urch logo home About Urch
News
Articles
Contact

Publications list
Consulting
search site (& ISBN)  

Pricing & Reimbursement Pricing & Reimbursment
Question Icon Email Icon Print Icon Add to basket icon View Basket Icon Checkout Icon
Title Preparing Health Technology Submissions for Pharmaceutical Products
Sub title Meeting Formulary Submission Requirements for New Product Assessments and Disease Area & Therapeutic Class Reviews
Author Dr. P. Langley
Publication date April 2006
ISBN 0-9546981-1-8
Pages 139
Price pdf £1550   |   print £1595 currency coverter link
Summary


"it must be acknowledged that few pharmaceutical manufacturers, let along biotech companies are equipped to meet these new health technology assessment guidelines"


This essential report will help you:
  • Prepare a global dossier to ensure successful formulary listing
  • Understand formulary submission guidelines in Australia, UK and USA
  • Respond to emerging evidentiary and analytical standards
  • Structure your organisation to make a convincing case to the regulators

    The rapid uptake of formulary submission guidelines in the last decade is forcing  pharmaceutical manufacturers and biotechnology companies to comply with more rigorous evidentiary and analytical standards in clinical and cost-effectiveness evaluations.

    Two developments in 2004 further transformed the situation:
    1. The introduction of a revised health technology assessment guideline by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK; and
    2. The introduction of revised technology assessment guidelines for new products and for the re-evaluation of products by WellPoint Pharmacy Management (WPM) in the USA.

    Where the NICE and WPM guidelines represent a major change in requirements with the need:
    (i) to accommodate adequately uncertainty in modelled cost-effectiveness claims and the requirement for a reference case (NICE); and
    (ii) the requirement for naturalistic, active comparator trials together with ongoing monitoring and validation of claims for cost-effectiveness and systems impact (WPM).

    Put together, the NICE and WPM guidelines present formidable challenges to manufacturers in both the UK market and in the US managed care sector. If other health technology assessment and reimbursement gatekeepers adopt these new evidentiary and analytical standards, then manufacturers will have to rethink seriously not only how they adapt their clinical development programs to accommodate the reference case and active comparator requirements in Phase III trials, but the ways in which they present cost-effectiveness and system impact claims to meet monitoring and validation standards.

    Preparing health technology submissions for pharmaceutical products - Meeting Formulary Submission Requirements for New Product Assessments and Disease Area and Therapeutic Class Reviews, considers how manufacturers should respond to emerging evidentiary and analytical standards as exemplified by the NICE and WPM guidelines for formulary submissions.

    The report considers, in particular, the implications of the standards required in the NICE and WPM guidelines for manufacturers preparing reimbursement submissions and it goes beyond being simply a review of evidentiary and analytical standards required by reimbursement and pricing authorities that have mandated a formulary submission dossier as part of the technology assessment of new products, to establishing the standards required of a global dossier. Meeting the NICE and WPM requirements ensures that specific or targeted dossiers can be assembled to satisfy the requirements of other jurisdictions. A global dossier, therefore, if structured to meet the standards of NICE and WPM, will also meet the requirements of other jurisdictions - where individual formulary submissions are customized to meet the needs of individual health systems.

    "a poorly constructed and self-serving case, where the modelled case has clearly been driven by the need to justify cost-effectiveness, seldom stands up to a critical review."

    Reasons you company should invest in this report:
  • Understand the published guidelines from the major evaluation agencies
  • Benefit from over 40 detailed case studies of technology appraisal guidelines
  • Learn to prepare an excellent global dossier to ensure formulary acceptance
  • Forecast how technology appraisals will develop over the next few years


  • TABLE OF CONTENTS
    Executive Summary
    View the Executive Summary (pdf)

