While the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) consistently asks for input on its reports, the changes between draft and revised evidence reports are “generally modest,” a recent article published in Value in Health suggests.
The authors reviewed 15 reports by ICER between 2017 and 2019.
More robust feedback could play a key role in how the industry influences the cost-effectiveness analyses.
“Greater precision in industry comments could increase the influence of industry critiques, thus enhancing the dialogue around pharmaceutical value,” the authors write.
To read the article on Value in Health, click here.