10 results on '"Catrin Treharne"'
Search Results
2. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 3
- Author
-
Alice Beattie, Catrin Treharne, and Sreeram V Ramagopalan
- Subjects
canadian drug agency ,direct access scheme ,health technology assessment ,health technology management ,icer ,innovative medicines fund ,market access ,value assessment framework ,vpag ,Public aspects of medicine ,RA1-1270 - Abstract
In this latest update, we explore some of the key updates in market access over recent months including the UK’s voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth (VPAG), the first drugs funded by the Innovative Medicines Fund in the UK and the Direct Access Scheme in France, and, finally, the new Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) value assessment framework in the USA.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 2
- Author
-
Alice Beattie, Catrin Treharne, Silvy Mardiguian, and Sreeram V Ramagopalan
- Subjects
drug pricing ,inflation reduction act ,market access ,medicare ,regulatory ,value assessment ,Public aspects of medicine ,RA1-1270 - Abstract
In this latest update, we explore the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) enacted by the US Congress in August 2022, with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently releasing the list of the first ten drugs it will negotiate prices on. We also cover the consequences of price controls and rigid value assessment in Germany which have led to the withdrawal of a number of medicines. It will be important to see how the IRA balances cost-saving with holistic value assessment, incentives for innovation and patient access to treatment.
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 1
- Author
-
Ramiro Gilardino, Catrin Treharne, Silvy Mardiguian, and Sreeram V Ramagopalan
- Subjects
decision making ,european union ,health technology assessment ,joint clinical assessment ,market access ,regulatory ,Public aspects of medicine ,RA1-1270 - Abstract
In this new series reviewing recent developments inmarket access, we highlight publications investigating health technology assessment (HTA) guidance, review processes and outcomes across the world and discuss how forthcoming changes in the HTA and regulatory environment in the European Union may allow for more consistency in decision making.
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. For what it’s worth: the complex area of medicine value assessment
- Author
-
Sreeram V Ramagopalan, Catrin Treharne, Jonathan Pearson-Stuttard, and Vivek Subbiah
- Subjects
health technology assessment ,inflation reduction act ,medicare ,value ,Public aspects of medicine ,RA1-1270 - Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. Cost-Effectiveness of Triple Therapy with Budesonide/Glycopyrronium/Formoterol Fumarate Dihydrate versus Dual Therapies in Moderate-to-Very Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: United Kingdom Analysis Using the ETHOS Study
- Author
-
Enrico de Nigris, Catrin Treharne, Nick Brighton, Ulf Holmgren, Andrew Walker, and John Haughney
- Subjects
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive ,Cost-Benefit Analysis ,Formoterol Fumarate ,Quality of Life ,Humans ,General Medicine ,Muscarinic Antagonists ,International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ,Budesonide ,Glycopyrrolate ,State Medicine - Abstract
Enrico de Nigris,1 Catrin Treharne,2 Nick Brighton,2 Ulf Holmgren,3 Andrew Walker,4 John Haughney5 1Formerly of Global Product and Portfolio Strategy, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK; 2Formerly of Health Economic Modelling, Regulatory and Access, Parexel International, London, UK; 3Real World Science and Digital, BioPharmaceuticals Medical, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden; 4Salus Alba, Glasgow, UK; 5Clinical Research Facility, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UKCorrespondence: Ulf Holmgren, AstraZeneca, Pepparedsleden 1, Gothenburg, SE-431 83, Sweden, Tel +46 0 317 761 424, Email ulf.holmgren@astrazeneca.comBackground: In the 52-week ETHOS study (NCT02465567), fixed-dose triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate (BGF) reduced moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations versus fixed-dose long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) or inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA dual therapies. Here, ETHOS data were used to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of BGF versus LAMA/LABA and ICS/LABA dual therapies in the United Kingdom.Methods: Costs, exacerbations, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and LYs were extrapolated using a Markov model that considered disease severity progression, risk of moderate and severe exacerbations, adverse events, and treatment discontinuation in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD receiving BGF 320/14.4/10 μg, the LAMA/LABA glycopyrronium/formoterol fumarate dihydrate 14.4/10 μg (GFF), or the ICS/LABA budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate 320/10 μg (BFF). Utilities for COPD severity states were estimated using EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level data from ETHOS. Exacerbation disutilities were sourced from published literature. Healthcare resource utilization was based on ETHOS data, published literature, key external expertsâ input, and informed assumptions. Unit costs came from the UK National Health Service Schedule of Reference Costs, Unit Costs of Health and Social Care from the Personal Social Services Research Unit, and published literature. A lifetime horizon was considered, with costs, QALYs, and LYs discounted at 3.5% per annum.Results: The incremental costâutility ratio (ICUR; per QALY gained) was £ 9901 for BGF versus GFF and £ 2164 for BGF versus BFF. The probability of treatments being cost-effective at the conventional UK-adopted willingness-to-pay threshold of ICUR
- Published
- 2022
7. Peritoneal Dialysis and In-Centre Haemodialysis: A Cost-Utility Analysis from a UK Payer Perspective
- Author
-
Usman Farooqui, Lydia Crowe, Catrin Treharne, Murat Arici, and Frank Xiaoqing Liu
- Subjects
Economics and Econometrics ,medicine.medical_specialty ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Cost-Benefit Analysis ,urologic and male genital diseases ,Ambulatory Care Facilities ,State Medicine ,Health administration ,Peritoneal dialysis ,Quality of life (healthcare) ,Health care ,medicine ,Humans ,Original Research Article ,Intensive care medicine ,Dialysis ,health care economics and organizations ,Cost–utility analysis ,Health economics ,business.industry ,Health Policy ,General Medicine ,female genital diseases and pregnancy complications ,Markov Chains ,United Kingdom ,Quality-adjusted life year ,Quality of Life ,Kidney Failure, Chronic ,Quality-Adjusted Life Years ,Health Expenditures ,business ,Peritoneal Dialysis ,Models, Econometric - Abstract
Background With limited healthcare resources available, cost-effective provision of dialysis to patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is important. Objectives To assess the cost-effectiveness of varying levels of peritoneal dialysis (PD) use versus current practice among incident ESRD patients requiring dialysis. Methods A Markov model was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of increasing uptake of PD to 39 and 50 % versus current practice of 22 % PD from a UK National Health Service perspective for the year of 2013–2014. A scenario with 5 % PD was also considered. Sensitivity analyses were performed. Results Five- and 10-year discounted total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient for the current scenario (22 % PD) were £96,307 and 2.104, and £133,339 and 3.301, respectively. Use of PD in 39 % of patients resulted in 5- and 10-year total per-patient cost savings of £3,180 and £4,102 versus current usage alongside total per-patient QALY increases of 0.017 and 0.020. Use of PD in 50 % of patients resulted in 5- and 10-year per-patient cost savings of £5,238 and £6,758 versus current usage alongside per-patient QALY increases of 0.029 and 0.033. Thus, increasing use of PD was associated with marginally better outcomes and lower costs. Cost savings were driven by lower treatment costs and reduced transport requirements for PD versus haemodialysis. Reducing PD use was associated with higher costs and a small reduction in QALYs. Conclusions These findings suggest increasing PD use among incident dialysis patients would be cost-effective, associated with reduced costs and potential modest improvements in quality of life. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40258-014-0108-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
- Published
- 2014
8. The financial impact of increasing home-based high dose haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis
- Author
-
Frank Xiaoqing Liu, Catrin Treharne, Bruce F. Culleton, L. Lees, and Murat Arici
- Subjects
Budgets ,Nephrology ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Budget impact analysis ,National Health Programs ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Peritoneal dialysis ,Hemodialysis, Home ,Tariff ,Health outcomes ,End stage renal disease ,End-stage renal disease ,High dose haemodialysis ,Home haemodialysis ,Cost Savings ,Internal medicine ,medicine ,Humans ,Intensive care medicine ,health care economics and organizations ,Dialysis ,In-centre haemodialysis ,Modalities ,business.industry ,Financial impact ,Health Policy ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Fee-for-Service Plans ,Budget impact ,Home Care Services ,Home based ,Markov Chains ,Hospitalization ,Transportation of Patients ,England ,Costs and Cost Analysis ,Kidney Failure, Chronic ,Hemodialysis ,business ,Research Article - Abstract
Background Evidence suggests that high dose haemodialysis (HD) may be associated with better health outcomes and even cost savings (if conducted at home) versus conventional in-centre HD (ICHD). Home-based regimens such as peritoneal dialysis (PD) are also associated with significant cost reductions and are more convenient for patients. However, the financial impact of increasing the use of high dose HD at home with an increased tariff is uncertain. A budget impact analysis was performed to investigate the financial impact of increasing the proportion of patients receiving home-based dialysis modalities from the perspective of the England National Health Service (NHS) payer. Methods A Markov model was constructed to investigate the 5 year budget impact of increasing the proportion of dialysis patients receiving home-based dialysis, including both high dose HD at home and PD, under the current reimbursement tariff and a hypothetically increased tariff for home HD (£575/week). Five scenarios were compared with the current England dialysis modality distribution (prevalent patients, 14.1% PD, 82.0% ICHD, 3.9% conventional home HD; incident patients, 22.9% PD, 77.1% ICHD) with all increases coming from the ICHD population. Results Under the current tariff of £456/week, increasing the proportion of dialysis patients receiving high dose HD at home resulted in a saving of £19.6 million. Conducting high dose HD at home under a hypothetical tariff of £575/week was associated with a budget increase (£19.9 million). The costs of high dose HD at home were totally offset by increasing the usage of PD to 20–25%, generating savings of £40.0 million – £94.5 million over 5 years under the increased tariff. Conversely, having all patients treated in-centre resulted in a £172.6 million increase in dialysis costs over 5 years. Conclusion This analysis shows that performing high dose HD at home could allow the UK healthcare system to capture the clinical and humanistic benefits associated with this therapy while limiting the impact on the dialysis budget. Increasing the usage of PD to 20-25%, the levels observed in 2005-2008, will totally offset the additional costs and generate further savings.
