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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Hampson, G. & Towse, A. & Dreitlein, B. & Henshall, C. & Pearson, S., 2018. "Real World Evidence for Coverage Decisions: Opportunities and Challenges," Research Papers 001997, Office of Health Economics.
    6. 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.
    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. Noemi Kreif & Richard Grieve & Rosalba Radice & Zia Sadique & Roland Ramsahai & Jasjeet S. Sekhon, 2012. "Methods for Estimating Subgroup Effects in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(6), pages 750-763, November.
    3. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Vecchio, Riccardo & Caso, Gerarda & Cembalo, Luigi & Borrello, Massimiliano, 2020. "Is respondents’ inattention in online surveys a major issue for research?," Economia agro-alimentare / Food Economy, Italian Society of Agri-food Economics/Società Italiana di Economia Agro-Alimentare (SIEA), vol. 22(1), March.
    5. 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, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    6. Jorge Arias-de la Torre & Elisa Puigdomenech & Jose M Valderas & Jonathan P Evans & Vicente Martín & Antonio J Molina & Nuria Rodríguez & Mireia Espallargues, 2019. "Availability of specific tools to assess patient reported outcomes in hip arthroplasty in Spain. Identifying the best candidates to incorporate in an arthroplasty register. A systematic review and sta," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, April.
    7. Jacob Elnaggar & Fern Tsien & Lucio Miele & Chindo Hicks & Clayton Yates & Melisa Davis, 2019. "An Integrative Genomics Approach for Associating Genetic Susceptibility with the Tumor Immune Microenvironment in Triple Negative Breast Cancer," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Zhenhua Xing & Liang Tang & Zhaowei Zhu & Xinqun Hu, 2018. "Effects of thrombolysis on outcomes of patients with deep venous thrombosis: An updated meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-10, September.
    10. 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.
    11. Claire Godard-Sebillotte & Mélanie Le Berre & Tibor Schuster & Miguel Trottier & Isabelle Vedel, 2019. "Impact of health service interventions on acute hospital use in community-dwelling persons with dementia: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Melissa H. Roberts & Gary T. Ferguson, 2021. "Real-World Evidence: Bridging Gaps in Evidence to Guide Payer Decisions," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 3-11, March.
    14. Zhenjie Wu & Yunjiu Cheng & Lynn Htet Htet Aung & Bixun Li, 2013. "Association between Adiponectin Concentrations and Cardiovascular Disease in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-6, November.
    15. Georgios Tsivgoulis & Aristeidis H Katsanos & Nikolaos Grigoriadis & Georgios M Hadjigeorgiou & Ioannis Heliopoulos & Constantinos Kilidireas & Konstantinos Voumvourakis, 2015. "The Effect of Disease Modifying Therapies on Brain Atrophy in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-10, March.
    16. Frank Peinemann & Ulrich Grouven & Nicolaus Kröger & Carmen Bartel & Max H Pittler & Stefan Lange, 2011. "First-Line Matched Related Donor Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Compared to Immunosuppressive Therapy in Acquired Severe Aplastic Anemia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, April.
    17. E-Shien Chang & Sneha Kannoth & Samantha Levy & Shi-Yi Wang & John E Lee & Becca R Levy, 2020. "Global reach of ageism on older persons’ health: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Panagiotis Kiekkas & Nikolaos Stefanopoulos & Nick Bakalis & Antonios Kefaliakos & Menelaos Karanikolas, 2016. "Agreement of infrared temporal artery thermometry with other thermometry methods in adults: systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(7-8), pages 894-905, April.
    19. Alinda G Vos & Annelieke Hulzebosch & Diederick E Grobbee & Roos E Barth & Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch, 2017. "Association between Immune Markers and Surrogate Markers of Cardiovascular Disease in HIV Positive Patients: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, January.
    20. Lilla Náfrádi & Kent Nakamoto & Peter J Schulz, 2017. "Is patient empowerment the key to promote adherence? A systematic review of the relationship between self-efficacy, health locus of control and medication adherence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.

    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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.