Summary
This article presents an overview of the process and organisational aspects required to support the collection of pharmacoeconomic (PE) data during phase II and phase III clinical trials of pharmaceutical products. The process described requires early involvement of the PE study team in clinical trials design and planning, as well as continuing close collaboration between the PE study team and the clinical study team as the data collection plans are implemented.
Adequate resources must be made available for staffing and funding the PE component of data collection and analysis. If the suggested procedures are adequately resourced and implemented, the result should be a comprehensive, complete and accurate database that will allow the PE study team to characterise the economic value of the new drug at the same time as the clinical study team characterise its safety and efficacy. Integrated clinical and economic evaluations are essential for the appropriate use of pharmaceutical products in rapidly changing markets.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky A, et al. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can Med Assoc J 1992; 146: 473–81
Evans D, Freund D, Dittus R, et al. The use of economic analysis as a basis for inclusion of pharmaceutical products on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. Canberra: Department of Health, Housing and Community Services, 1990
Schulman K. The use of evaluation in pharmaceutical reimbursement decisions in the United States. In: Schubert F, editor. Proceedings of the Canadian Collaborative Workshop on Pharmacoeconomics; 1993 Jun 21-22; Quebec. Princeton (NJ): Excerpta Medica Inc., 1993: 19–23
Eisenberg J, Glick H, Schulman K, et al. Pharmacoeconomics: economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. In: Strom B, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 1994
Drummond M, Davies L. Economic analysis alongside clinical trials: revisiting the methodological issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1991; 7: 561–73
Schulman K, Glick H, Buxton M, et al. Economic assessment of the FIRST study: a prospective multinational phase III study. Controlled Clin Trials. In press
Bonsel G, Rutten F, Uyl–de Groot C. Economic evaluation alongside cancer trials: methodological and practical aspects. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A Suppl. 7: S10–4
Morris J, Goddard M. Economic evaluations and quality of life assessments in cancer clinical trials: the CHART trial. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A (5): 766–70
Kassirer JP, Angell M. The Journal’s policy on cost–effectiveness analyses. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 669–70
Schulman KA, Rubenstein LE, Glick HA, et al. Relationships between sponsors and investigators in pharmacoeconomic and clinical research. PharmacoEconomics 1995; 7: 206–20
Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology. Economic analysis of health care technology: a report on principles. Ann Intern Med 1995; 122: 61–70
Glick H. Strategies for economic assessment during the development of new drugs. Drug Info J 1995; 29: 1391–403
De Nino L, Mulrow C, Gerety M, et al. Problems in interpreting cost effectiveness in clinical trials: experimental versus implementation costs. Online J Curr Clin Trials 1993 Apr 10; Document no. 44
O’Brien B, Drummond M, Labelle R, et al. In search of power and significance: issues in the design and analysis of stochastic cost–effectiveness studies in health care. Med Care 1994; 32: 150–63
Schulman K, Yabroff K, Glick H. A health services approach for the evaluation of innovative pharmaceutical and biotechnology products. Drug Info J 1995; 29: 1405–14
Copley–Merriman C, Lair T. Valuation of medical resource units collected in health economic studies. Clin Ther 1994; 16: 553–68
Revicki D, Irwin D, Reblando J, et al. The accuracy of selfreported disability days. Med Care 1994; 32: 401–4
Schron E, Shumaker S. The integration of health quality of life in clinical research: experiences from cardiovascular clinical trials. Prog Cardiovasc Nurs 1992; 7: 21–8
Cella D, Wiklund I, Shumaker S, et al. Integrating healthrelated quality of life into cross–national clinical trials. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 433–40
Cunny K, Perri M. Single–item vs multiple–item measures of health–related quality of life. Psychol Rep 1991; 69: 127–30
Torrance G. Measurement of health states for economic appraisal. J Health Econ 1986; 5: 1–30
Kaplan R, Feeny D, Revicki D. Methods for assessing relative importance in preference based outcome measures. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 467–75
Van Hout B, Al M, Gordon G, et al. Costs, effects, and c/e ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994; 3: 309–19
Rutten–van Mölken M, van Doorslaer E, van Vliet R. Statistical analysis of cost outcomes in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Health Econ 1994; 3: 333–45
Fenn P, McGuire A, Phillips V, et al. The analysis of censored treatment cost data in economic evaluation. Med Care 1995; 33: 851–63
Finkler S. The distinction between cost and charges. Ann Intern Med 1982; 96: 102–9
Glick H, Heyse J, Thompson D, et al. A model for evaluating the cost–effectiveness of cholesterol–lowering treatment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1992; 8: 719–34
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mauskopf, J., Schulman, K., Bell, L. et al. A Strategy for Collecting Pharmacoeconomic Data During Phase II/III Clinical Trials. Pharmacoeconomics 9, 264–277 (1996). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199609030-00007
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199609030-00007