Societal Preferences for Funding Orphan Drugs in the United Kingdom: An Application of Person Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiment Methods
- PMID: 29753350
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.026
Societal Preferences for Funding Orphan Drugs in the United Kingdom: An Application of Person Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiment Methods
Abstract
Background: It is unclear whether UK National Health Service (NHS) policies for orphan drugs, which permit funding of non-cost-effective treatments, reflect societal preferences.
Methods: We conducted person trade-off (PTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) among 3950 adults selected to be representative of the UK general population. Experimental design was informed by surveys of patients affected by rare diseases, their caregivers, health care staff, and policymakers. Societal preferences were estimated in relation to treating a common disease, increases in waiting lists, or filling of vacant NHS posts. Results of the DCE were applied to recently licensed orphan drugs.
Results: On the basis of equal cost, the majority of respondents to the PTO (54%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 50-59) chose to allocate funds equally between patients treated for rare diseases and those treated for common diseases, with 32% (95% CI 28-36) favoring treating rare diseases over treating common diseases (14%; 95% CI 11-17), which this reduced to 23% (95% CI 20-27) when rare disease treatments were 10 times more expensive. When framed differently, more respondents prioritized not increasing waiting list size (43%; 95% CI 39-48) than to treat rare disease patients (34%; 95% CI 30-38).
Discussion: The DCE indicated a greater preference for treating a common disease over a rare disease. Respondents agreed with five of 12 positive appraisal recommendations for orphan drugs, even if their list price was higher, but preferred the NHS not to fund the remainder.
Conclusions: The general public does not value rarity as a sufficient reason to justify special consideration for additional NHS funding of orphan drugs. This has implications regarding the appropriateness of operating higher thresholds of cost-effectiveness.
Keywords: discrete choice experiment; orphan drugs; person trade-off; rare disease; resource allocation; societal preferences.
Copyright © 2018 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Societal preferences for funding orphan drugs in China: An application of the discrete choice experiment method.Front Public Health. 2022 Dec 12;10:1005453. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1005453. eCollection 2022. Front Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36579068 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Societal Preferences in Health Technology Assessments for Rare Diseases and Orphan Drugs: A Systematic Literature Review of New Analytic Approaches.Value Health Reg Issues. 2024 Nov;44:101026. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101026. Epub 2024 Jul 25. Value Health Reg Issues. 2024. PMID: 39059264
-
A discrete choice experiment investigating preferences for funding drugs used to treat orphan diseases: an exploratory study.Health Econ Policy Law. 2011 Jul;6(3):405-33. doi: 10.1017/S1744133110000344. Epub 2010 Dec 21. Health Econ Policy Law. 2011. PMID: 21205401
-
Using a stated preference discrete choice experiment to assess societal value from the perspective of decision-makers in Europe. Does it work for rare diseases?Health Policy. 2019 Feb;123(2):152-158. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.11.015. Epub 2018 Nov 29. Health Policy. 2019. PMID: 30528244
-
Challenges in measuring the societal value of orphan drugs: insights from a canadian stated preference survey.Patient. 2015 Feb;8(1):93-101. doi: 10.1007/s40271-014-0109-5. Patient. 2015. PMID: 25586645
Cited by
-
Comparison of Rare and Common Diseases in the Setting of Healthcare Priorities: Evidence of Social Preferences Based on a Systematic Review.Patient Prefer Adherence. 2023 Jul 24;17:1783-1797. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S416226. eCollection 2023. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2023. PMID: 37520063 Free PMC article. Review.
-
What Aspects of Illness Influence Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK.Pharmacoeconomics. 2021 Dec;39(12):1443-1454. doi: 10.1007/s40273-021-01067-w. Epub 2021 Aug 19. Pharmacoeconomics. 2021. PMID: 34409564 Free PMC article.
-
Preferences on Policy Options for Ensuring the Financial Sustainability of Healthcare Services in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2023 Jun 12;16:1033-1047. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S414823. eCollection 2023. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2023. PMID: 37333981 Free PMC article.
-
Views and opinions of the general public about the reimbursement of expensive medicines in the Netherlands.PLoS One. 2025 Jan 8;20(1):e0317188. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317188. eCollection 2025. PLoS One. 2025. PMID: 39774515 Free PMC article.
-
Valuation of Treatments for Rare Diseases: A Systematic Literature Review of Societal Preference Studies.Adv Ther. 2023 Feb;40(2):393-424. doi: 10.1007/s12325-022-02359-z. Epub 2022 Dec 1. Adv Ther. 2023. PMID: 36451072 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources