Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30656545›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2019

Estimated Versus Observed Expenditure Associated with Medicines Recommended by the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group.

Stuart Keeping, Paul N Deslandes, Kathryn E Haines, Philip A Routledge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A novel method for predicting the budget impact of innovative medicines: validation study for oncolytics.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020
    Article
  6. Affordability of oncology drugs: accuracy of budget impact estimations.Journal of market access & health policy · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stuart KeepingAll Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre, University Hospital Llandough, Llandough, CF64 2XX, UK.
Paul N DeslandesAll Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre, University Hospital Llandough, Llandough, CF64 2XX, UK. paul.deslandes@wales.nhs.uk.
Kathryn E HainesAll Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre, University Hospital Llandough, Llandough, CF64 2XX, UK.
Philip A RoutledgeAll Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre, University Hospital Llandough, Llandough, CF64 2XX, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe All Wales Medicines Strategy Group (AWMSG) appraises the clinical and cost effectiveness of new medicines being considered for National Health Service (NHS) prescribing in Wales (UK). The aim of this study was to compare the estimated expenditure on selected medicines submitted by pharmaceutical companies for appraisal with the observed expenditure on these medicines following recommendation.

methodsMedicines appraised and recommended for use in NHS Wales by AWMSG between May 2005 and December 2013 were identified for inclusion in the study. Estimates of expenditure were obtained from company submissions to AWMSG. Primary and secondary care dispensing databases were used to obtain observed expenditure. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was used to compare the observed and estimated expenditure in each of the 3 years after introduction of the medicine.

resultsForty-nine medicines appraised and recommended by AWMSG during the period of interest were included in the study. Median estimated and observed expenditure in each of the 3 years post-recommendation were as follows: year 1 £86,400 and £47,300; year 2 £175,500 and £73,200; year 3 £212,100 and £78,900 (p = 0.03, p = 0.006 and p = 0.001, respectively). The expenditure on 42 of the 49 medicines (82%) was overestimated in at least one of the 3 years post-introduction, with 32 (65%) overestimated in all 3 years.

conclusionIn their applications for health technology appraisal, pharmaceutical companies tended to overestimate the expenditure of the majority of medicines recommended by AWMSG. These findings have implications for the assessment of predicted expenditure as part of the process of medicines appraisal in Wales.

Identifiers

PMID30656545
PMCPMC6710308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.