Search

Objective To review drug policies, health technology assessment (HTA), and HTA's use in drug policies in China, to further improve the quality and efficiency of drugs. Methods This study draws on multiple methods. A systematic review of the literature, review of Chinese government documents and statistical handbooks, and authors' experiences in drug policies and HTA in China were combined to achieve the objective. Results Of 571 studies identified in the initial search, 14 eligible articles (6 English, 8 Chinese) were finally included. On the Web site of the National Health and Family Planning Commission, the National Development and Reform Commission, and the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, we found that HTA or pharmacoeconomics evaluation is mentioned in recent years and its frequency has been increasing; however, there was not one hit about HTA or PE on the Web site of China Food and Drug Administration. Conclusions The decision makers have realized the importance and value of HTA and have tried to integrate HTA into drug policies and regulations. However, the application of HTA findings to drug policymaking is not yet widespread and there are a number of challenges in using HTA in China. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a national HTA commission and develop pharmacoeconomics guidelines to support the use of HTA in decision making. Moreover, the most important steps are to encourage technology innovation, groom more HTA experts, and build reliable databases in China.

Background: There are multiple antidiabetic drugs in China, which vary in efficacy and safety. However, no clinical study exists comparing all the alternative drugs simultaneously. This study aims to estimate and compare the efficacy of alternative classes of antidiabetic drugs in the regimen of monotherapy for Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Methods: Systematic literature review was conducted by retrieving databases including CNKI, WanFang, CQVIP, PubMed, Embase, Web-of-Science, ScienceDirect and Cochrane Library, to identify randomized controlled trials (1990-2016) comparing the efficacy of 'antidiabetic drug monotherapy' vs 'placebo/lifestyle intervention' in Chinese T2DM patients. Three-lines eight-classes of antidiabetic drugs were included based on Chinese guideline: 1st line drug (metformin), 2nd line drug (I±-glycosidase inhibitor, sulfonylurea, glinide, DPP-4 inhibitor, thiazolidinedione), 3rd line drug (insulin, GLP-1 receptor agonist). Meta-analyses were used to estimate the efficacy of antidiabetic drug vs placebo/lifestyle intervention. Findings: 99,072 records were identified through database search, with 46 studies finally included. Overall, compared with placebo/lifestyle intervention, metformin, 2nd line drug and 3rd line drug reduced HbA1c level by 1·04%, 0·72% and 1·22%, BMI level by 1·77kg/m2, 0·24kg/m2 and 1·14kg/m2, TC level by 0·64mmol/l, 0·10mmol/l and 0·58mmol/l, SBP level by 3·13mmHg, 1·37mmHg and 3·00mmHg; while increased HDL-C level by 0·19mmol/l, 0·09mmol/l and 0·15mmol/l, respectively. In 2nd line drugs, the top three treatments for reducing HbA1c level were sulfonylurea (WMD:-1·19;95%CI:-1·56,-0·82), α-glycosidase inhibitor (WMD:-0·90;95%CI:-1·32,-0·47), thiazolidinedione (WMD:-0·80;95%CI:-1·31,-0·29); for reducing BMI level were α-glycosidase inhibitor (WMD:-0·64;95%CI:-1·46,0·17), DPP-4 inhibitor (WMD:-0·27;95%CI:-1·12,0·57), thiazolidinedione (WMD:0·11;95%CI:-0·96,1·17); for reducing TC level were DPP-4 inhibitor (WMD:-0·18;95%CI:-0·35,-0·01), α±-glycosidase inhibitor (WMD:-0·30;95%CI:-1·28,0·68), thiazolidinedione (WMD:0·00;95%CI:-0·30,0·31); for increasing HDL-C level were thiazolidinedione (WMD:0·19;95%CI:0·12,0·26), sulfonylurea (WMD:0·02;95%CI:-0·18,0·22), DPP-4 inhibitor (WMD:0·01;95%CI:-0·05,0·06); for reducing SBP level were α-glycosidase inhibitor (WMD:-3·20;95%CI:-8·39,1·99), DPP-4 inhibitor (WMD:-1·85;95%CI:-4·17,0·47), thiazolidinedione (WMD:1·60;95%CI:-5·22,8·42). In 3rd line drugs, insulin (WMD:-2·37;95%CI:-3·79,-0·95) was superior to GLP-1 receptor agonist (WMD:-1·18;95%CI:-1·45,-0·91) in reducing HbA1c level, while no data for the comparison on other outcomes. Interpretation: Pharmacological monotherapies have better efficacy than placebo/lifestyle intervention in Chinese T2DM patients. Funding: None. Declaration of Interest: We declare no competing interests.