    Background

    Overview

    Chapter 1: Global Formulary Submission Requirements
    Chapter outline
    1.1 Introduction
    1.1.1 Key documents
    1.1.2 The second level
    1.1.3 Health technology assessments (HTAs)
    1.1.4 The emergence of formulary submission guidelines
    1.2 Current formulary submission standards
    1.2.1 PBAC: standards for clinical assessment
    Case study 1.1: The PBAC guidelines
    1.2.2 England and Wales, NICE: standards for modeled cost-effectiveness claims
    Case study 1.2: The NICE guidelines
    1.2.3 WellPoint: standards for monitoring and validating claims
    Case study 1.3: The WellPoint guidelines
    1.2.4 The Scottish Medicines Consortium
    Case study 1.4: The SMC guidelines
    1.2.5 US: AMCP - an interim standard
    Case study 1.5: The AMCP guidelines
    1.2.6 Process and dossier submissions
    Case study 1.6: Identifying reimburser requirements
    1.2.7 Transparency and process
    1.3 Hierarchy of clinical evidence
    1.4 Formulary recommendations and assignments
    1.5 The role of guidelines
    Case study 1.7: The future of NICE - what could be NICER?
    1.6 Linking cost-effectiveness and budget-impact claims
    Case study 1.8: Viagra versus the PBAC
    1.7 Overview: managing patient populations
    Notes

    Chapter 2: Guidelines from a Global Perspective
    Chapter outline
    2.1 A global guideline overview
    Case study 2.1: The ISPOR guidelines summary
    2.2 Formulary submission guidelines: documentation and process
    2.3 Health technology assessments (HTAs) and the life cycle of a drug
    2.4 Disease area and therapeutic class reviews
    2.5 Bias and compliance
    2.6 Technology scoping
    2.7 The global dossier: meeting evidentiary and analytical standards
    2.2: Proposed outline for a global dossier
    Notes

    Chapter 3: Uncertainty - Net Benefits, Product Ranking and the Reference Case
    Chapter outline
    3.1 Uncertainty in cost-effectiveness claims
    3.2 Ranking therapy interventions
    3.3 ICERs and net benefit measures
    3.4 Defining net benefits
    3.5 Interpreting ICERs
    3.6 Net monetary benefit
    3.7 Probabilistic sensitivity analysis
    3.8 Estimating cost-effectiveness acceptability curves
    Case study 3.1: Modelling a probabilistic sensitivity analysis
    3.9 Interpreting, monitoring and validating claims
    3.10 The NICE reference case
    Case study 3.2: NICE reference case requirements
    Case study 3.3: The EQ-5D and the SF-6D in liver transplant patients
    3.11 Implications of the reference case requirements
    3.12 Overview: thresholds and evidentiary standards
    Notes

    Chapter 4: The Clinical Outcomes Case
    Chapter overview
    4.1 Literature searches
    4.1.1 Key databases
    4.1.2 Reference inclusion/exclusion criteria
    Case study 4.1: PBAC requirements for literature searches
    4.2 Bias and systematic reviews
    4.2.1 Randomisation
    4.2.2 Follow-up
    4.2.3 Blinding
    Case study 4.2: Bias assessment in clinical trials
    4.2.4 Filtering studies
    4.3 Hierarchies of clinical evidence
    Case study 4.3: The PBAC and WellPoint hierarchies of clinical evidence
    4.4 Summarising clinical studies
    Case study 4.4: Meeting PBAC trial summary requirements
    4.5 Quality-scoring clinical studies
    Case study 4.5: The Jadad quality-scoring algorithm
    4.6 Pooled clinical data and meta-analyses
    Case study 4.6: The PBAC requirements for meta-analysis
    4.6.1 Identifying relevant studies
    4.6.2 Eligibility criteria
    4.6.3 Abstracting data
    4.6.4 Statistical models
    4.7 Adverse events and side-effect profiles
    Case study 4.7: Pharmacoepidemiology
    4.8 Defining comparator products 4
    Case study 4.8: Comparator therapies in the PBAC guidelines
    4.9 Epidemiology
    Case study 4.9: WellPoint epidemiology profiling requirements
    4.10 Place of product in therapy
    Case study 4.10: The PBAC and expert opinion
    4.11 Product profile
    Case study 4.11: WellPoint product profile requirements
    4.12 Therapy intervention strategies
    Case study 4.12: NICE recommendations for Relenza in the treatment of influenza
    4.13 Linking meta-analyses to modelled claims
    Case study 4.13: Defining clinical parameters for cost-effectiveness modelling
    4.14 Monitoring and validating clinical claims
    Case study 4.14: The NICE appraisal of beta interferon and glatiramer for multiple sclerosis
    Notes

