...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical therapeutics >Review of regulatory recommendations for orphan drug submissions in the netherlands and scotland: focus on the underlying pharmacoeconomic evaluations.
【24h】

Review of regulatory recommendations for orphan drug submissions in the netherlands and scotland: focus on the underlying pharmacoeconomic evaluations.

机译:审查荷兰和苏格兰针对孤儿药提交的监管建议:重点关注基础药物经济学评估。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Pharmacoeconomic evaluations of new drug therapies are often required for reimbursement or guidance decisions. However, for orphan drugs, country-specific requirements exist. In the Netherlands, orphan drug developers can be exempted from providing a full pharmacoeconomic evaluation, whereas in Scotland, no such exceptions can be made, although additional modifying factors specific to orphan products may be considered. Objective: The aim of the present work was to identify differences in the outcomes of the recommendations for orphan drugs for rare diseases between 2 European countries: Scotland and the Netherlands. Methods: All orphan drug reports to the Dutch Committee for Pharmaceutical Assistance (Commissie Farma-ceutische Hulp [CFH]) and orphan drugs guidance issued by the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) through May 2009 were reviewed from the respective organizations' Web sites. The following were gathered from the pharmacoeconomic analyses and recommendations for reimbursement in the Netherlands or guidance for drug use in Scotland: drug indication, outcome of pharmacoeconomic evaluation, recommendation, and exact date. Results: Dossiers for 38 orphan drugs were submitted to the CFH; 37 were submitted to the SMC. Only 1 submission to the CFH included a full pharmacoeconomic analysis; all other reports included only a cost analysis. Twenty-four submissions to the SMC were accompanied by a full pharmacoeconomic evaluation; no information could be obtained for 4 drugs. The remaining reports either did not include a cost-effectiveness analysis or were deemed insufficient by the SMC. Forty-three percent (10/23) of the cost-utility analyses submitted to the SMC reported an unfavorable outcome of more than pound30,000/ quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained; of these, only 2 (20%) reporting incremental cost-utility ratios of pound43.717 to pound81.000 were granted a restricted positive recommendation. The CFH gave positive recommendations for reimbursement for 36 of 38 submissions (95%). Of the 37 orphan drugs submitted to the SMC, 19 (51%) received a positive recommendation for use. Seventy-three percent (8/11) of submissions to the SMC with an unfavorable cost-effectiveness estimate (ie, more than pound30,000 [euro34,000 or US Dollars 48,000] per QALY gained) received a negative recommendation for reimbursement. Conclusions: Ninety-five percent of orphan drug submissions were approved for reimbursement in the Netherlands, compared with 51% in Scotland, during the period of interest. Moreover, cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses were included in 24 of 37 submissions in Scotland, compared with only 1 of 38 in the Netherlands.
机译:背景:报销或指导决策通常需要对新药疗法进行药物经济学评估。但是,对于孤儿药,存在特定国家/地区的要求。在荷兰,可以考虑对孤儿药物开发者进行全面的药物经济学评估,而在苏格兰,尽管可以考虑针对孤儿产品的其他修饰因素,也不能排除此类例外。目的:本工作的目的是确定苏格兰和荷兰这两个欧洲国家之间的罕见病孤儿药物建议的结果差异。方法:截止2009年5月,向苏格兰药品援助委员会(Commissie Farma-ceutische Hulp [CFH])提交的所有孤儿药报告和苏格兰药品协会(SMC)发行的孤儿药指南均已从各自组织的网站上进行了审核。以下是从荷兰进行的药物经济分析和费用报销建议或苏格兰的药物使用指南中收集的以下内容:药物适应症,药物经济评估的结果,建议和确切日期。结果:38种孤儿药的档案提交给了CFH。 37个已提交给SMC。只有1份提交给CFH的药物包括完整的药物经济学分析。所有其他报告仅包括成本分析。向SMC提交了24份意见书,同时进行了完整的药物经济学评估;无法获得4种药物的信息。其余报告要么不包括成本效益分析,要么被SMC认为不足。提交给SMC的成本-效用分析中有43%(10/23)报告的结果不利,超过30,000英镑/质量调整生命年(QALY);其中,只有2(20%)个报告的成本效用比在43.717英镑对81.000英镑之间,受到了严格的肯定推荐。 CFH提出了积极建议,要求补偿38份申请中的36份(95%)。在提交给SMC的37种孤儿药中,有19种(51%)收到了积极的使用建议。向SMC提交的书中有百分之七十三(8/11)的成本效益估计不佳(即,每个QALY超过30,000英镑[34,000欧元或48,000美元]),因此对付款的建议是负面的。结论:感兴趣期间,荷兰批准了95%的孤儿药物报销,而苏格兰为51%。此外,苏格兰的37项呈报中有24项包括成本效益或成本效用分析,而荷兰的38项中只有1项。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号