1 Evaluating & Applying What Works Best Leaders’ Project Policy Forum Kathy Buto, VP Health Policy April 24, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mary Ellen Turner MD, MPH Vice-President
Advertisements

Building a New Payment System: Stakeholder Perspectives on Principles and Elements Robert L. Broadway, FHFMA VP of Corporate Strategy, Bethesda Healthcare.
The Advanced Medical Home ACP Attributes of Advanced Medical Home Evidence-based care/clinical decision support Chronic care model approach for all patients.
Management of Drug Formulary Dimitry Gotlinsky Western University Managed Care Clerkship ProPharma Pharmaceutical Consultants, Inc. 06/16/06.
Donald T. Simeon Caribbean Health Research Council
Value & Coverage Issue Brief Slides A Closer Look at Health Plan Coverage Policies and Approaches.
C omparative Effectiveness: A Manufacturer’s Perspective AHRQ 2007 Annual Conference September 27, 2007 Peter Juhn, MD, MPH Vice President Evidence and.
Combination Products and Mutually Conforming Labeling David Eveleth Pfizer Inc.
Hospital Pharmacy Payam Parchamazad, PharmD Staff Pharmacist
HTA from an Industry Perspective Janey Shin, Director of Medical Affairs Johnson & Johnson Medical Companies CADTH, 2015.
Objectives Why we need DHCPL Situations that call for a DHCPL Definitions DHCPL itself–content, presentation, process Target audience Current and future.
ONC Policy and Program Update Health IT Standards Committee Meeting July 17, 2013 Jodi Daniel Director, Office of Policy and Planning, ONC 0.
Clinical Pharmacy Basma Y. Kentab MSc..
IPhVWP Polish Presidency, Warsaw October 6 th 2011 Almath Spooner Irish Medicines Board Monitoring the outcome of risk minimisation activities.
 Pharmacovigilance – Patient’s standpoint Steve Arlington May 2007.
Value-Based Insurance Design A.Mark Fendrick, MD University of Michigan Center for Value-Based Insurance Design
Regulatory Update Ellen Leinfuss SVP, Life Sciences.
Outcomes of Public Health
NICE Decision Making Dr Katherine Payne North West Genetics Knowledge Park The University of Manchester
NCI Review of the Clinical Trials Process 6 th Annual National Forum on Biomedical Imaging in Oncology James H. Doroshow M.D. April 7, 2005 Bethesda, Maryland.
Pharmacovigilance Programme of India
Fourth Annual Medical Research Summit Concurrent Session 4.05 – Managing CROs and SMOs from a Compliance Perspective Michael SwiatochaAprill 23, 2004.
Community Paramedic. Benchmark 101 We need a description of the epidemiology of the medical conditions targeted by the community paramedicine program.
IPhVWP Polish Presidency, Warsaw October 6 th 2011 Almath Spooner Irish Medicines Board Monitoring the outcome of risk minimisation activities.
A major step towards a Europe for Health Directive on patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare DG SANCO D2 Healthcare Systems.
How NICE supports its guidance Julie Royce Associate Director Implementation Support.
Chapter 6 CRISIS MANAGEMENT. Introduction - Crisis: ◦is a situation that specifically involves a pharmaceutical product, medical device or activity with.
Key Compliance Risks in Clinical Trials Kathleen Meriwether Principal, ERNST & YOUNG, LLP Fraud Investigation & Dispute Services.
1 Comparative Effectiveness Research: Key Issues and Controversies Consumer-Purchaser Disclosure Project Discussion Forum May 5, 2009 Steven D. Pearson,
1 PhRMA Guiding Principles - DTC About Prescription Medicines.
Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (ASH) Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability (ACBSA)
+ Role of Industry in Clinical Care, Research, and Education.
Summary of Findings Improving the System of Reporting and Interpreting Unexpected Serious Adverse Events to Investigators Conducting Research Under an.
Medicaid Fee-for-Service: Prior Authorization Criteria & the Role of the DUR Board Charles Agte, Pharmacy Administrator Health Care Services June 19, 2013.
1 The Role of Medicare National Coverage in the Regulatory Process Steve Phurrough MD, MPA Director, Coverage and Analysis Group Centers for Medicare and.
A Journey Together: New Maryland Healthcare Landscape Baltimore County Forum Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission June 2015.
THE COMMONWEALTH FUND Chronic Care Initiatives to Improve the Medicare Program Stuart Guterman Director, Program on Medicare’s Future The Commonwealth.
Ralph F. Hall October 14, Background and Disclosures Develop policy solutions Coalition management Consulting services Partner – Leavitt Partners.
Improving Value in Health Care: Challenges and Potential Strategies Arnold M Epstein October 24, 2008 Congressional Health Care Reform Education Project.
General Regulatory Issues in the Development of Drugs Intended for Treatment of Chronic Illness Sharon Hertz, M.D. Medical Officer Division of Anesthetic,
July 15, Postmarketing Safety Evaluation of Approved Drugs and Risk Management Victor F. C. Raczkowski, MD, MS Director, Office of Drug Safety July.
Linking the learning to the National Standards for Safer Better Healthcare Joan Heffernan Inspector Manager Regulation – Healthcare Health Information.
October 28, F OOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2007 (FDAAA) and Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) Presented to the Ninth.
1 National Forum on Biomedical Imaging in Oncology CMS UPDATE Steve Phurrough MD, MPA Director, Coverage and Analysis Group.
STAKEHOLDERANALYSIS Boot Camp WHY CARE ABOUT STAKEHOLDERS? Where are we? (most of you)  Identified Need; Developed Concept / Solution What do we.
Applying New Science to Drug Safety Janet Woodcock, M.D. Acting Deputy Commissioner for Operations April 15, 2005.
HPTN Ethics Guidance for Research: Community Obligations Africa Regional Working Group Meeting, May 19-23, 2003 Lusaka, Zambia.
Component 1: Introduction to Health Care and Public Health in the U.S. 1.9: Unit 9: The evolution and reform of healthcare in the US 1.9c: Quality Indicators.
1 BETTER APPROACHES TO MONITORING MEDICAL PRODUCT SAFETY ARE NEEDED.
E-SICK LEAVE ATTESTATION Medical Committees Section.
The Third Annual Medical Device Regulatory, Reimbursement and Compliance Congress Value-Based Pricing: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly What Does Value.
Gwendolyn Ryals, Look at Me Artwork from The Creative Center Janey Shin, Director, Real World Evidence Government Affairs and Market Access CADTH Symposium.
The Basque Foundation for Health and Innovation Research Demotek Demonstration Unit of Innovative Technologies in Health An opportunity for.
Regulatory and Reimbursement Harmonization An Industry Perspective Adrian Griffin | April 2016.
Patient Engagement throughout the Biopharmaceutical Lifecycle: Tips for Effective Patient Advocate/Industry Collaboration to Improve Patient Access and.
FUNDAMENTALS OF PUBLIC HEALTH Joseph S Duren Lopez Community & Public Health - HCA415 Instructor: Adriane Niare November 10, 2015.
Department of Public Health Presentation to the Health Cabinet June 14, 2016.
Patient Engagement in Drug Development: Experiences, Good Practices and Lessons Learned Lana Skirboll VP Science Policy Sanofi October 28, 2016, National.
RAC Regulatory Affairs Certification
Off-label Use.
Comparative Effectiveness Research: Key Issues and Controversies
Health Information Security and Privacy Collaborative (HISPC) Overview
Lessons Learned Through HBD: The Regulator’s View - US FDA
FDA-CDRH in the Next Decade A Vision for Change
Accountable care organizations
Regulatory and Reimbursement Harmonization
Tobey Clark, Director*, Burlington USA
Regulatory Perspective of the Use of EHRs in RCTs
Presentation transcript:

1 Evaluating & Applying What Works Best Leaders’ Project Policy Forum Kathy Buto, VP Health Policy April 24, 2008

2 Comparative Effectiveness Benefits -Help establish value of treatments -Help physicians and patients make better decisions - Promotes higher quality, value-based care -Way for developers of products to differentiate truly innovative products - Research investment will focus on finding higher value treatments if include incentives (like streamlined approvals, higher reimbursement)

3 Comparative Effectiveness Concerns and implications -Expectations the CE is “silver bullet” -Won’t address major drivers of costs -Population-based decisions trumping individual patient needs(cost/QALY metric) -Consider alternatives to treat condition not just drug to drug, device to device -Could be used as a “fourth hurdle” -For devices, role and training of operator/surgeon, procedure volume, ease of use, shorter lifecycle must be considered -Can be misleading (CATIE study) -If costs, should be costs/savings over time not input costs

4 Comparative Effectiveness Best way to go about it: -Undertake trust-building among stakeholders -Public-private entity or “enterprise” -Transparent processes, findings, limitations, ways to disseminate -Begin with conditions where wide variation in treatment patterns, high burden of illness -Acknowledge the role of population-based studies but build in consideration of individual patient variation -Consider incentives to create “clamoring” for CE -Focus on comparative clinical value not costs

5 Risk Sharing – the Velcade Case “Bortezomib monotherapy, in its licensed indication, is not recommended for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma……. …….the Committee concluded that bortezomib monotherapy for the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma is clinically effective compared with HDD, but that it has not been shown to be cost effective.” Final NICE Recommendation, October 2006

6 Risk Sharing – Velcade Case Only licensed drug for multiple myeloma, available in Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland Clinically effective but did not meet cost effectiveness threshold – uncertainty about patients who would benefit Patient and media response, characterized as a “death sentence” Company appealed but prior to Velcade, only 1 appeal had succeeded in overturning guidance Company proposed “risk sharing” to reduce uncertainty

7 Risk Sharing – Velcade Case Agreement NHS funds treatment at first relapse in patients who achieve a complete or partial response during first 4 cycles of treatment (serum M protein test) Patients who fail to respond discontinue Velcade Complete rebate or free stock direct to hospital units for patients with less than a partial response Interim bridging to provide access ahead of new evidence – not a permanent reimbursement

8 Other Risk Sharing Agreements Performance agreements – restenosis rates, anti-psychotic compliance Guaranteed Savings – utilization rates “Coverage with evidence development” – U.S.

9 Drug Safety Monitoring Evaluate benefit-risk profiles continuously, with important information gained in real world use Pre-approval, knowledge based on thousands of patients in controlled clinical setting In study with 3000 patients, one can identify adverse reactions that occur at a rate of 1 in 100 patients Not possible to identify an adverse reaction that occurs in fewer than 1 in 1000 patients In post-approval, rely on post-marketing reports, additional research, including epidemiological studies and targeted trials Good risk management requires cooperation between regulatory agencies and the company and timely communication of benefit-risk information to health professionals and patients.

10 Drug Safety Monitoring Under FDA Amendments, FDA will have ability to develop partnerships with public and private payers and academia to increase access to data on drug safety Companies will play an important role in assessing the data in partnership with FDA Question of whether these data can provide information to help improve targeting of appropriate patients, improve understanding of effectiveness as well as safety