US advocacy group the Institute for Patient Access (IfPA) has released a document criticizing the influence of the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), a Boston, USA-based health economic research group that provides cost-effectiveness analyses of health technologies.
The ICER, which claims to be independent, is financed by a mixture of charitable donations and industry sources. Funding from foundations, which makes up about 80% of the total, comes from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation (LJAF), the Blue Shield of California Foundation and others.
The IfPA report, called “ The ICER Myth” looks at four perceived limitations of ICER’s methodology.
This article is accessible to registered users, to continue reading please register for free. A free trial will give you access to exclusive features, interviews, round-ups and commentary from the sharpest minds in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology space for a week. If you are already a registered user please login. If your trial has come to an end, you can subscribe here.
Login to your accountTry before you buy
7 day trial access
Become a subscriber
Or £77 per month
The Pharma Letter is an extremely useful and valuable Life Sciences service that brings together a daily update on performance people and products. It’s part of the key information for keeping me informed
Chairman, Sanofi Aventis UK
Copyright © The Pharma Letter 2024 | Headless Content Management with Blaze