» Articles » PMID: 30656545

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

Overview
Date 2019 Jan 19
PMID 30656545
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: The 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.

Methods: Medicines 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.

Results: Forty-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.

Conclusion: In 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.

Citing Articles

Budget impact models for lung cancer interventions: A systematic literature review.

Willis M, Nilsson A, Kellerborg K, Lwin Z, Prelaj A J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2024; 30(9):1041-1056.

PMID: 39213147 PMC: 11366214. DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2024.30.9.1041.


Budget Impact Analysis of Risperidone Use and Adverse Event Monitoring in Autism Spectrum Disorder in Brazil: Assessment of Theoretical Versus Real Data.

Lopes L, Itria A, Lopes L Pharmacoecon Open. 2023; 7(6):951-961.

PMID: 37707722 PMC: 10721756. DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00436-9.


Prescribing costs of hypoglycaemic agents and associations with metabolic control in Wales; a national analysis of primary care data.

Taylor P, Siah Q, Marei O, McDade-Kumar M, Rachedi N, Bracchi R Diabet Med. 2022; 39(9):e14908.

PMID: 35766972 PMC: 9545615. DOI: 10.1111/dme.14908.


Assessing the Accuracy of Sales Forecasts Submitted by Pharmaceutical Companies Applying for Reimbursement in Austria.

Kossmeier M, Themanns M, Hatapoglu L, Kogler B, Keuerleber S, Lichtenecker J Front Pharmacol. 2021; 12:726758.

PMID: 34483937 PMC: 8414520. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.726758.


A novel method for predicting the budget impact of innovative medicines: validation study for oncolytics.

Geenen J, Belitser S, Vreman R, van Bloois M, Klungel O, Boersma C Eur J Health Econ. 2020; 21(6):845-853.

PMID: 32248313 PMC: 7366590. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-020-01176-x.


References
1.
Cha M, Rifai B, Sarraf P . Pharmaceutical forecasting: throwing darts?. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2013; 12(10):737-8. DOI: 10.1038/nrd4127. View

2.
Broder M, Zambrano J, Lee J, Marken R . Systematic bias in predictions of new drugs' budget impact: analysis of a sample of recent US drug launches. Curr Med Res Opin. 2017; 34(5):765-773. DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2017.1320276. View

3.
Varnava A, Bracchi R, Samuels K, Hughes D, Routledge P . New Medicines in Wales: The All Wales Medicines Strategy Group (AWMSG) Appraisal Process and Outcomes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018; 36(5):613-624. PMC: 5906524. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0632-7. View