- Published
- 2014
9. High-dose hemodialysis versus conventional in-center hemodialysis: a cost-utility analysis from a UK payer perspective
- Author
-
Murat Arici, Bruce F. Culleton, Catrin Treharne, Lydia Crowe, and Frank Xiaoqing Liu
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Pediatrics ,high-dose hemodialysis ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Cost-Benefit Analysis ,Ambulatory Care Facilities ,End stage renal disease ,Renal Dialysis ,medicine ,Humans ,in-center hemodialysis ,Intensive care medicine ,Sensitivity analyses ,Reimbursement ,Cost–utility analysis ,end-stage renal disease ,Cost–benefit analysis ,Dose-Response Relationship, Drug ,business.industry ,Health Policy ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Outcome measures ,cost-effectiveness analysis ,cost-utility analysis ,Cost-effectiveness analysis ,Markov Chains ,United Kingdom ,Insurance, Health, Reimbursement ,Hemodialysis ,business - Abstract
Objective To investigate the cost-effectiveness of high-dose hemodialysis (HD) versus conventional in-center HD (ICHD), over a lifetime time horizon from the UK payer's perspective. Methods We used a Markov modeling approach to compare high-dose HD (in-center or at home) with conventional ICHD using current and hypothetical home HD reimbursement tariffs in England. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Results Over a lifetime, high-dose HD in-center (5 sessions/wk) is associated with higher per-patient costs and QALYs (increases of £108,713 and 0.862, respectively) versus conventional ICHD. The corresponding ICER (£126,106/QALY) indicates that high-dose HD in-center is not cost-effective versus conventional ICHD at a UK willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 to £30,000. High-dose HD at home is associated with lower total costs (£522 less per patient) and a per-patient QALY increase of 1.273 compared with ICHD under the current Payment-by Results reimbursement tariff (£456/wk). At an increased home HD tariff (£575/wk), the ICER for high-dose HD at home versus conventional ICHD is £17,404/QALY. High-dose HD at home had a 62% to 84% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 to £30,000/QALY. Conclusions Although high-dose HD has the potential to offer improved clinical and quality-of-life outcomes over conventional ICHD, under the current UK Payment-by Results reimbursement scheme, it would be considered cost-effective from a UK payer perspective only if conducted at home.
- Published
- 2014
10. Economic Value of the Transurethral Resection in Saline System for Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in England and Wales: Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Cost–Consequence Model
- Author
-
Zenichi Ihara, Danielle Booth, Catrin Treharne, and Lydia Crowe
- Subjects
Male ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Blood transfusion ,Urology ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Prostatic Hyperplasia ,030232 urology & nephrology ,TURis ,Context (language use) ,TUR syndrome ,Transurethral resection in saline ,03 medical and health sciences ,Benign prostate enlargement ,0302 clinical medicine ,Prostate ,Benign prostate hyperplasia ,Humans ,Medicine ,Perioperative Period ,Saline ,Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ,Transurethral resection of the prostate ,Urethral Stricture ,business.industry ,Transurethral Resection of Prostate ,Cost minimisation analysis ,Perioperative ,Length of Stay ,United Kingdom ,Surgery ,Meta-analysis ,TURP ,Treatment Outcome ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Relative risk ,BPH ,Urologic Surgical Procedures ,Saline Solution ,business - Abstract
ContextMonopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) is the current UK surgical standard of care for benign prostatic hyperplasia, a condition estimated to affect >2 million men in the United Kingdom. Although M-TURP efficacy in prostate resection is established, potential perioperative complications and associated costs remain a concern.ObjectiveTo present up-to-date and robust evidence in support of bipolar transurethral resection in saline (TURis) as an alternative surgical option to M-TURP.Evidence acquisitionA systematic review (SR) of electronic databases (up to 2015) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TURis with M-TURP was conducted, followed by evidence synthesis in the form of a meta-analysis of hospital stay, catheterisation time and procedure duration, transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, blood transfusion, clot retention, and urethral strictures. An economic analysis was subsequently undertaken from the UK National Health Service hospital perspective with costs and resource use data from published sources.Evidence synthesisThe SR identified 15 good-quality RCTs, of which 11 were used to inform the meta-analysis. TURis was associated with improved safety versus M-TURP, eliminating the risk of TUR syndrome and reducing the risk of blood transfusion and clot retention (relative risks: 0.34 and 0.43, respectively; p
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.