The Role of Value-of-Information Analysis in a Health Care Research Priority Setting

Background. The Dutch reimbursement procedure for expensive drugs requires the submission of a baseline cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis and a research plan for the period of temporary reimbursement to estimate the real-life cost-effectiveness after 4 years. The Dutch guidelines recommend a value-of-information analysis to identify the critical parameters to be studied in such an outcome study. Objectives. Identify situations where sensitivity analyses are sufficient to establish the need for additional data collection and priority setting. Methods. We used a hypothetical Markov model with 3 groups of parameters. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) and analyzed the expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI), for different configurations of input parameters and a range of threshold incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (λ). We introduced a multivariate (deterministic) sensitivity analysis and a partial PSA. Results. Deterministic, partial PSA, and EVPPI analyses came to the same ranking of priorities for future research in most cases, irrespective of the place of the results on the CE plane. Rankings differed only when the statistical metrics that we calculated for each method were close together. Conclusions. When a clear ranking can be established, all methods lead to the same priority setting. If there is no clear ranking, we regard the parameters as equally important. Priority setting for future research depends on λ and the location of results on the CE plane. The EVPPI is needed to estimate the value of doing additional research, but to prioritize parameters for further research, extensive (partial probabilistic) sensitivity analyses and expected value of perfect information are often sufficient.

[1]  P Tappenden,et al.  Methods for expected value of information analysis in complex health economic models: developments on the health economics of interferon-beta and glatiramer acetate for multiple sclerosis. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[2]  Gordon B. Hazen,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis and the Expected Value of Perfect Information , 1998, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[3]  K Claxton,et al.  The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. , 1999, Journal of health economics.

[4]  Jan B Oostenbrink,et al.  Probabilistic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of bronchodilator therapy in COPD patients in different countries. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[5]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Calculating Partial Expected Value of Perfect Information via Monte Carlo Sampling Algorithms , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[6]  M Sculpher,et al.  A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment programme. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[7]  Alan Brennan,et al.  Simulation sample sizes for Monte Carlo partial EVPI calculations. , 2010, Journal of health economics.

[8]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of complex models: a Bayesian approach , 2004 .

[9]  Marc C. Kennedy,et al.  Case studies in Gaussian process modelling of computer codes , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[10]  Andrew Briggs,et al.  Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: statistical representation of parameter uncertainty. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[11]  B. McNeil,et al.  Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis Using Monte Carlo Simulation , 1985, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[12]  M. Sculpher,et al.  Using Value of Information Analysis to Prioritise Health Research , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[13]  A Briggs,et al.  Uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies: the role of sensitivity analysis. , 1994, Health economics.

[14]  A Briggs,et al.  Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation: a review of published studies. , 1995, Health economics.

[15]  M. Sculpher,et al.  Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. , 2005, Health economics.

[16]  Bas Groot Koerkamp,et al.  Limitations of Acceptability Curves for Presenting Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[17]  M J Al,et al.  Costs, effects and C/E-ratios alongside a clinical trial. , 1994, Health economics.

[18]  Elisabeth Fenwick,et al.  A guide to cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. , 2005, The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science.

[19]  Andrew H. Briggs,et al.  Handling Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Models , 2000, PharmacoEconomics.

[20]  A. Briggs,et al.  Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis for Decision Trees with Multiple Branches: Use of the Dirichlet Distribution in a Bayesian Framework , 2003, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[21]  M. Drummond,et al.  A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute For Clinical Excellence (NICE) , 2002, The Lancet.