Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37566690›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2023

The impact of government reimbursement negotiation on targeted anticancer medicines use and cost in China: A cohort study based on national health insurance data.

Yu Yang, Yichen Zhang, Anita K Wagner, Huangqianyu Li, Luwen Shi, Xiaodong Guan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Immune checkpoint inhibitorsTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yu Yang *Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Yichen Zhang *Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Anita K WagnerDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Huangqianyu LiInternational Research Center for Medicinal Administration, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Luwen ShiDepartment of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Xiaodong GuanDepartment of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Peking University · CNHarvard Pilgrim Health Care · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: High prices of targeted anticancer medicines (TAMs) result in financial toxicity for patients and the health insurance system. How national price negotiation and reimbursement policy affect the accessibility of TAMs for cancer patients remains unknown. Methods: In this population-based cohort study, we used national health insurance claims data in 2017 and identified adult patients with cancer diagnoses for which price-negotiated TAMs were indicated. We estimated the half-month prevalence of price-negotiated TAMs use before and after the policy implementation in September 2017. We calculated direct medical costs, out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, and the proportion of OOP cost for each cancer patient to measure their financial burden attributable to TAMs use. We performed segmented linear and multivariable logistic regression to analyse the policy impact. Results: We included 39 391 of a total 118 655 cancer beneficiaries. After September 2017, the prevalence of price-negotiated TAMs use increased from 1.4%-2.1% to 2.9%-3.1% (P = 0.005); TAMs users' daily medical costs increased from US$261.3 to US$292.5 (P < 0.001), while median daily OOP costs (US$68.2 vs US$65.7; P = 0.134) and OOP costs as a proportion of daily medical costs persisted (28.5% vs 28.5%; P = 0.995). Compared with resident beneficiaries, the relative probability of urban employee beneficiaries on TAMs uses decreased after the policy (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.4 vs aOR = 2.2). Conclusions: The government price negotiation and reimbursement policy improved patient access to TAMs and narrowed disparities among insurance schemes. China's approach to promoting the affordability of expensive medicines provides valuable experience for health policy decision-makers.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasmsAdultChinaCohort StudiesGovernmentHealth ExpendituresHumansInsurance, HealthNational Health ProgramsNegotiatingAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID37566690
PMCPMC10420358
OpenAlexW4385754520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.