1. PIPC Save the Data: PCORI Advocacy 101 Webinar, click here for details.
2. Tony Coelho in Huffington Post: ‘Patient Voices, Patient Value: Stepping Out of the Ivory Towers and into the Real World’, click here to view the article.
3. ICER Proposes Updates to Drug Value Analyses, click here to view the ICER proposal.
4. PCORI: Moving Beyond Averages, click here to view the post.
5. National Academy of Medicine: ‘Framework for Patient and Family Engaged Care’, click here to view the discussion paper.
6. The Next Frontier in Quality Care Measurement: How Patients Feel, click here to view the article.
7. ICER Releases Draft Evidence Report on Treatments for Rheumatoid Arthritis, click here to view the press release.
8. ICER Review Releases Evidence Report on Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis, click here to view the press release.
9. Upcoming Events and Webinars, see details below.
10. Medical Journal Articles, see details below.
11. AHRQ Effective Program Updates, see details below.
On Wednesday, February 15th from 2:00-3:00pm ET, the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) invites PCORI ambassadors and patient advocates to an ‘Advocacy 101’ webinar to learn more about the Institute’s pending reauthorization and how stakeholders can support of patient-centered research. This informational webinar will include a background related to PCORI’s creation, the legislative process that we anticipate for reauthorization in 2019, and appropriate tactics for outreach to legislators to ensure they understand the personal impact that PCORI’s work has on patients and other stakeholders.
Kindly RSVP to: dgleason@PIPCpatients.org. Click here for additional details.
2. Tony Coelho in Huffington Post: ‘Patient Voices, Patient Value: Stepping Out of the Ivory Towers and into the Real World’
In a new article published in Huffington Post, PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho discusses the importance of recognizing “value” to the patient in the health reform debate. “While I may not concur with everything coming out of the new administration on health care, I agree broadly with the need for policymakers to get out of the ivory towers. Policymakers need to listen to real patients and embrace health care solutions that matter to patients, caregivers and people with disabilities. And frankly, in this drive to value-based health care, it hasn’t always been about us. It’s often about what is most cost effective for the ‘average patient’ and what is most cost effective for the payer. But I am not average. You are not average. We are the reason a health care system exists - our health and well-being, our treatment, our recovery… This administration can build bridges to the community of patients and people with disabilities by demonstrating they do not want a one-size-fits-all system of health care defined by people in lab coats. If this administration truly wants to get input from outside the establishment, then they should be looking to patients for insight as to how to improve the health care system.” Click here to view the article.
3. ICER Proposes Updates to Drug Value Analyses
As The Hill reports, “The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review released proposed updates to it value assessment framework, which influences how much insurers pay for drugs, treatments and health services. Drug companies and lobbyists have been critical of ICER's analyses, which attempt to set an independent pricing system that reflects all available data from drugmakers, insurers and patient groups. The proposed updates improve the transparency and reproducibility of ICER’s economic models, formally add patient-centered factors into the framework, and considerably revise the institute’s approach to budget impact assessment, the National Pharmaceutical Council said in its initial review of the report. Instead of trying to estimate the uptake of a new drug or service, ICER is proposing to use a range of potential product uptake rates and potential prices in its calculations. The new proposed structure of the ICER value framework requires consideration of two general concepts — long-term value for money and short-term affordability.”
“Long-term value for money — the ‘primary anchor’ of ICER’s value analysis — would replace ‘care value’ as the term for the evaluation of clinical effectiveness, incremental cost-effectiveness, other benefits or disadvantages, and contextual considerations, such as the severity of a condition or if other treatments are available or soon will be. The primary measure for incremental cost-effectiveness will remain the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) — a globally recognized standard for capturing longer life or improved quality of life benefits. ICER is proposing to expand its cost-effectiveness range to make $50,000 per QALY the lower bound, which is currently $100,000 per QALY, and maintain $150,000 as an upper limit. ICER also proposed weighting other benefits or disadvantages and contextual considerations given by an independent appraisal committee, and including in its future reports the analyses of cost per life-year gained and certain other ‘cost per consequences’ when relevant. For example, treatments intended to prevent strokes might be compared by a ‘cost per stroke averted’ analysis along with the cost per QALY analysis, the report says.” Click here to view the ICER proposal.
4. PCORI: Moving Beyond Averages
As detailed in a recent post on the PCORI website, “The current public and professional buzz about precision, or personalized, medicine arises from the vision of treatments tailored to the individual patient. Published results from a PCORI-funded project suggest one way to make that goal more attainable. As summarized in several articles in major medical journals, the project shows how data from large clinical studies can, through a statistical analysis, provide not just the average effect of a treatment, as most studies now do, but indicate which patients are likely to benefit—or not.
