Search

Objectives: To analyze how value is determined within the scope of the German Pharmaceutical Restructuring Act, which came into effect in 2011.Methods: Using data from all pharmaceuticals that had undergone assessment, appraisal, and price negotiations in Germany before June 30, 2016, we applied generalized linear model regression to analyze the impact of added benefit on the difference between negotiated prices and the prices of comparators. Data were extracted from the Federal Joint Committee's appraisals and price databases. We specified added benefit in various ways. In all models, we controlled for additional criteria such as size of patient population, European price levels, and whether the comparators were generic.Results: Our regression results confirmed the descriptive results, with price premiums reflecting the extent of added benefit as appraised by the Federal Joint Committee. On the substance level, an added benefit was associated with an increase in price premium of 227.2% (P < 0.001) compared with no added benefit. Moreover, we saw increases in price premium of 377.5% (P < 0.001), 90.0% (P < 0.001), and 336.8% (P < 0.001) for added benefits that were "considerable," "minor," and "not quantifiable," respectively. Beneficial effects on mortality were associated with the greatest price premium (624.3%; P < 0.001), followed by such effects on morbidity (174.7%; P < 0.001) and adverse events (93.1%; P = 0.019).Conclusions: Price premiums, or "value," are driven by health gain, the share of patients benefiting from a pharmaceutical, European price levels, and whether comparators are generic. No statement can be made, however, about the appropriateness of the level of price premiums. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objectives: Hypoglycemia is a common complication of treatment with certain diabetes drugs. Non-severe hypoglycemic events (NSHEs) occur more frequently than severe events and account for the majority of total events. The objective of this multi-country study was to identify how NSHEs in a working population affect productivity, costs, and self-management behaviors. Methods: A 20-minute survey assessing the impact of NSHEs was administered via the Internet to individuals (≥ 18 years of age) with self-reported diabetes in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and France. The analysis sample consisted of all respondents who reported an NSHE in the past month. Topics included: reasons for, duration of, and impact of NSHE(s) on productivity and diabetes self-management. Results: A total of 1404 respondents were included in this analysis. Lost productivity was estimated to range from $15.26 to $93.47 (USD) per NSHE, representing 8.3 to 15.9 hours of lost work time per month. Among individuals reporting an NSHE at work (n = 972), 18.3% missed work for an average of 9.9 hours (SD 8.4). Among respondents experiencing an NSHE outside working hours (including nocturnal), 22.7% arrived late for work or missed a full day. Productivity loss was highest for NSHEs occurring during sleep, with an average of 14.7 (SD 11.6) working hours lost. In the week following the NSHE, respondents required an average of 5.6 extra blood glucose test strips. Among respondents using insulin, 25% decreased their insulin dose following the NSHE. Conclusions: NSHEs are associated with substantial economic consequences for employers and patients. Greater attention to treatments that reduce NSHEs could have a major, positive impact on lost work productivity and overall diabetes management. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: To assess the costs and cost-effectiveness of voriconazole in comparison to conventional amphotericin B (CAB) for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Germany. Methods: The cost-effectiveness of voriconazole in comparison to CAB was evaluated with a lifetime Markov model, focusing on the long-term survival of patients treated for invasive aspergillosis. Long-term survival was extrapolated from survival after 12 weeks of treatment, obtained from a randomized aspergillosis study. Information on medical resource consumption and treatment pathways were obtained from this study and an expert committee. With probabilistic analysis the cost-effectiveness of voriconazole compared with amphotericin B was analyzed and expressed in incremental costs per life-weeks gained. The evaluation was performed from a limited societal perspective (both inpatient and outpatient costs) and hospital perspective (only inpatient costs). Results: Average survival of patients treated with voriconazole was 174.4 life-weeks (95% confidence interval [CI] 159.4–191.3), compared with 119.4 life-weeks (95% CI 106.4–132.3) for amphotericin B. With voriconazole, the mean total costs per patient were &U20AC;30,026 (95% CI &U20AC;23,118–37,947) compared with &U20AC;26,669 for amphotericin B (95% CI &U20AC;21,259–34,263) from the limited societal perspective. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was &U20AC;62 per life-week gained (i.e., &U20AC;3224 per life-year gained). Hospital costs were approximately 90% of the mean total costs. Conclusions: In the treatment of invasive aspergillosis, voriconazole is cost-effective in comparison to amphotericin B. Hospital costs are comparable for both treatments and are expected to be reimbursed based on the German diagnosis-related groups (DRG) system 2005. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]