Just 2 weeks ago, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) proposed changes to its 2017-2019 Value Assessment Framework, which guides the analytic structure of the primary domains of their framework. These 4 domains include comparative clinical effectiveness, long-term cost-effectiveness (CE), potential other benefits or disadvantages[…]
2018 was not a good year for biopharma manufacturers, based on the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review’s (ICER) evaluation of interventions across various disease areas. Seemingly every month, ICER generated negative press for the biopharma industry. Headlines read:
BHE hosted its annual Instant Health Data (IHD) User Conference on March 20, 2019 at the Four Seasons Hotel in Boston, Massachusetts. This day-long event brought together IHD users and analytics team leads from 20 top-ranked pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, and research organizations.
In my previous post, I explored the differences between early- and late-stage economic modeling, including a discussion of the benefits of using early-stage models. In this post, I will examine 5 ways that utilizing early-stage models can benefit drug manufacturers and help produce more efficient, cost-effective drug development.
Wouldn’t it be nice if there were a crystal ball that could predict, during the very early stages of drug development, whether a new medication would represent good value for money at its intended launch price? Or which efficacy targets it needed to hit in order to remain cost-effective? Or what an assessment by the Institute for Clinical and[…]
Do Research Groups Align on the Value of an Intervention? A Prelude to our ISPOR Barcelona Presentation
Do Research Groups Align on the Value of an Intervention? A Prelude to our ISPOR Barcelona Presentation By Matthew Sussman
BHE held its 2018 Instant Health Data (IHD) User’s Conference on Wednesday, March 14th at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Real-world evidence (RWE) managers and IHD users attended from over a dozen life science companies and payers, representing about one-half of all companies licensing IHD. These researchers regularly use[…]
This is my last post in an ICER versus NICE series that examines how ICER’s and NICE’s methodologies for implementing cost-effectiveness (CE) analyses differ. My last post explored how differences in the use of a fixed CE threshold and the application of a narrower CE threshold range may lead to different intervention recommendations. In this[…]
Although the NCAA’s March Madness is just heating up, my own March madness is starting to wind down. For those of us in New England, March’s madness really kicked off with three wild Nor’easters. Fortunately for me, these storms coincided with trips to Las Vegas for the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS)’s Annual[…]
In my last post, I highlighted three subtle differences between ICER’s and NICE’s methodologies when conducting cost-effectiveness (CE) analyses. These differences, if overlooked, could actually lead to very different recommendations for coverage, reimbursement, and pricing. Two of these important differences revolve around CE thresholds,[…]