IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v18y2020i4d10.1007_s40258-020-00562-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluations of Anticancer Drugs Based on Medico-Administrative Databases: A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Elsa Bouée-Benhamiche

    (French National Cancer Institute (Institut National du Cancer INCa))

  • Philippe Jean Bousquet

    (French National Cancer Institute (Institut National du Cancer INCa))

  • Salah Ghabri

    (French National Authority for Health (Haute Autorité de Santé, HAS))

Abstract

Background Oncology is among the most active therapeutic fields in terms of new drug development projects, with increasingly expensive drugs. The expected clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of these treatments in clinical practice have yet to be fully confirmed. Health medico-administrative databases may be useful for assessing the value of anticancer drugs with real-world data. Objective The objectives of our systematic literature review (SLR) were to analyse economic evaluations of anticancer drugs based on health medico-administrative databases, to assess the quality of these evaluations, and to identify the inputs from such databases that can be used in economic evaluations of anticancer drugs. Methods We performed an SLR by using PubMed and Web of Science articles published from January 2008 to January 2019. The search strategy focused on anticancer drug cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs)/cost-utility analyses (CUAs) that were entirely based on medico-administrative databases. The review reported the main choices of economic evaluation methods in the analyses. The quality of the articles was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and risk of bias assessment checklists. Results Of the 306 records identified in PubMed, 12 articles were selected, and one additional article was identified through Web of Science. Ten of the 13 articles were CEAs and three were CUAs. Most of the analyses were carried out in North America (n = 11). The economic metric used was the cost per life-year gained (n = 10) or cost per quality-adjusted life-year (n = 3). Reporting of the target analysis population and strategies in the articles was in agreement with the CHEERS guidelines. The structural assumptions underpinning the economic models displayed the poorest reporting quality among the items analysed. Representativeness bias (n = 11) and the issue of censored medical costs (n = 8) were the most frequently analysed risks. Conclusion A comparison of the economic results was not relevant due to the high heterogeneity of the selected studies. Our SLR highlighted the benefits and pitfalls related to the use of medico-administrative databases in the economic evaluations of anticancer drugs.

