Riddhi Doshi, Victoria Divino, Luke Greenwalt, Mitchell DeKoven
{"title":"Methodological standards for comparative effectiveness research: considerations for evidentiary review for medicare drug price negotiation.","authors":"Riddhi Doshi, Victoria Divino, Luke Greenwalt, Mitchell DeKoven","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2453503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is expected to result in lower drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries in the United States (US). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the most recent draft guidance for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation (DPN) program in May 2024.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>In August 2023, the list of 10 drugs selected for the DPN were published and the first round of negotiations are now complete. While the latest CMS guidance highlights the importance of considering study limitations, bias, uncertainty, and generalizability, there were scarce methodological guidelines provided for the comparative effectiveness research (CER) studies. We conducted searches on PubMed and reviewed resources from websites of regulatory authorities.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Broader domains of data quality, transparency and methodology including study design, outcomes assessment, bias, confounding and uncertainty should be considered when developing methodological guidelines for evidence submitted for DPN. There is opportunity to align with and leverage existing guidelines published by federal and non-federal organizations in the US and globally while customizing the new guidance based on the specific requirements of DPN, keeping in mind CMS's interest in specific populations as well as health equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-12","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/10.1080/14737167.2025.2453503","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is expected to result in lower drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries in the United States (US). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the most recent draft guidance for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation (DPN) program in May 2024.
Areas covered: In August 2023, the list of 10 drugs selected for the DPN were published and the first round of negotiations are now complete. While the latest CMS guidance highlights the importance of considering study limitations, bias, uncertainty, and generalizability, there were scarce methodological guidelines provided for the comparative effectiveness research (CER) studies. We conducted searches on PubMed and reviewed resources from websites of regulatory authorities.
Expert opinion: Broader domains of data quality, transparency and methodology including study design, outcomes assessment, bias, confounding and uncertainty should be considered when developing methodological guidelines for evidence submitted for DPN. There is opportunity to align with and leverage existing guidelines published by federal and non-federal organizations in the US and globally while customizing the new guidance based on the specific requirements of DPN, keeping in mind CMS's interest in specific populations as well as health equity.
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.