OHE Publications

OHE releases a number of publications throughout the year, authored by OHE team members and/or outside experts. All are free for download as pdf files; hard copies of some publications are available upon request.

A description of the OHE publications categories.


 

Berdud. M., Ferraro. J., Towse. A.

Consulting Report
July 2020

This paper presents a supply and demand model of pharmaceutical markets to analyse the relationship between the value of the Cost-Effectiveness Threshold (CET) and the distribution of the health and economic value of new medicines between consumers (payers) and developers (life science industry). As a novelty, the model incorporates a bargaining process and bargaining power distributed between the payer and the developers, which has an impact on the distribution of the health and economic value of new medicines between the two parties.

Bulut, M., O’Neill, P. and Cole, A. 

Consulting Report
July 2020

The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) makes recommendations for the use of interventions including medicines in the National Health Service in England based on their clinical and cost-effectiveness. Over the last 20 years 82% of technology appraisal recommendations have been ‘positive’. However, around one third of these are ‘optimised’ recommendations. In this report we quantify the patient access associated with NICE ‘optimised’ recommendations.

Brassel, S., Cookson, G.

Consulting Report
June 2020

In the 2017 Industrial Strategy, the Government committed to increasing investment in UK Research and Development to the OECD-average of 2.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2027, with a longer-term goal of reaching 3% to put the UK in the upper quartile. Whilst there is universal agreement that increasing R&D investment in the UK is a worthy goal, there is an ongoing discussion over how best to achieve it.

Zhang, K., Garau, M. 

Consulting Report
May 2020

OHE presents an overview on the use of cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) in a number of selected countries in their decision-making process for health technology assessments. In addition to the different levels of CETs in these countries, this review examines whether an explicit or implicit CET is used, and the additional considerations (here termed ‘modifiers’) that are incorporated when funding and reimbursement decisions are made.

Cole, A., Towse, A., Zamora, B.

Consulting Report
April 2020

Although the science underlying drug development has evolved, there has been little change in how we pay for them. As more and more medicines come to market with multiple indications (or even more importantly the unrealised potentialto treat multiple indications), the way we pay for those medicines becomes critical in making sure we can benefit from them. “Indication-based pricing” (IBP) permits price to vary according to indication and has been proposed to tackle this issue.

Hernandez-Villafuerte, K., Shah, K., Herdman, M., and Lorgelly, P.

Consulting Report
March 2020

Meningococcal disease is a life-threatening infection and can result in severe sequelae. Recent scientific and technical advances have led to the discovery and implementation of novel meningococcal vaccines which have resulted in a substantial reduction in the burden of disease worldwide, representing a major public health achievement (Crum-Cianflone and Sullivan, 2016).

Cubi-Molla, P., Errea, M., Zhang, K. and Garau, M.

Consulting Report
February 2020

Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds (CETs) are used in a selected number of countries as tool in decision-making on funding and reimbursements for new healthcare technologies. In this white paper, OHE presents an analysis of the relative merits and shortfalls of current approaches to defining, estimating and applying CETs in Health Technology Assessments. The paper also puts forward a number of policy recommendations to help guide decision makers in ensuring CETs are used to achieve improved health outcomes in the future.

Henderson N., Errea M., Skedgel C. and Jofre-Bonet, M.

Consulting Report
January 2020

In light of concerns that not all medicines for ultra-rare (also known as ultra-orphan) conditions are appraised under the same NICE process, a new OHE Consulting Report discusses the distinct ethical and economic challenges faced by medicines for ultra-rare conditions, with particular reference to the challenges of HTA in the UK. A failure to consistently consider all ultra-rare disease medicines under the HST process could lead to inequalities in access and health outcomes for patients with ultra-rare conditions.

Yasunaga, H., Yamana, H., Rodes Sanchez, M. and Towse, A.

Consulting Report
September 2019

In 2015, OHE Consulting published a report on data governance arrangements for real-world evidence (RWE) covering the specifics under which RWE was used in eight different countries: Australia, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK and the US1. Two years later, Lilly commissioned a second report based on the South Korean setting, following the same method and structure as the original2.

Zamora, B., Cookson, G. and Garau, M.

Consulting Report
September 2019

In England, an estimated 378,427 people receive palliative care each year in a range of specialised and generalised services. Overall, the quality of palliative care in England and the wider UK is widely regarded as excellent. However, despite the generally high level of care, many patients receiving palliative care die in pain every year. Yet, to date, there is little evidence of the scale of this problem. This study estimates that currently there are approximately 125,971 end-of-life patients receiving, or in need of, palliative care suffering from unrelieved pain.

Pages