Unbiased Analysis of Today's Healthcare Issues

Archive for November, 2016

Do pharmaceuticals have value to healthy people?

Value-based pricing has become all the rage of late among health policy wonks. Medicare aims to tie 90% of reimbursement to some measure of value by 2018. The AMA has endorsed value-based pricing for pharmaceuticals. Organizations such as IVI and ICER propose different approaches for measuring value as well. Typically, value is measured as the […]

Read the rest of this entry »

100 citations

This week I passed the 100 citation mark on Google Scholar.  This means over 100 peer-reviewed articles have cited my own peer-reviewed research. To take a look at my full list of publications, please visit my Google Scholar page.

Read the rest of this entry »

Republican plans to replace Obamacare

From Aaron Carroll at the Incidental Economist:

Read the rest of this entry »

Geographic Variation in the Quality and Cost of Care for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

This is the title of my latest article in JMCP co-authored with Arijit Ganguli,  Yuri Sanchez Gonzalez, Jin Joo Shim, and Seth A. Seabury.  The paper’s abstract is below. BACKGROUND: There is considerable push to improve value in health care by simultaneously increasing quality while lowering or containing costs. However, for diseases that are best […]

Read the rest of this entry »

Insurance value of multiple sclerosis therapies

An interesting paper from Shih et al. in this month’s edition of AJMC finds that–due to risk aversion–healthy individuals actually place a high value on the development of new treatments for multiple sclerosis. Results: In the baseline model, Avonex, Tysabri, and Tecfidera generated $46.2 billion of total value to consumers, almost one-third of which accrued […]

Read the rest of this entry »

Precision medicine will increase drug prices and that’s a good thing

Check out my latest article at MedCity News looking at how the advent of precision medicine will affect patients, regulators and payers. The article describes how precision medicine will be good for patients.  Precision medicines will likely be more expensive that regular therapies, but–because they are targeted to more specific populations–aggregate spending on pharmaceuticals could increase […]

Read the rest of this entry »

How to regulate precision medicines

Currently, pharmaceutical treatments that are used in the U.S. need to gain an approval from the FDA.  The FDA’s approval is contingent on a demonstration of efficacy and safety in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).  However, precision medicine makes the standard FDA approval problematic. As described in Breckenridge et al. (2016), in the precision medicine […]

Read the rest of this entry »

Optimal Matching Techniques

In randomized controlled trials, participants are randomized to different groups where each group receives a unique intervention (or control). This process insures that any differences in the outcomes of interest are due entirely to the interventions under investigation.   While RCTs are useful, they are expensive to run, are highly controlled and suffer from their own […]

Read the rest of this entry »

Friday Links

CRISPR=Sputnik 2.0 RIP Leibniz. Budget caps in Germany. Getting value frameworks right. Repeal and delay = the next ‘doc fix’?

Read the rest of this entry »

The AMA on value-based drug pricing

The American Medical Association released a statement yesterday in support of value-based pricing of pharmaceuticals.  However, AMA claims that value-based pricing should follow the following core principles. Value-based prices of pharmaceuticals should be determined by objective, independent entities. They also should be evidence-based and the result of valid and reliable inputs and data that incorporate […]

Read the rest of this entry »