Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34697718›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2022

Is an Orphan Drug's Cost-Effectiveness Associated with US Health Plan Coverage Restrictiveness?

James D Chambers, Nikoletta M Margaretos, Daniel E Enright, Rosa Wang, Xin Ye

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Factors Associated with Biosimilar Exclusions and Step Therapy Restrictions Among US Commercial Health Plans.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

James D ChambersCenter for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. jchambers@tuftsmedicalcenter.org.ORCID 0000-0001-5696-4894
Nikoletta M MargaretosCenter for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Daniel E EnrightCenter for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Rosa WangDaiichi Sankyo, Inc., Basking Ridge, NJ, USA.
Xin YeDaiichi Sankyo, Inc., Basking Ridge, NJ, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesOrphan drugs' high prices raise questions about whether their costs are worth their benefits. We examined the association between an orphan drug's cost-effectiveness and health plan coverage restrictiveness.

methodsWe analyzed a dataset of US commercial health plan coverage decisions (information current as of 2019) for orphan drugs (n = 3298). We used multi-level random-effect logistic regression to examine the association between orphan drug cost-effectiveness and coverage restrictiveness. We identified cost-effectiveness estimates from the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, and from the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review's value assessments. We included only cost-effectiveness studies not funded by product manufacturers. We included the following independent variables: cancer indication, availability of alternatives, pediatric population, number of years since US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, disease prevalence, annual cost, additional non-orphan indication, safety, and inclusion in a FDA expedited review program.

resultsPlans restricted drug coverage in 29.7% (n = 981) of decisions. Plans were more likely to restrict drugs with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $50,000-$175,000 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] (odds ratio = 1.855, p < 0.05), $175,000-$500,000 per QALY (odds ratio = 1.859, p < 0.05), and >$500,000 per QALY/dominated (odds ratio = 2.032, p < 0.01), compared to drugs with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios <$50,000 per QALY. Plans more often restricted drugs with non-cancer indications, having available alternatives, with more recent approval, in an FDA expedited review program, and for which the FDA additionally issued approval for a non-orphan disease. Plans more often restricted drugs with higher annual costs, and drugs indicated for higher prevalence diseases. All findings p < 0.05.

conclusionsAmong other factors, an orphan drug's cost-effectiveness was associated with health plan drug coverage restrictiveness.

Indexed as

Insurance CoverageOrphan Drug ProductionChildCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.