Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

Dr Mark P. Lythgoe

Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer

Research Postgraduate
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

m.lythgoe

 
 
//

Location

 

Institute of Reproductive and Developmental BiologyHammersmith Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Haslam:2021:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.35123,
author = {Haslam, A and Lythgoe, MP and Greenstreet, Akman E and Prasad, V},
doi = {10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.35123},
journal = {JAMA Netw Open},
title = {Characteristics of Cost-effectiveness Studies for Oncology Drugs Approved in the United States From 2015-2020.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.35123},
volume = {4},
year = {2021}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - IMPORTANCE: Increasingly, cost-effectiveness analyses are being done to determine the value of rapidly increasing oncology drugs; however, this assumes that these analyses are unbiased. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the characteristics of cost-effectiveness studies and to determine characteristics associated with whether an oncology drug is found to be cost-effective. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 254 cost-effectiveness analyses for 116 oncology drugs that were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 2015 to 2020. EXPOSURES: Each drug was analyzed for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year, the funding of the study, the authors' conflict of interest, the threshold of willingness-to-pay, from what country's perspective the analysis was done, and whether a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness analysis had been done. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcome was the odds of a study concluding that a drug was cost-effective. RESULTS: There were 116 drug approvals with 254 studies and country perspectives. Of the country perspectives, 132 (52%) were from the US. Forty-seven of 78 drugs with cost-effective studies had been shown to improve overall survival, whereas 15 of 38 of drugs without a cost-effectiveness study had been shown to improve overall survival. Having a study funded by a pharmaceutical company was associated with higher odds of a study concluding that a drug was cost-effective than studies without funding (odds ratio, 41.36; 95% CI, 11.86-262.23). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional study, pharmaceutical funding was associated with greater odds that an oncology drug would be found to be cost-effective. These findings suggest that simply disclosing potential conflict of interest is inadequate. We encourage cost-effectiveness analyses by independent groups.
AU  - Haslam,A
AU  - Lythgoe,MP
AU  - Greenstreet,Akman E
AU  - Prasad,V
DO  - 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.35123
PY  - 2021///
TI  - Characteristics of Cost-effectiveness Studies for Oncology Drugs Approved in the United States From 2015-2020.
T2  - JAMA Netw Open
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.35123
UR  - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34792592
VL  - 4
ER  -
Download