Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jun;33(6):551-60.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0260-4.

A practical guide for using registry data to inform decisions about the cost effectiveness of new cancer drugs: lessons learned from the PHAROS registry

Affiliations

A practical guide for using registry data to inform decisions about the cost effectiveness of new cancer drugs: lessons learned from the PHAROS registry

Hedwig M Blommestein et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015 Jun.

Abstract

Decision makers increasingly request evidence on the real-world cost effectiveness of a new treatment. There is, however, a lack of practical guidance on how to conduct an economic evaluation based on registry data and how this evidence can be used in actual decision making. This paper explains the required steps on how to perform a sound economic evaluation using examples from an economic evaluation conducted with real-world data from the Dutch Population based HAematological Registry for Observational Studies. There are three main issues related to using registry data: confounding by indication, missing data, and insufficient numbers of (comparable) patients. If encountered, it is crucial to accurately deal with these issues to maximize the internal validity and generalizability of the outcomes and their value to decision makers. Multivariate regression modeling, propensity score matching, and data synthesis are well-established methods to deal with confounding. Multiple imputation methods should be used in cases where data are missing at random. Furthermore, it is important to base the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a new treatment compared with its alternative on comparable groups of (matched) patients, even if matching results in a small analytical population. Unmatched real-world data provide insights into the costs and effects of a treatment in a real-world setting. Decision makers should realize that real-world evidence provides extremely valuable and relevant policy information, but needs to be assessed differently compared with evidence derived from a randomized clinical trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Gliklich R, Dreyer N, editors. Registries for evaluating patient outcomes: a user’s guide (prepared by Outcome DEcIDE Center [Outcome Sciences, Inc. d/b/a Outcome] under Contract No. HHSA29020050035I TO2). AHRQ Publication No. 10-EHC049. 2nd ed. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010. - PubMed
    1. Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, O’Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.; 2005.
    1. Rutten-van Mölken MPMH, Uyl-de Groot C, Rutten F. Costs and effects: a guideline for economic evaluations in health care. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Gezondheidszorg; 2010.
    1. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS): explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16(2):231–250. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.02.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berger ML, Martin BC, Husereau D, Worley K, Allen JD, Yang W, et al. A questionnaire to assess the relevance and credibility of observational studies to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force report. Value Health. 2014;17(2):143–156. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.12.011. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances