IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v8y2024i6d10.1007_s41669-024-00511-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health Technology Assessment Reports for Non-Oncology Medications in Canada from 2018 to 2022: Methodological Critiques on Manufacturers’ Submissions and a Comparison between Manufacturer and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) Analyses

Author

Listed:
  • Fatemeh Mirzayeh Fashami

    (McMaster University)

  • Jean-Eric Tarride

    (McMaster University
    The Research Institute of St. Joe’s Hamilton, St Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
    McMaster Chair in Health Technology Management, McMaster University)

  • Behnam Sadeghirad

    (McMaster University
    Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Pain Research and Care, McMaster University
    McMaster University)

  • Kimia Hariri

    (Mazandaran University of Medical Science)

  • Amirreza Peyrovinasab

    (Islamic Azad University, Tehran Medical Sciences University (IAUTMU))

  • Mitchell Levine

    (McMaster University
    McMaster University
    The Research Institute of St. Joe’s Hamilton, St Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton)

Abstract

Introduction Identifying key differences between manufacturers’ submitted analysis and economic reanalysis by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) is an important step toward understanding reimbursement recommendations. We compared economic values reported in manufacturers’ analysis with the CADTH reanalysis and also assessed methodological critiques. Methods Two reviewers extracted data from the clinical and economic reports in publicly available CADTH reports from 2018 to 2022. We used the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to assess the difference between mean economic values, and the Chi-square test to assess the association between the CADTH critique final recommendations. Results Of the total submissions, 99.4% included effectiveness critiques, 88.8% included model structure critiques, 69.1% included utility score critiques, and 78.7% included cost critiques. The median incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) in the manufacturers’ analyses was $138,658/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 2.5-fold lower than the CADTH’s reanalysis at $380,251/QALY (p

Suggested Citation

  • Fatemeh Mirzayeh Fashami & Jean-Eric Tarride & Behnam Sadeghirad & Kimia Hariri & Amirreza Peyrovinasab & Mitchell Levine, 2024. "Health Technology Assessment Reports for Non-Oncology Medications in Canada from 2018 to 2022: Methodological Critiques on Manufacturers’ Submissions and a Comparison between Manufacturer and Canadian," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 8(6), pages 823-836, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s41669-024-00511-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-024-00511-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-024-00511-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-024-00511-9?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
    ---><---

    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:pharmo:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s41669-024-00511-9. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.