Abstract
When decision-makers use economic evaluation to facilitate making decisions about reimbursing whether to reimburse pharmaceuticals within a publicly funded health care system, they may consider whether to prioritise specific patient populations or diseases: e.g., cancer or rare disease. This can be achieved through applying equity weights to outcomes such as QALYs. Decision makers, however, must choose whether equity weights are applied to solely the treatment of a specific disease or to treatments of the patient with the specific disease. Without such clarification, confusion may arise which can hinder the work of those who must make reimbursement recommendations and decisions. This study examines the repercussions of implementation of equity weights. For illustration, two hypothetical case studies relating to a rare disease are considered. The first case study demonstrates that applying equity weights only to the treatment of the rare disease of interest can lead to a patient with that rare disease accruing less benefits at a higher cost to the payer. The second case study demonstrates that if equity weights are applied to the patients who have a specific rare disease, then funding of a treatment for a common disease may be restricted only to those patients for whom treatment is more costly and less effective. As discussions continue with respect to applying equity weights within economic evaluation, it is important that the repercussions outlined are recognised.