Dave Fornell, DAIC Editor

Dave Fornell, Editor DAIC

Blog | Dave Fornell, DAIC Editor | Business| July 09, 2014

Drawing the Line When Evaluating Cost vs. Benefit

A big fly in the ointment for widespread adoption of many new technologies is cost. In today’s cost-conscience environment of healthcare reform, there needs to be a clear, quantifiable return of investment (ROI). This is especially true for new medical technologies that are competing with a long-established standard of care, where the new technology must show either a cost-benefit over the older technology, or must show a big improvement in patient outcomes to justify the added expense. With a device that shows only an incremental increase in benefit, say a 1-2 percent or less improvement over existing technology, the question may become one of economics rather than device effectiveness.

This is not only a question for physicians, as it applies to vendors developing these products as well. One of the biggest examples of this is the case of drug-eluting stents. During the last decade, key stent vendors were in an arms race to build a better device and capture a large share of the then lucrative coronary stent market. This included extremely expensive, blockbuster clinical trials, massive R&D efforts, and lawsuits and countersuits to try to slow down the competition. However, this came to a halt with the SPIRIT IV trial results in 2010, which proved the Abbott Xience stent was the best in the market for patient outcomes and beat out the long-time market leader, the Boston Scientific Taxus stent.  

However, the victory only just edged out Taxus. Stent thrombosis improvements were measured in fractions of less than 1 percent, and ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization improvements were less than a 2.6 percentage-point absolute reduction. The data proving that Abbott was the top performer by only a small margin came at a staggering cost of nearly a billion dollars and several years of data collection. Few vendors are willing to shell out that sort of cash today to conduct similar sized trials that will be powered with enough patients to show only small incremental improvements.  

In reality, all the drug-eluting stents on the U.S. market today are good devices and all have similar patient outcomes. This has led to stents becoming commodity items, where lower pricing can often trump slightly better trial data. This is why the Xience stent does not master the entire stent market and why competitors remain in the game. 

I shared some additional thoughts on things to consider when looking at new devices and software in the article The Basics for Evaluating New Technology in the July-August issue of DAIC.

 

Related Content on the Basics of Evaluating New Technology

Four Key Themes Emerging in the Medical Technology Market

Don’t Overlook the Simple Questions When Purchasing New Technology

Drawing the Line When Evaluating Cost vs. Benefit

Related Content

Tryton Side Branch Stent Recognized With Premier Technology Breakthrough Award
News | Stents Bifurcation| September 21, 2017
September 21, 2017 — Cardinal Health and Tryton Medical Inc.
DISRUPT BTK Study Shows Positive Results With Lithoplasty in Calcified Lesions Below the Knee
News | Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD)| September 20, 2017
Shockwave Medical reported positive results from the DISRUPT BTK Study, which were presented at the annual...
Corindus Announces First Patient Enrolled in PRECISION GRX Registry
News | Robotic Systems| September 18, 2017
September 18, 2017 — Corindus Vascular Robotics Inc.
Two-Year ILLUMENATE Trial Data Demonstrate Efficacy of Stellarex Drug-Coated Balloon
News | Drug-Eluting Balloons| September 18, 2017
Philips announced the two-year results from the ILLUMENATE European randomized clinical trial (EU RCT) demonstrating...
Sentinel Cerebral Protection System Significantly Reduces Stroke and Mortality in TAVR
News | Embolic Protection Devices| September 18, 2017
September 18, 2017 – Claret Medical announced publication of a new study in the...
Fysicon Receives FDA Approval for QMAPP Hemodynamic Monitoring System
Technology | Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems| September 18, 2017
Fysicon announced that it has been granted 510(k) clearance by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its...
Peter Schneider, M.D. presents late breaking clinical trial results at VIVA 17 in Las Vegas. Panelists (l to r) Krishna Rocha-Singh, M.D., Sean Lyden, M.D., John Kaufman, M.D., Donna Buckley, M.D.

Peter Schneider, M.D. presents late breaking clinical trial results at VIVA 17 in Las Vegas. Panelists (l to r) Krishna Rocha-Singh, M.D., Sean Lyden, M.D., John Kaufman, M.D., Donna Buckley, M.D.

Feature | Cath Lab| September 14, 2017
September 14, 2017 — Here are quick summaries for all the key late-breaking vascular and endovascular clinical trials
Mississippi Surgical and Vascular Center Uses Toshiba Ultimax-i FPD to Save Patients' Limbs
News | Angiography| September 14, 2017
The southern U.S. sees some of the highest numbers of chronic medical conditions, such as peripheral artery disease...
Sponsored Content | Videos | Structural Heart Occluders| September 13, 2017
Ziyad Hijazi, M.D., MPH, MSCAI, FACC, director of the cardiac program and chair of the Department of Pediatrics at Si
Philips Showcases Integrated Vascular Solutions at VIVA 2017
News | Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD)| September 13, 2017
Philips announced its presence at the Vascular Interventional Advances (VIVA 17) Annual Conference in Las Vegas from...
Overlay Init