Liese Barbier, Yannick Vandenplas, Niels Boone, Isabelle Huys, Rob Janknegt, Arnold G Vulto
{"title":"如何选择性价比最高的生物药?支持医院药师的实用模式。","authors":"Liese Barbier, Yannick Vandenplas, Niels Boone, Isabelle Huys, Rob Janknegt, Arnold G Vulto","doi":"10.1093/ajhp/zxac235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the growing availability of biosimilars on the global market, clinicians and pharmacists have multiple off-patent biological products to choose from. Besides the competitiveness of the product's price, other criteria should be considered when selecting a best-value biological. This article aims to provide a model to facilitate transparent best-value biological selection in the off-patent biological medicines segment.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The presented model was developed on the basis of established multicriteria decision analysis tools for rational and transparent medicine selection, ie, the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis and InforMatrix. Criteria for the model were informed by earlier research, a literature search, and evaluation by the authors. The developed model includes up-to-date guidance on criteria that can be considered in selection and provides background on the allocation of weights that may aid hospital pharmacists and clinicians with decision-making in practice. Three main categories of criteria besides price were identified and included in the model: (1) product-driven criteria, (2) service-driven criteria, and (3) patient-driven criteria. Product-driven criteria include technical product features and licensed therapeutic indications. Service-driven criteria consist of supply conditions, value-added services, and environment and sustainability criteria. Patient-driven criteria contain product administration elements such as ease of use and service elements such as patient support programs. Relative weighting of the criteria is largely context dependent and should in a given setting be determined at the beginning of the process.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The practical model described here may support hospital pharmacists and clinicians with transparent and evidence-based best-value biological selection in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":520552,"journal":{"name":"American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists","volume":" ","pages":"2001-2011"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9452170/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to select a best-value biological medicine? A practical model to support hospital pharmacists.\",\"authors\":\"Liese Barbier, Yannick Vandenplas, Niels Boone, Isabelle Huys, Rob Janknegt, Arnold G Vulto\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ajhp/zxac235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the growing availability of biosimilars on the global market, clinicians and pharmacists have multiple off-patent biological products to choose from. Besides the competitiveness of the product's price, other criteria should be considered when selecting a best-value biological. This article aims to provide a model to facilitate transparent best-value biological selection in the off-patent biological medicines segment.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The presented model was developed on the basis of established multicriteria decision analysis tools for rational and transparent medicine selection, ie, the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis and InforMatrix. Criteria for the model were informed by earlier research, a literature search, and evaluation by the authors. The developed model includes up-to-date guidance on criteria that can be considered in selection and provides background on the allocation of weights that may aid hospital pharmacists and clinicians with decision-making in practice. Three main categories of criteria besides price were identified and included in the model: (1) product-driven criteria, (2) service-driven criteria, and (3) patient-driven criteria. Product-driven criteria include technical product features and licensed therapeutic indications. Service-driven criteria consist of supply conditions, value-added services, and environment and sustainability criteria. Patient-driven criteria contain product administration elements such as ease of use and service elements such as patient support programs. Relative weighting of the criteria is largely context dependent and should in a given setting be determined at the beginning of the process.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The practical model described here may support hospital pharmacists and clinicians with transparent and evidence-based best-value biological selection in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520552,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2001-2011\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9452170/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxac235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxac235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
随着生物仿制药在全球市场上的可用性不断增加,临床医生和药剂师有多种非专利生物产品可供选择。除了产品价格的竞争力外,在选择最具价值的生物制剂时还应考虑其他标准。本文旨在提供一个模型,以促进透明的最优价值的生物选择在非专利生物药品部分。摘要:本模型是在客观判断分析和信息库系统(System of Objectified Judgement analysis and InforMatrix)的基础上建立起来的,目的是实现合理透明的药物选择。该模型的标准由早期研究、文献检索和作者评估得出。开发的模型包括可以在选择中考虑的标准的最新指导,并提供权重分配的背景,这可能有助于医院药剂师和临床医生在实践中做出决策。除价格外,本文还确定并纳入了三大类标准:(1)产品驱动标准,(2)服务驱动标准,(3)患者驱动标准。产品驱动的标准包括技术产品特征和许可的治疗适应症。服务驱动的标准包括供应条件、增值服务、环境和可持续性标准。患者驱动的标准包含产品管理元素(如易用性)和服务元素(如患者支持计划)。标准的相对权重在很大程度上取决于上下文,在给定的设置中应在流程开始时确定。结论:本文所描述的实用模型可以支持医院药剂师和临床医生在临床实践中进行透明和循证的最佳价值生物学选择。
How to select a best-value biological medicine? A practical model to support hospital pharmacists.
Purpose: With the growing availability of biosimilars on the global market, clinicians and pharmacists have multiple off-patent biological products to choose from. Besides the competitiveness of the product's price, other criteria should be considered when selecting a best-value biological. This article aims to provide a model to facilitate transparent best-value biological selection in the off-patent biological medicines segment.
Summary: The presented model was developed on the basis of established multicriteria decision analysis tools for rational and transparent medicine selection, ie, the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis and InforMatrix. Criteria for the model were informed by earlier research, a literature search, and evaluation by the authors. The developed model includes up-to-date guidance on criteria that can be considered in selection and provides background on the allocation of weights that may aid hospital pharmacists and clinicians with decision-making in practice. Three main categories of criteria besides price were identified and included in the model: (1) product-driven criteria, (2) service-driven criteria, and (3) patient-driven criteria. Product-driven criteria include technical product features and licensed therapeutic indications. Service-driven criteria consist of supply conditions, value-added services, and environment and sustainability criteria. Patient-driven criteria contain product administration elements such as ease of use and service elements such as patient support programs. Relative weighting of the criteria is largely context dependent and should in a given setting be determined at the beginning of the process.
Conclusion: The practical model described here may support hospital pharmacists and clinicians with transparent and evidence-based best-value biological selection in clinical practice.