacoeconomic evidence played an official role in
    designing reimbursement
•   Four countries
•   Four strategies
•   Some more advanced than others
•   All have made significant progress
•   We can all learn from their organization,
    successes and challenges.
•   Kim C. Health technology assessment in South Korea. Int J Tech
    Assessment in Health Care, 25:Supplement 1 (2009);219-223.
•   Sivalal S. Health technology assessment in the Asia Pacific Region.
    Int J Tech Assessment in Health Care, 25:Supplement 1 (2009);196-
•   Teerawattananon Y, et al. Historical development of health technology
    assessment in Thailand. Int J Tech Assessment in Health Care,
    25:Supplement 1 (2009);241-252.
•   Harris A, et al. The role of value for money in public insurance
    coverage decisions for drugs in Australia. A retrospective analysis
•   Halley D. The history of health technology assessment in Australia. Int
    J Tech Assessment in Health Care, 25:Supplement 1 (2009);61-67.
•   Yang B. The future of health technology assessment in healthcare
    decision making in Asia. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27(11):891-901.

Shared By: