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.


 

Devlin, N., Lorgelly, P. and Herdman, M.

Research Paper
April 2019

The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the issues that might limit comparability of PRO data and to highlight some of the evidence that exists on these issues. We note some of the implications for the development and use of PRO instruments, for their application in multi-country clinical trials, and for employing evidence from them in regulatory and reimbursement decisions. Although much progress has been made in this area, there is still scope for further research and improvement. Numerous factors can affect the comparability of PRO data across (and potentially within) countries and cultures. Failure to recognise and account for these differences could lead to incorrect conclusions about the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of new medicines and other health care interventions. We suggest areas where further research and enhanced guidelines for users of PRO instruments and data would be useful.

Sampson, C. and Garau, M.

Briefing
March 2019

The measurement of quality of life in the context of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is challenging. This is because the disease is experienced by children and is rare, which makes data collection difficult. This Briefing reports on a symposium that outlined some lessons that can be learnt from the SMA context that might be more widely applicable.

Cole, A., Cubi-Molla, P., Pollard, J., Sim, D., Sullivan, R., Sussex, J. and Lorgelly, P.

Research Paper
February 2019

OHE Research Paper 19/01: This report explores the feasibility of introducing one type of flexible payment mechanism –outcome-based payment (OBP) –for cancer medicines into the NHS in England. This model links the price the NHS pays for a medicine to the outcomes it achieves in practice for NHS patients. OBP could help to accelerate patient access to some new medicines and ensure close monitoring of real-world patient benefit. It can also promote value for money in NHS spending and support innovation. This is especially valuable against the backdrop of rising overall NHS spending on medicines.

Hampson, G., Mott, D., Devlin, N. and Shah, K.

Consulting Report
January 2019

Whether or not society values curative therapies more highly (or less highly) than the sum of the iterative improvements that might come from conventional therapy has been highlighted as an important area for research. The aim of this research was thus to explore society’s preferences across curative and non-curative therapies and large and small health gains, via a discrete choice experiment.

Cole, A. and Towse, A.

Consulting Report
December 2018

The proliferation of health data in our ever more digitalised world of health care creates opportunities for better research around – and delivery of – pharmaceutical innovation. However, these opportunities may be constrained around the legal barriers to the use of health data for these purposes, which are poorly understood, particularly in relation to the new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

The Office of Health Economics

Briefing
November 2018

This is OHE’s report to the Charity Commission for England and Wales for the year 2017, OHE’s first since becoming a registered charity in December 2016. It demonstrates some of the ways in which OHE has met its charitable objects: namely, to advance the education of the public in general/health care payers/policy makers on the subject of health economics and health care policy.

Cubi-Molla, P., Mott, D., Shah, K., Herdman, M., Summers, Y. and Devlin, N.

Consulting Report
June 2018

Cancer survival rates have improved dramatically in recent decades due in part to pharmaceutical advances, with a growing range of increasingly effective and targeted medicines being developed, such as immunotherapies. In the economic modelling of such treatments, the question arises of which utilities should be assigned to patients who show a long-term, durable response.

In recent critiques of economic models in this area by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the idea that long-term cancer survivors (LTCS) who have received such treatments could report quality of life (QoL) scores which are similar to, or higher than, those of equivalent general population samples has not been viewed as credible. This literature review examines whether there is evidence to support the assumption that the QoL of LTCS can be similar to that of age/sex-matched population samples.

This study was funded by Roche Products Ltd.

Zamora, B., Parkin, D., Feng, Y., Bateman, A., Herdman, M., and Devlin, N.

Research Paper
April 2018

This paper reports new methods for analysing the distribution of EQ-5D observations. The Health State Density Index and Health State Density Curve are used to summarise the extent to which people’s self-reported health on the EQ-5D is concentrated on a few health states, or distributed more evenly over a wide range of health states. This information can be useful in understanding patients’ treatment needs, as well as providing a way of comparing the nature of data provided by different patients or collected using different patient-reported outcome measures.

Lee, E.K., Park, J.A., Cole, A., and Mestre-Ferrandiz, J.

Consulting Report
September 2017

In 2015, OHE published a report which set out the core principles that should govern how Real-World Data (RWD) is accessed or generated, and used credibly to generate Real-World Evidence (RWE), thereby working toward a set of “international standards”. The analysis was based on a study of governance arrangements in eight key markets: the UK, France, Italy, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia and the U.S.

In recognition of the expanding market for health care data in South Korea, the authors partnered with collaborators from SungKyunKwan University to extend this assessment to South Korea. In this report, the authors outline the current arrangements for the collection, sharing and use of RWD in South Korea, and assess how these compare with an “ideal”, facilitative framework for data governance.

Pages