IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v87y2008i3p389-400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing methods for full versus single technology appraisal: A case study of docetaxel and paclitaxel for early breast cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Kaltenthaler, Eva
  • Tappenden, Paul
  • Booth, Andrew
  • Akehurst, Ron

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study is to compare and contrast the reports of the rapid National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) single technology (STA) process with the full Health Technology Assessment Report (TAR) for the same technologies (docetaxel and paclitaxel for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer).Methods Documentary analysis was used to compare three reports. A data extraction form was developed to record information on the decision problem addressed in each report, literature searching methods, the clinical effectiveness review, cost-effectiveness analysis, conclusions and issues of concern.Results The decision problems and search strategies for the STAs differed from those reported in the TAR. Not all trials of clinical effectiveness included in the TAR were reported by manufacturers. The methods and assumptions used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the technologies were generally similar between reports, although only one common health economic comparison was presented across the three reports. The TAR supports the STA results for docetaxel but suggested that the manufacturer's cost-effectiveness estimates for paclitaxel were highly optimistic.Conclusions Although the STA process provides the opportunity for rapid appraisal of new technologies, there remains uncertainty concerning the extent to which STAs adequately address the specific decision problem under consideration.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaltenthaler, Eva & Tappenden, Paul & Booth, Andrew & Akehurst, Ron, 2008. "Comparing methods for full versus single technology appraisal: A case study of docetaxel and paclitaxel for early breast cancer," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 389-400, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:87:y:2008:i:3:p:389-400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(08)00042-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. McMahon, Meghan & Morgan, Steve & Mitton, Craig, 2006. "The Common Drug Review: A NICE start for Canada?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 339-351, August.
    2. Frank A. Sonnenberg & J. Robert Beck, 1993. "Markov Models in Medical Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 13(4), pages 322-338, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kasper M. Johannesen & Karl Claxton & Mark J. Sculpher & Allan J. Wailoo, 2018. "How to design the cost‐effectiveness appraisal process of new healthcare technologies to maximise population health: A conceptual framework," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 41-54, February.

    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. Malek B Hannouf & Chander Sehgal & Jeffrey Q Cao & Joseph D Mocanu & Eric Winquist & Gregory S Zaric, 2012. "Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Cetuximab to Platinum-Based Chemotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-9, June.
    2. Bärnighausen, Till & Bloom, David E., 2009. ""Conditional scholarships" for HIV/AIDS health workers: Educating and retaining the workforce to provide antiretroviral treatment in sub-Saharan Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 544-551, February.
    3. de Wit, G.Ardine & Ramsteijn, Paul G & de Charro, Frank Th, 1998. "Economic evaluation of end stage renal disease treatment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 215-232, June.
    4. Afschin Gandjour & Eva-Julia Weyler, 2006. "Cost-effectiveness of referrals to high-volume hospitals: An analysis based on a probabilistic Markov model for hip fracture surgeries," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 359-369, November.
    5. Jennifer Whitty & Paul Scuffham & Sharyn Rundle-Thielee, 2011. "Public and decision maker stated preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 73-79, March.
    6. Malek Ebadi & Raha Akhavan-Tabatabaei, 2021. "Personalized Cotesting Policies for Cervical Cancer Screening: A POMDP Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Mark Sculpher & David Torgerson & Ron Goeree & Bernie O'Brien, 1999. "A critical structured review of economic evaluations of interventions for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis," Working Papers 169chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    8. Armstrong, Kristy & Mitton, Craig & Carleton, Bruce & Shoveller, Jean, 2008. "Drug formulary decision-making in two regional health authorities in British Columbia, Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 308-316, December.
    9. F. Tomini & F. Prinzen & A. D. I. Asselt, 2016. "A review of economic evaluation models for cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter defibrillators in patients with heart failure," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(9), pages 1159-1172, December.
    10. Chisholm, Orin & Sharry, Patrick & Phillips, Lawrence, 2022. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for benefit-risk analysis by national regulatory authorities," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114407, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Franck Maunoury & Aurore Clément & Chizoba Nwankwo & Laurie Levy-Bachelot & Armand Abergel & Vincent Di Martino & Eric Thervet & Isabelle Durand-Zaleski, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of elbasvir-grazoprevir regimen for treating hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection in stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease patients in France," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Stephen G. Pauker & John B. Wong, 2005. "The Influence of Influence Diagrams in Medicine," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 238-244, December.
    13. K Cooper & S C Brailsford & R Davies, 2007. "Choice of modelling technique for evaluating health care interventions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(2), pages 168-176, February.
    14. F. R. Rolli & M. Ruggeri & F. Kheiraoui & C. Drago & M. Basile & C. Favaretti & A. Cicchetti, 2018. "Economic evaluation of Zepatier for the management of HCV in the Italian scenario," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(9), pages 1365-1374, December.
    15. Nicholas Graves & Mary Courtney & Helen Edwards & Anne Chang & Anthony Parker & Kathleen Finlayson, 2009. "Cost-Effectiveness of an Intervention to Reduce Emergency Re-Admissions to Hospital among Older Patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(10), pages 1-9, October.
    16. Jan Jürgensen & Wolfgang Arns & Bastian Haß, 2010. "Cost-effectiveness of immunosuppressive regimens in renal transplant recipients in Germany: a model approach," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(1), pages 15-25, February.
    17. Douglas K. Owens, 2002. "Analytic Tools for Public Health Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(1_suppl), pages 3-10, September.
    18. Jun Li & Benjamin H K Yip & Chichiu Leung & Wankyo Chung & Kin On Kwok & Emily Y Y Chan & Engkiong Yeoh & Puihong Chung, 2018. "Screening for latent and active tuberculosis infection in the elderly at admission to residential care homes: A cost-effectiveness analysis in an intermediate disease burden area," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, January.
    19. Bruce A. Craig & Peter P. Sendi, 2002. "Estimation of the transition matrix of a discrete‐time Markov chain," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 33-42, January.
    20. B. Brüggenjürgen & P. Lindgren & B. Ehlken & H.-J. Rupprecht & S. Willich, 2007. "Long-term cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 8(1), pages 51-57, March.

    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:eee:hepoli:v:87:y:2008:i:3:p:389-400. 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: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.