Lidia García-Pérez, Ignacio Abásolo-Alessón, Miguel Ángel Negrín-Hernández
{"title":"利用跨国研究范围审查的数据探索国外成本效益分析对西班牙的普遍性。","authors":"Lidia García-Pérez, Ignacio Abásolo-Alessón, Miguel Ángel Negrín-Hernández","doi":"10.1007/s40273-025-01541-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study examines the generalizability of foreign economic evaluations to the Spanish healthcare system. The research aims to describe the cross-country adaptation methods identified in a scoping review of multinational cost-utility analyses and to examine the probability of concordant funding decisions between Spanish and foreign results, as well as to identify factors influencing generalizability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First, a scoping review of multinational studies reporting cost-utility analyses for at least two countries, including Spain, was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science in April 2025. Data related to transferability were extracted and a narrative synthesis was performed. Second, a dataset of case comparisons-each defined as a technology against a comparator in a specific population-was developed from the identified studies. Each foreign comparison was matched to its Spanish equivalent within the same study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were converted to 2024 Spanish Euros and compared against a threshold of €30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). A multilevel logit model was used, with a binary variable indicating decision concordance between Spanish and foreign ICERs/dominance as the dependent variable. We also analysed the distances in the incremental costs and incremental QALYs between countries using a log-normal bivariate model. Country-specific and other study-related factors were considered as independent variables in both models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review included 57 studies. Most were funded by drug manufacturers and conducted in Europe. The majority of authors did not specify their reasons for selecting countries. All but three studies attempted to use local costs, probabilities and/or epidemiological data. Twelve studies incorporated country-specific utilities. A total of 644 comparisons were analysed; 142 were Spanish results and 502 were foreign results with their Spanish equivalents. The cost-effectiveness plane quadrant of the foreign result matched the Spanish result in 84% of cases. Assuming a threshold of €30,000 per QALY, the funding decisions were the same in 93% of cases. The probability of decision concordance was higher when the study was conducted in a Eurozone country or in the United Kingdom. Sensitivity analysis showed the variability of decisions depending on the selected cost-effectiveness threshold. Similar variables were found as relevant factors explaining the distance in the incremental QALYs analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Foreign cost-effectiveness results of those studies analysing drugs from Eurozone countries such as France, Germany, Italy, or from the United Kingdom can often be generalizable and provide meaningful insights for decision making in Spain. However, these findings should not be used as a reason to avoid country-specific studies if they are feasible. Further research is needed to determine if these findings apply to other health technologies. Limitations of the study include the lack of a formal assessment of the methodological quality of the selected studies and the potential risks of bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":19807,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Generalizability of Foreign Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Spain Using Data From a Scoping Review of Multinational Studies.\",\"authors\":\"Lidia García-Pérez, Ignacio Abásolo-Alessón, Miguel Ángel Negrín-Hernández\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40273-025-01541-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study examines the generalizability of foreign economic evaluations to the Spanish healthcare system. The research aims to describe the cross-country adaptation methods identified in a scoping review of multinational cost-utility analyses and to examine the probability of concordant funding decisions between Spanish and foreign results, as well as to identify factors influencing generalizability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First, a scoping review of multinational studies reporting cost-utility analyses for at least two countries, including Spain, was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science in April 2025. Data related to transferability were extracted and a narrative synthesis was performed. Second, a dataset of case comparisons-each defined as a technology against a comparator in a specific population-was developed from the identified studies. Each foreign comparison was matched to its Spanish equivalent within the same study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were converted to 2024 Spanish Euros and compared against a threshold of €30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). A multilevel logit model was used, with a binary variable indicating decision concordance between Spanish and foreign ICERs/dominance as the dependent variable. We also analysed the distances in the incremental costs and incremental QALYs between countries using a log-normal bivariate model. Country-specific and other study-related factors were considered as independent variables in both models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review included 57 studies. Most were funded by drug manufacturers and conducted in Europe. The majority of authors did not specify their reasons for selecting countries. All but three studies attempted to use local costs, probabilities and/or epidemiological data. Twelve studies incorporated country-specific utilities. A total of 644 comparisons were analysed; 142 were Spanish results and 502 were foreign results with their Spanish equivalents. The cost-effectiveness plane quadrant of the foreign result matched the Spanish result