A recent research article published on Health Affairs suggests that frequently-prescribed cardiovascular drugs in the U.S. are not often aligned with their value.
The study’s authors estimated the cost-effectiveness range for thirty cardiovascular treatments, then pulled evidence from randomized controlled trials to find average lifetime quality-adjusted life years and payer-related costs to determine incremental cost-effectiveness rations.
“Across the thirty drugs, the ICERs ranged from cost-saving with increased QALYs to more costly with decreased QALYs,” the study’s abstract states. “This range suggests that drug pricing is not consistently influenced by value, or that such influence is masked by inaccessible factors, such as price discounts.”
According to the authors, the study suggests a need to start a conversation about how to best define and utilize value-based evidence to bolster decision making in the U.S.
To find the full research article on Health Affairs, click here.
