SOURCE: Cutting Edge Information

Cutting Edge Information

April 19, 2016 12:12 ET

Only 40 Percent of Surveyed Global Groups Collect Comparative Effectiveness Research Through Dedicated Trials

Many Life Science Companies Look for Ways to Generate Useful Comparative Effectiveness Data Without Budgeting for Dedicated Trials

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC--(Marketwired - April 19, 2016) - Among surveyed companies, 40 percent of global teams and 20 percent of country-level teams collect comparative effectiveness research (CER) through dedicated trials, according to primary intelligence provider Cutting Edge Information. Comparative effectiveness research is a significant cost-driver for many health economics operations. These data also carry a heavy risk that a product might come out less favorably after a study, which can make convincing internal stakeholders of their importance very difficult. As a result, many companies actively look for ways to generate useful comparative effectiveness data without having to budget for dedicated CER trials.

In Comparative Effectiveness Research: Value Stories that Engage Patients, Physicians and Payers, Cutting Edge Information found that a more popular choice for generating CER among global groups is to make sure that existing Phase 3 trials collect appropriate endpoints and that they include a comparison element with a competitor.

"Due to the marketplace becoming increasingly crowded, companies are pursuing CER to meet payer demands," said Jacob Presson, senior research analyst at Cutting Edge Information. "Payers want to make informed decisions when choosing medicine, thus magnifying the importance of CER and broader research on health economics and outcomes."

Database studies are another popular method for obtaining comparative effectiveness data. Although 80 percent of surveyed global teams and 100 percent of country-level teams leverage database studies for CER, best practices from the study warn that they are not standardized and that the lack of uniformity can undermine the validity or viability of a potential database study.

Comparative Effectiveness Research: Value Stories that Engage Patients, Physicians and Payers, available at, provides metrics on the cost and duration of comparative effectiveness studies, as well as how to best deliver this data to external stakeholders. The report examines the changing priorities with regards to conducting comparative effectiveness research in the United States. Report highlights include:

  • Benchmarking data showing total comparative effectiveness spending and CER spending per product from 2013 to 2015.
  • Top executives' strategic recommendations for delivering CER data to payers -- and using health outcomes liaisons to supplement managed markets account managers' efforts.
  • Data showing the amount of time spent discussing CER with payers.

For more information on comparative effectiveness research, please download Cutting Edge Information's comparative effectiveness data report summary at

Image Available:

Contact Information