Payer perspectives on federally funded comparative effectiveness research.

Area of Science:

• Health economics and outcomes research
• Pharmaceutical policy analysis

Background:

• Payers routinely assess drug effectiveness and cost.
• Payer evaluation criteria may differ from those in federally funded comparative effectiveness research (CER).

Purpose of the Study:

• To survey payer views on the impact of federal CER on specialty drugs.
• To understand how payer perspectives align with or diverge from CER findings.

Main Methods:

• Survey of healthcare payers.
• Analysis of payer criteria for drug evaluation.

Main Results:

• Federal CER findings may not fully align with payer decision-making factors.
• Payer criteria often incorporate elements beyond clinical effectiveness and direct cost.

Conclusions:

• Payer perspectives are crucial for understanding the real-world impact of CER on specialty drug access.
• Federal CER could be enhanced by considering a broader range of payer-relevant factors.