Pharmaceutical innovativeness index: methodological approach for assessing the value of medicines - a case study of oncology drugs.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-13 DOI:10.1080/14737167.2024.2365985
Ludmila P Gargano, Juliana Alvares-Teodoro, Francisco de A Acurcio, Augusto A Guerra
{"title":"Pharmaceutical innovativeness index: methodological approach for assessing the value of medicines - a case study of oncology drugs.","authors":"Ludmila P Gargano, Juliana Alvares-Teodoro, Francisco de A Acurcio, Augusto A Guerra","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2024.2365985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We propose a framework to assess the value of pharmaceutical innovations, with explicit clinical and methodological parameters, based on the therapeutic value and health needs.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>The study was based on the adaptation of health technology assessment methods documented in the literature, which was applied to a sample of oncological drugs. Difficulties and issues during the application of those tools were identified and addressed to develop a new framework with new and revised domains and clear classification criterion for each domain. Scores were assigned to each level and domain according to their relevance to generate the final score of innovativeness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Pharmaceutical Innovation Index (PII) includes four domains, two related to clinical and social dimensions - Therapeutic Need and Added Therapeutic Value - and other two about methodological features - Study Design and Quality (risk of bias). The scores combined after assigned to each domain results Index of the Innovativeness of the medicines represents the degree of pharmaceutical innovation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This work proposes a transparent methodology with well-defined criteria and script; the algorithm developed with authors' weightings and criteria may be switched to best adjust to other applications, perspective or clinical indications, while keeping the transparency and objectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2365985","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We propose a framework to assess the value of pharmaceutical innovations, with explicit clinical and methodological parameters, based on the therapeutic value and health needs.

Research design and methods: The study was based on the adaptation of health technology assessment methods documented in the literature, which was applied to a sample of oncological drugs. Difficulties and issues during the application of those tools were identified and addressed to develop a new framework with new and revised domains and clear classification criterion for each domain. Scores were assigned to each level and domain according to their relevance to generate the final score of innovativeness.

Results: The Pharmaceutical Innovation Index (PII) includes four domains, two related to clinical and social dimensions - Therapeutic Need and Added Therapeutic Value - and other two about methodological features - Study Design and Quality (risk of bias). The scores combined after assigned to each domain results Index of the Innovativeness of the medicines represents the degree of pharmaceutical innovation.

Conclusion: This work proposes a transparent methodology with well-defined criteria and script; the algorithm developed with authors' weightings and criteria may be switched to best adjust to other applications, perspective or clinical indications, while keeping the transparency and objectiveness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
药品创新指数:评估药品价值的方法论--肿瘤药物案例研究。
背景:我们根据治疗价值和健康需求,提出了一个评估药物创新价值的框架,其中包含明确的临床和方法参数:研究设计和方法:本研究基于对文献中记载的健康技术评估方法的调整,并将其应用于肿瘤药物样本。在应用这些工具的过程中,发现并解决了一些困难和问题,从而制定了一个新的框架,其中包含新的和经过修订的领域,并为每个领域制定了明确的分类标准。根据每个级别和领域的相关性为其打分,以得出创新性的最终得分:药物创新指数(PII)包括四个领域,其中两个与临床和社会层面有关--治疗需求和附加治疗价值,另外两个与方法学特征有关--研究设计和质量(偏倚风险)。对每个领域进行评分后得出的药品创新指数代表了药品创新的程度:这项工作提出了一种具有明确标准和脚本的透明方法;根据作者的权重和标准开发的算法可根据其他应用、视角或临床适应症进行最佳调整,同时保持透明度和客观性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
期刊最新文献
Secondary healthcare resource utilization and related costs associated with influenza-related hospital admissions in adult patients, England 2016 - 2020. Costs for global guideline-based diagnosis of mucormycosis in patients with neutropenia, hematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplantation - a perspective of the German healthcare system. Content and cost of waste pharmaceuticals collected by pharmacies for disposal. Correction. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lorlatinib and crizotinib in the first-line treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1