ArticleJournal of health economics and outcomes research2025
Quantifying Disease Severity in Health Technology Assessment in Japan: A Retrospective Analysis Using Quality-Adjusted Life-Year Shortfalls.
Article in Journal of health economics and outcomes research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of Alternative Outcome Measures in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Three Applications Within Oncology.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Since 2019, Japan has implemented health technology assessments (HTAs) for selected drugs and medical devices. In the HTA system, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), calculated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), is employed to guide price adjustments. However, the current system does not incorporate a quantitative assessment of disease severity. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate whether severity modifiers based on QALY shortfalls correspond to conditions currently granted special consideration, that is, those eligible for a higher ICER reference value (1.5× the standard), and to explore their implications for Japan's HTA system. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 32 drugs assessed under Japan's HTA up to March 2025. Absolute shortfall (AS) and proportional shortfall (PS) were calculated using age, sex distribution, and comparator quality-adjusted life expectancy estimates from manufacturer assessments and public assessments. Severity categories were defined as ×1.0 (AS ≤ ×12 or PS ≤0.85), ×1.2 (12 < AS < 18 or 0.85 < PS < 0.95), and ×1.7 (AS ≥18 or PS ≥0.95). The concordance between severity classification and policy-based special consideration was then examined. Results: Twenty-five matched target populations were identified. Mean AS and PS values did not differ significantly between manufacturer and public assessments, although manufacturers tended to report higher shortfalls. All cancer and pediatric cases were classified as ×1.2 or ×1.7, whereas 1 designated intractable disease was classified as having low severity (×1.0). Chronic and infectious diseases fell into higher severity categories despite not currently being subject to special consideration. Weighted mean severity values were comparable to those used in the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence benchmarks. Discussion: The findings revealed both alignment and misalignment between Japan's current HTA policy and severity classification. While cancer and pediatric diseases were consistent with the existing system, some serious diseases might have been overlooked, and the designated intractable disease might not align with quantitative severity criteria. Conclusions: QALY shortfalls may serve as a complementary approach to identifying unmet health needs within Japan's HTA system. To ensure methodological robustness and social acceptance, broader validation, standardized estimation methods, and stakeholder consensus are necessary for effective decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.