Coverage with evidence development (CED) has been developed as a response to the uncertainty in evidence when new technologies, including pharmaceuticals, are introduced into the market. Rather than deny coverage for these technologies or grant them unlimited coverage, CED attempts to ensure that patients' access to new medications is not prevented but is managed in a coordinated way, while also generating additional evidence to reduce any uncertainty about the value of the medications. CED projects are currently operating in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. However, decision-making about these projects is haphazard, and basic information about the projects is not publicly available. As a new policy development there are many unanswered policy questions, and no organized comprehensive strategy seems to be in place in any country for resolving these questions. Until these policy issues have been addressed, CED will have difficulty achieving its potential.
Canadian Institute for Health Information. Drug Expenditure in Canada, 1985 to 2006. Ottawa, 2007.
3.
TunisS. R.StryerD. B., and ClancyC. M.Practical clinical trials: Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA290: 1624–1632, 2003.
4.
NICE Citizens Council. Only in Research. NICE, London, 2007.
5.
FisherJ. A.Medical Research for Hire: The Political Economy of Pharmaceutical Clinical Trials. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ, 2009.
6.
Van SpallH. G. C.Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: A systematic sampling review. JAMA297: 1233–1240, 2007.
7.
LeeP. E.Published randomized controlled trials of drug therapy for dementia often lack complete data on harm. J. Clin. Epidemiol.61: 1152–1160, 2008.
8.
RisingK.BacchettiP., and BeroL.Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: Review of publication and presentation. PLoS Med. 5(11): e217, 2008.
9.
TurnerE. H.Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N. Engl. J. Med.358: 252–260, 2008.
10.
HuttonJ.TruemanP., and HenshallC.Coverage with evidence development: An examination of conceptual and policy issues. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care23: 425–435, 2007.
11.
TunisS. R., and ChalkidouK.Coverage with evidence development: A very good beginning, but much to be done. Commentary to Hutton et al. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care23: 432–435, 2007.
12.
O'HarrowR.Jr.Grass roots seeded by drugmaker: Schering-Plough uses “coalitions” to sell costly treatment. Washington Post, September 12, 2000.
ChalkidouK.HoyA., and LittlejohnsP.Making a decision to wait for more evidence: When the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends a technology only in the context of research. J. R. Soc. Med.100: 453–460, 2007.
ReidC.The Bosentan Patient Registry. National Medicines Symposium 2006. Canberra, 2006.
17.
BarrS. G.Mandatory pharmacosurveillance: A Canadian model for access to therapy and research. Clin. Exp. Rheumatol.22(Suppl. 35): S39–43, 2004.
18.
CookseyS. D.A Review of UK Health Research Funding. Stationery Office, London, 2006.
19.
Department of Health, United Kingdom. Drug Treatment for Multiple Sclerosis (Beta-Interferons and Glatiramer Acetate): Risk-Sharing Scheme. HSC 2002/004, Briefing Note, January 12, 2004. London, 2004. www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Primarycare/Primarycaretrusts/DH_4000556 (accessed May 2, 2008).
Department of Health, United Kingdom. Health Service Circular: Cost Effective Provision of Disease Modifying Therapies for People with Multiple Sclerosis. London, February 4, 2002.
22.
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. National Coverage Determinations with Data Collection as a Condition of Coverage: Coverage with Evidence Development. 2006. www.cms.hhs.gov/mcd/ncpc_view_document.asp?id?8 (accessed May 2, 2008).
23.
CarinoT.Medicare's coverage of colorectal cancer drugs: A case study in evidence development and policy. Health Aff. (Millwood)25: 1231–1239, 2005.
24.
TunisS. R., and PearsonS. D.Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare's “coverage with evidence development.”Health Aff. (Millwood)25: 1218–1230, 2005.
25.
Health Technology Assessment International. Conditional Coverage/Access with Evidence. Edmonton, Alberta, 2009. www.htai.org/index.php?id?89 (accessed July 12, 2009).