On the basis of his findings, David M. Kent, MD, MS, of Tufts Medical Center in Boston, recommends all large trials consider applying the statistical method he and colleagues developed. “Clinical evidence comes from groups of patients, but medical decisions must be made for individuals,” Kent says. “Individuals differ in so many characteristics that can influence their potential benefits and risks. Selecting the best treatment for an individual is a fundamentally different problem from estimating which treatment is better on average.” The idea behind Kent’s approach to reducing that mismatch has been around for more than a decade. But PCORI funding allowed his group to test it rigorously—and document its usefulness. Click here to view the post.
5. National Academy of Medicine: ‘Framework for Patient and Family Engaged Care’
The National Academy of Medicine has released a new discussion paper entitled “Harnessing Evidence and Experience to Change Culture: A Guiding Framework for Patient and Family Engaged Care.” This paper is the result of over a year of collaborative work performed under the auspices of the National Academy of Medicine’s Care Culture and Decision-Making Innovation Collaborative, co-chaired by Bill Novelli and Mary Naylor, and led by Planetree. In the paper, the co-authors assert that a cultural shift to “patient and family engaged care” is an essential driver to achieving the Quadruple Aim outcomes of better culture, better care, better health, and lower costs, and lay out a novel Guiding Framework for creating and sustaining a culture of patient and family engaged care that is grounded in both scientific evidence and the lived experience of patients, their care partners, practitioners, and health system leaders. Click here to view the discussion paper.
6. The Next Frontier in Quality Care Measurement: How Patients Feel
In Modern Healthcare last week, Elizabeth Whitman reports that “since 2015, the number of patient-reported outcome performance measures endorsed by the National Quality Forum has nearly doubled to 122...‘The science is actually very good for a lot of the patient-reported outcome measures,’ said Eugene Nelson, director of the population health measurement program at the Dartmouth Institute. But although many think they should be used in value-based payment, ‘for the most part, there's more interest in that area than there is action,’ he said.” Click here to view the article.
7. ICER Releases Draft Evidence Report on Treatments for Rheumatoid Arthritis
The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) has released a Draft Evidence Report assessing the comparative clinical effectiveness and value of 11 treatments for rheumatoid arthritis. The report, as well as accompanying draft voting questions, is now open to public comment for four weeks. The Draft Evidence Report, as well as the accompanying voting questions, will be open to public comment until February 17, 2017 at 5PM ET. All stakeholders are invited to submit formal comments by email to email@example.com. Guidelines for submitting public comments, including formatting specifications, are available on the ICER website. Click here to view the press release.
8. ICER Review Releases Evidence Report on Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis, including Daclizumab and Ocrelizumab
The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) has released an Evidence Report assessing the comparative clinical effectiveness and value of 15 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for treatment of relapsing-remitting and primary-progressive multiple sclerosis. This Evidence Report will be the subject of the upcoming public meeting of the California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF) on February 16, 2017.” Click here to view the press release.
9. Upcoming Events and Webinars
2017 National Health Policy Conference
January 30 - 31, 2017, Marriott, Marquis, Washington D.C.
Click here for details.
Understanding the Proposed Updates to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review’s Value Assessment Framework
February 13, 2017
Click here for details.
PCORI: Community Engagement in Research: Practical Tips for Researchers and Community-based Organizations
February 23, 2017
Click here for details.
PCORI Online: Awardee Invoice Training Webinar
March 2, 2017
Click here for details.
National Value-Based Payment and Pay for Performance Summit
March 8, 2017, San Francisco, CA
Click here for details.
Evidence-Based Guidelines Affecting Policy, Practice and Stakeholders (E-GAPPS III) Conference
March 20-21, 2017, New York, NY
Click here for details.
10. Medical Journal Articles
Improving Oncology Quality Measurement in Accountable Care: Filling Gaps with Cross-Cutting Measures, click here to view.
Payer Perspectives on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Health Care Decision Making: Oncology Examples, click here to view.
A Review of NICE Methods and Processes Across Health Technology Assessment Programmes: Why the Differences and What is the Impact?, click here to view.
Health-State Utility Estimates for Health Technology Assessment: A Review of the Manufacturers' Submissions to the French National Authority for Health, click here to view.
HAS Should Not Be NICE: Rejecting Imaginary Worlds in the French Technology Assessment Guidelines, click here to view.
Residents' Introduction to Comparative Effectiveness Research and Big Data Analytics, click here to view.
Key Recommendations from the MedtecHTA Project, click here to view.
Challenges in the Assessment of Medical Devices: The MedtecHTA Project, click here to view.
Comparative Effectiveness of Mesalamine, Sulfasalazine, Corticosteroids, and Budesonide for the Induction of Remission in Crohn's Disease: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis, click here to view.
11. AHRQ Effective Program Updates
Prioritization and Selection of Harms for Inclusion in Systematic Reviews, click here to view.
Assessing the Risk of Bias of Individual Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions: An Update, click here to view.