Suggested Citation

  • Elsa Bouée-Benhamiche & Philippe Jean Bousquet & Salah Ghabri, 2020. "Economic Evaluations of Anticancer Drugs Based on Medico-Administrative Databases: A Systematic Literature Review," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 491-508, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:18:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s40258-020-00562-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-020-00562-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-020-00562-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-020-00562-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rumona Dickson & Angela Boland & Rui Duarte & Eleanor Kotas & Nerys Woolacott & Robert Hodgson & Rob Riemsma & Sabine Grimm & Bram Ramaekers & Manuela Joore & Nasuh Büyükkaramikli & Eva Kaltenthaler &, 2018. "EMA and NICE Appraisal Processes for Cancer Drugs: Current Status and Uncertainties," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 429-432, August.
    2. François-Olivier Baudot & Anne-Sophie Aguadé & Thomas Barnay & Christelle Gastaldi-Ménager & Anne Fagot-Campagna, 2019. "Impact of type 2 diabetes on health expenditure: estimation based on individual administrative data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 657-668, July.
    3. Alessandro Liberati & Douglas G Altman & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Cynthia Mulrow & Peter C Gøtzsche & John P A Ioannidis & Mike Clarke & P J Devereaux & Jos Kleijnen & David Moher, 2009. "The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-28, July.
    4. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & M. Zia Sadique, 2013. "Statistical Methods For Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data: A Critical Appraisal Tool And Review Of Current Practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 486-500, April.
    5. Philippe Jean Bousquet & Delphine Lefeuvre & Philippe Tuppin & Marc Karim BenDiane & Mathieu Rocchi & Elsa Bouée-Benhamiche & Jérôme Viguier & Christine Le Bihan-Benjamin, 2018. "Cancer care and public health policy evaluations in France: Usefulness of the national cancer cohort," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-13, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jason R. Guertin & Blanchard Conombo & Raphaël Langevin & Frédéric Bergeron & Anne Holbrook & Brittany Humphries & Alexis Matteau & Brian J. Potter & Christel Renoux & Jean-Éric Tarride & Madelein, 2020. "A Systematic Review of Methods Used for Confounding Adjustment in Observational Economic Evaluations in Cardiology Conducted between 2013 and 2017," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(5), pages 582-595, July.
    2. Ludoviko Zirimenya & Fatima Mahmud-Ajeigbe & Ruth McQuillan & You Li, 2020. "A systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between urogenital schistosomiasis and HIV/AIDS infection," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Trang Nguyen & Sara Holton & Thach Tran & Jane Fisher, 2019. "Informal mental health interventions for people with severe mental illness in low and lower middle-income countries: A systematic review of effectiveness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 65(3), pages 194-206, May.
    4. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    5. Damiano Pizzol & Mike Trott & Igor Grabovac & Mario Antunes & Anna Claudia Colangelo & Simona Ippoliti & Cristian Petre Ilie & Anne Carrie & Nicola Veronese & Lee Smith, 2021. "Laparoscopy in Low-Income Countries: 10-Year Experience and Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-11, May.
    6. Alessandro Margherita & Emanuele Banchi & Alfredo Biffi & Gianluca di Castri & Rocco Morelli, 2022. "Beyond Total Cost Management (TCM) to Systemic Value Management (SVM): Transformational Trends and a Research Manifesto for an Evolving Discipline," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-16, October.
    7. Stefano D’Angelo & Angelo Cavallo & Antonio Ghezzi & Francesco Di Lorenzo, 2024. "Understanding corporate entrepreneurship in the digital age: a review and research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(12), pages 3719-3774, December.
    8. Fabio Magnacca & Riccardo Giannetti, 2024. "Management accounting and new product development: a systematic literature review and future research directions," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(2), pages 651-685, June.
    9. Michael Masaracchio & William J Hanney & Xinliang Liu & Morey Kolber & Kaitlin Kirker, 2017. "Timing of rehabilitation on length of stay and cost in patients with hip or knee joint arthroplasty: A systematic review with meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, June.
    10. Evans, Rhiannon & White, James & Turley, Ruth & Slater, Thomas & Morgan, Helen & Strange, Heather & Scourfield, Jonathan, 2017. "Comparison of suicidal ideation, suicide attempt and suicide in children and young people in care and non-care populations: Systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 122-129.
    11. Hang-Nga Mai & Jaeil Kim & Youn-Hee Choi & Du-Hyeong Lee, 2020. "Accuracy of Portable Face-Scanning Devices for Obtaining Three-Dimensional Face Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15, December.
    12. D. L. I. H. K. Peiris & Yanping Duan & Corneel Vandelanotte & Wei Liang & Min Yang & Julien Steven Baker, 2022. "Effects of In-Classroom Physical Activity Breaks on Children’s Academic Performance, Cognition, Health Behaviours and Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Tr," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-27, August.
    13. Stephanie Kovacs & Stephen E Hawes & Stephen N Maley & Emily Mosites & Ling Wong & Andy Stergachis, 2014. "Technologies for Detecting Falsified and Substandard Drugs in Low and Middle-Income Countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, March.
    14. Najmiatul Fitria & Antoinette D. I. Asselt & Maarten J. Postma, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness of controlling gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 407-417, April.
    15. Hyun Woo Lee & Jung Kyu Lee & Eunyoung Kim & Jae-Joon Yim & Chang-Hoon Lee, 2016. "The Effectiveness and Safety of Fluoroquinolone-Containing Regimen as a First-Line Treatment for Drug-Sensitive Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, July.
    16. Jung Soo Kim & Jinkyeong Park & Seong Yong Lim & Yeon-Mok Oh & Kwang Ha Yoo & Yong Bum Park & Seung Soo Sheen & Min-Ji Kim & K C Carriere & Ji Ye Jung & Hye Yun Park, 2015. "Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety between Indacaterol and Tiotropium in COPD: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12, March.
    17. Giuseppe La Torre & Remigio Bova & Rosario Andrea Cocchiara & Cristina Sestili & Anna Tagliaferri & Simona Maggiacomo & Camilla Foschi & William Zomparelli & Maria Vittoria Manai & David Shaholli & Va, 2023. "What Are the Determinants of the Quality of Systematic Reviews in the International Journals of Occupational Medicine? A Methodological Study Review of Published Literature," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-12, January.
    18. Eric P F Chow & Joseph D Tucker & Frank Y Wong & Eric J Nehl & Yanjie Wang & Xun Zhuang & Lei Zhang, 2014. "Disparities and Risks of Sexually Transmissible Infections among Men Who Have Sex with Men in China: A Meta-Analysis and Data Synthesis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(2), pages 1-13, February.
    19. Ricky D Turgeon & Michael R Kolber & Peter Loewen & Ursula Ellis & James P McCormack, 2019. "Higher versus lower doses of ACE inhibitors, angiotensin-2 receptor blockers and beta-blockers in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: Systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Adrián Csordás & Péter Lengyel & István Füzesi, 2022. "Who Prefers Regional Products? A Systematic Literature Review of Consumer Characteristics and Attitudes in Short Food Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:18:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s40258-020-00562-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.