    Chapter 5: The Health Economics Case I - Generating Modelled Cost-effectiveness Claims
    Chapter outline
    5.1 Types of modelled claim
    Case study 5.1: Modeling criteria in the PBAC guidelines
    5.2 Decision-model frameworks
    5.3 Resource units and direct costs
    Case study 5.2: Current procedure terminology (CPT) codes
    5.4 Valuing resource units
    5.5 Indirect costs
    Case study 5.3: Demonstrating workplace productivity benefits
    5.6 Measuring outcomes
    5.6.1 Construct
    5.7 Modelling, sensitivity and simulation analyses
    5.8 Spreadsheet models
    5.9 Monitoring and validating cost-outcome claims
    Case study 5.4: The impact of inhaler type on monthly treatment costs of asthma - a retrospective study
    5.10 Meta-models
    Case Study 5.5: The CORE diabetes meta-model
    Notes

    Chapter 6: The Health Economics Case II - Estimating System Impacts
    Chapter outline
    6.1 Defining terms
    6.2 Forecasting product uptake
    Case study 6.1: SMC requirements for product uptake projections
    6.3 Patient switching and target populations
    6.3.1 Defining a target population
    6.3.2 Market segmentation
    6.4 Budget-impact claims
    6.4.1 Resource units and unit pricing
    6.5 Estimated pharmacy budget impact
    6.6 Estimated medical budget impact
    6.7 Estimated total budget impact
    Case study 6.2: PBAC requirements for financial impact assessment
    Note

    Chapter 7: Responding to Disease Area and Therapeutic Class Reviews
    Chapter outline
    7.1 Life-cycle product assessment
    7.1.1 Clinical assessments
    7.1.2 Anticipating requests for monitoring and validation
    7.2 Assessing claims
    7.3 Contractual requirements
    7.4 Experimental approaches: naturalistic trial designs
    Case study 7.1: The role of naturalistic trials
    7.5 Non-experimental designs
    7.5.1 Case-control studies
    7.5.2 Cohort studies
    7.6 Practice pattern variations
    Case study 7.2: The WellPoint agenda
    Notes

    Chapter 8: Summary and Conclusions
    Chapter outline
    8.1 The future of technology appraisals
    8.2 Technology appraisals in the short term
    8.3 Technology appraisals in the longer term
    Glossary

    List of Figures
    Figure 3.1 Benefit and willingness to pay
    Figure 3.2 Cost-effectiveness plane
    Figure 3.3 Net monetary benefit
    Figure 3.4 Ranking net monetary benefits
    Figure 3.5 Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve
    Figure 3.6 Decision model: Therapy A versus Therapy B
    Figure 3.7 Simulated distribution of differences in costs
    Figure 3.8 Simulated distribution of differences in outcomes
    Figure 3.9 Distribution of cost and outcome difference coordinates in the cost-effectiveness plane
    Figure 3.10 Simulated cost-effectiveness acceptability curve

    List of Tables
    Table 2.1 Key formulary submission guidelines: documentation and process
    Table 3.1 Parameter values: Therapies A, B and C
    Table 3.2 Simulation pairs of cost and outcome differences
    Table 3.3 Simulated proportion of coordinate cost and outcome difference by willingness-to-pay threshold
    Table 4.1 Grading of clinical studies

    Pricing & Reimbursement Pricing & Reimbursment
    Question Icon Email Icon Print Icon Add to basket icon View Basket Icon Checkout Icon
    The Author
    Dr Paul Langley is Director, Maimon Research LLC, a health technology consulting company based in Arizona. Dr Langley is also Adjunct Professor, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota.

    Following graduation, he taught at universities in Canada, the UK, Australia and the US. He moved to the US in 1994 and taught at the University of Arizona and then the University of Colorado, where he was Professor in the School of Pharmacy, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver.

    He joined 3M Pharmaceuticals in September 1999 as US and International Manager, Health Economics, leaving 3M in July 2005 to return to consulting and academic pursuits. Dr Langley’s major areas of research interest are in the modelling of drug impacts within healthcare systems, the development and application of guidelines for formulary submission evaluations and the application of health economics to the process of drug development.

    Dr Langley received his undergraduate training in the UK and his postgraduate training in Canada, with a PhD in Economics from Queen’s University.


    Specimen