in 84% of cases. Assuming a threshold of €30,000 per QALY, the funding decisions were the same in 93% of cases. The probability of decision concordance was higher when the study was conducted in a Eurozone country or in the United Kingdom. Sensitivity analysis showed the variability of decisions depending on the selected cost-effectiveness threshold. Similar variables were found as relevant factors explaining the distance in the incremental QALYs analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Foreign cost-effectiveness results of those studies analysing drugs from Eurozone countries such as France, Germany, Italy, or from the United Kingdom can often be generalizable and provide meaningful insights for decision making in Spain. However, these findings should not be used as a reason to avoid country-specific studies if they are feasible. Further research is needed to determine if these findings apply to other health technologies. Limitations of the study include the lack of a formal assessment of the methodological quality of the selected studies and the potential risks of bias.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-025-01541-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmacoEconomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-025-01541-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究探讨国外经济评价对西班牙卫生保健系统的普遍性。研究的目的是描述在多国成本效用分析范围审查中确定的跨国适应方法,并检查西班牙和外国结果之间一致供资决定的可能性,以及确定影响普遍性的因素。方法:首先,于2025年4月使用MEDLINE、PubMed、Embase和Web of Science对包括西班牙在内的至少两个国家报告成本效用分析的跨国研究进行了范围审查。提取与可转移性相关的数据并进行叙事综合。其次,从已确定的研究中开发了一个病例比较数据集,每个数据集都定义为针对特定人群的比较器的技术。在同一项研究中,每个外国的比较都与西班牙的比较相匹配。增量成本效益比(ICERs)转换为2024西班牙欧元,并与每个质量调整生命年(QALY) 30,000欧元的阈值进行比较。采用多层logit模型,以二进制变量表示西班牙和外国ICERs/主导地位之间的决策一致性作为因变量。我们还使用对数正态双变量模型分析了各国之间的增量成本和增量质量年的距离。在两个模型中,具体国家和其他与研究相关的因素都被视为独立变量。结果:纳入了57项研究。大多数研究由药品制造商资助,在欧洲进行。大多数作者没有说明他们选择国家的原因。除三项研究外,所有研究都试图使用当地成本、概率和/或流行病学数据。12项研究纳入了具体国家的公用事业。总共分析了644个比较;142个是西班牙成绩,502个是外国成绩及其西班牙等效成绩。在84%的病例中,国外结果的成本效益平面象限与西班牙结果相匹配。假设每个QALY的门槛为30,000欧元,那么在93%的情况下,资助决定是相同的。当研究在欧元区国家或英国进行时,决策一致性的可能性更高。敏感性分析显示决策的可变性取决于所选择的成本效益阈值。在增量质量分析中,发现了类似的变量作为解释距离的相关因素。结论:分析来自欧元区国家(如法国、德国、意大利或英国)的药物的国外成本效益研究结果通常可以推广,并为西班牙的决策提供有意义的见解。但是,如果可行的话,这些发现不应作为避免进行针对具体国家的研究的理由。需要进一步研究以确定这些发现是否适用于其他卫生技术。该研究的局限性包括缺乏对所选研究的方法学质量的正式评估和潜在的偏倚风险。
Exploring the Generalizability of Foreign Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Spain Using Data From a Scoping Review of Multinational Studies.
Objective: This study examines the generalizability of foreign economic evaluations to the Spanish healthcare system. The research aims to describe the cross-country adaptation methods identified in a scoping review of multinational cost-utility analyses and to examine the probability of concordant funding decisions between Spanish and foreign results, as well as to identify factors influencing generalizability.
Methods: First, a scoping review of multinational studies reporting cost-utility analyses for at least two countries, including Spain, was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science in April 2025. Data related to transferability were extracted and a narrative synthesis was performed. Second, a dataset of case comparisons-each defined as a technology against a comparator in a specific population-was developed from the identified studies. Each foreign comparison was matched to its Spanish equivalent within the same study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were converted to 2024 Spanish Euros and compared against a threshold of €30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). A multilevel logit model was used, with a binary variable indicating decision concordance between Spanish and foreign ICERs/dominance as the dependent variable. We also analysed the distances in the incremental costs and incremental QALYs between countries using a log-normal bivariate model. Country-specific and other study-related factors were considered as independent variables in both models.
Results: The review included 57 studies. Most were funded by drug manufacturers and conducted in Europe. The majority of authors did not specify their reasons for selecting countries. All but three studies attempted to use local costs, probabilities and/or epidemiological data. Twelve studies incorporated country-specific utilities. A total of 644 comparisons were analysed; 142 were Spanish results and 502 were foreign results with their Spanish equivalents. The cost-effectiveness plane quadrant of the foreign result matched the Spanish result in 84% of cases. Assuming a threshold of €30,000 per QALY, the funding decisions were the same in 93% of cases. The probability of decision concordance was higher when the study was conducted in a Eurozone country or in the United Kingdom. Sensitivity analysis showed the variability of decisions depending on the selected cost-effectiveness threshold. Similar variables were found as relevant factors explaining the distance in the incremental QALYs analysis.
Conclusion: Foreign cost-effectiveness results of those studies analysing drugs from Eurozone countries such as France, Germany, Italy, or from the United Kingdom can often be generalizable and provide meaningful insights for decision making in Spain. However, these findings should not be used as a reason to avoid country-specific studies if they are feasible. Further research is needed to determine if these findings apply to other health technologies. Limitations of the study include the lack of a formal assessment of the methodological quality of the selected studies and the potential risks of bias.
期刊介绍:
PharmacoEconomics is the benchmark journal for peer-reviewed, authoritative and practical articles on the application of pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life assessment to optimum drug therapy and health outcomes. An invaluable source of applied pharmacoeconomic original research and educational material for the healthcare decision maker.
PharmacoEconomics is dedicated to the clear communication of complex pharmacoeconomic issues related to patient care and drug utilization.
PharmacoEconomics offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article.