Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 27
Filter
1.
Clin Ther ; 45(5): 426-436, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37137786

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Clinical guidelines recommend radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for eradication of Barrett esophagus in patients with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD), but evidence on whether RFA provides good value for money is still sparse. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of RFA in Italy. METHODS: A Markov model was used to estimate lifelong costs and consequences of disease progression with different treatments. RFA was compared with esophagectomy in the HGD group or endoscopic surveillance in the LGD group. Clinical and quality-of-life parameters were derived from a review of the literature and expert opinions, whereas Italian national tariffs were used as a proxy for costs. FINDINGS: RFA dominated esophagectomy in patients with HGD with a probability of 83%. For patients with LGD, RFA was more effective and more costly than active surveillance (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, €6276 per quality-adjusted life-year). At a cost-effectiveness threshold of €15,272, the probability of RFA being the optimal strategy in this population was close to 100%. Model results were sensitive to the cost of the interventions and utility weights used in the different disease states. IMPLICATIONS: RFA is likely to be the optimal choice for patients with LGD and HGD in Italy. Italy is discussing the implementation of a national program for the health technology assessment of medical devices, requiring more studies to prove value for money of emerging technologies.


Subject(s)
Barrett Esophagus , Catheter Ablation , Esophageal Neoplasms , Precancerous Conditions , Radiofrequency Ablation , Humans , Barrett Esophagus/surgery , Barrett Esophagus/epidemiology , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , Precancerous Conditions/surgery , Catheter Ablation/adverse effects , Catheter Ablation/methods , Disease Progression
2.
Clin Ther ; 44(11): 1480-1493, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36195503

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Resource modeling aims to explicitly quantify the effects of adopting new health care technologies in settings with capacity-related constraints. The aim of this analysis was to use resource modeling to explore the effects of the uptake of first-line treatment with daratumumab on wait lists and wait times in patients with untreated multiple myeloma. Two formulations were compared: the standard IV formulation (DARA-IV) and a recently approved SC formulation (DARA-SC). METHODS: First, semi-structured interviews at six oncologic centers were used to retrieve data on the management of patients given a DARA-IV regimen. Second, a discrete event simulation (DES) model was built to estimate the effects on resource consumption, wait lists, and wait times in scenarios with different incident numbers of patients treated with either DARA-IV or DARA-SC. FINDINGS: In all of the simulated scenarios with more incident patients initiated on first-line treatment with DARA-IV, the actual capacity of infusion chairs was not enough to meet the demand, leading to increases in wait times and wait lists. In the highest-demand scenario, 17 more infusion chairs per center would be required to avoid such increases. Treatment with DARA-SC would allow centers to meet the demand with their actual capacity. IMPLICATIONS: DES modeling can effectively be used to formally explore the effects of different formulations on the use of limited resources, wait lists, and wait times at the facility level. Based on the findings from this analysis, DARA-SC may free up resources and prevent short- and long-term costs to infusion centers.


Subject(s)
Multiple Myeloma , Humans , Multiple Myeloma/drug therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
4.
Health Econ ; 31 Suppl 1: 116-134, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35581685

ABSTRACT

Health economic modeling of novel technology at the early stages of a product lifecycle has been used to identify technologies that are likely to be cost-effective. Such early assessments are challenging due to the potentially limited amount of data. Modelers typically conduct uncertainty analyses to evaluate their effect on decision-relevant outcomes. Current approaches, however, are limited in their scope of application and imposes an unverifiable assumption, that is, uncertainty can be precisely represented by a probability distribution. In the absence of reliable data, an approach that uses the fewest number of assumptions is desirable. This study introduces a generalized approach for quantifying parameter uncertainty, that is, probability bound analysis (PBA), that does not require a precise specification of a probability distribution in the context of early-stage health economic modeling. We introduce the concept of a probability box (p-box) as a measure of uncertainty without necessitating a precise probability distribution. We provide formulas for a p-box given data on summary statistics of a parameter. We describe an approach to propagate p-boxes into a model and provide step-by-step guidance on how to implement PBA. We conduct a case and examine the differences between the status-quo and PBA approaches and their potential implications on decision-making.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Technology , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Probability , Uncertainty
5.
Expert Rev Med Devices ; 19(4): 315-325, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35579009

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Early Feasibility Studies (EFS) are among the pre-market clinical investigations allowed by the International Standard for Clinical investigation of medical devices (MD) for human subjects. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) introduced an EFS program in the US in 2013. The European Union (EU) MD Regulation, that entered into force in May 2021, opened the possibility of EFS in the EU. However, European countries at present have no standardized procedural framework for EFS. In this paper, we address the desirability of a European EFS program. AREAS COVERED: Characteristics of EFS conducted so far are reviewed, and perceptions of an expert, multidisciplinary panel of key stakeholders are explored regarding desirability and feasibility of a European EFS program and critical factors favoring or hampering its implementation. EXPERT OPINION: Implementing an EFS program in the EU would contribute to creating a favorable environment for early-stage clinical investigations, with positive effects on the quality and timeliness of clinical evidence for novel MDs, and attractiveness of the European system for pre- and post-market clinical research. Based on discussion with experts, also leveraging on the US experience, three dimensions should be considered for effective design and implementation: process, resources, and ethical issues.


Subject(s)
European Union , Europe , Feasibility Studies , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration
6.
Health Econ ; 31 Suppl 1: 98-115, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35460307

ABSTRACT

Payers and manufacturers can disagree on the appropriate level of evidence that is required for new medical devices, resulting in high societal costs due to decisions taken with sub-optimal information. A cost-effectiveness model of a hypothetical total artificial heart was built using data from the literature and the (simulated) results of a pivotal study. The expected value of perfect information (EVPI) was calculated from both the payer and manufacturer perspectives, using net monetary benefit and the company's return on investment respectively. A function was also defined, linking effectiveness to market shares. Additional constraints such as a minimum clinical difference or maximum budget impact were introduced into the company's decisions to simulate additional barriers to adoption. The difference in the EVPI between manufacturers and payers varied greatly depending on the underlying decision rules and constraints. The manufacturer's EVPI depends on the probability of being reimbursed, the uncertainty on the (cost-)effectiveness of the technology, as well as other parameters relating to initial investments, operating costs and market dynamics. The use of Value of information for both perspectives can outline potential misalignments and can be particularly useful to inform early dialogs between manufacturers and payers, or negotiations on conditional reimbursement schemes.


Subject(s)
Budgets , Heart, Artificial , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Probability , Uncertainty
7.
Health Econ ; 31 Suppl 1: 195-206, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35322478

ABSTRACT

Experiences with coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes are fairly limited in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, which are usually late adopters of new health technologies. Our aim was to put forward recommendations on how CEE health technology assessment bodies and payer organizations can apply CED to reduce decision uncertainty on reimbursement of medical devices, with a particular focus on transferring the structure and data from CED schemes in early technology adopter countries in Western Europe. Structured interviews on the practices and feasibility of transferring CED schemes were conducted and subsequently, a draft tool for the systematic classification of decision alternatives and recommendations was developed. The decision tool was reviewed in a focus group discussion and validated within a wider group of CEE experts in a virtual workshop. Transferability assessment is needed in case of (1) joint implementation of a CED scheme; (2) transferring the structure of an existing CED scheme to a CEE country; (3) reimbursement decisions that are linked to outcomes of an ongoing CED scheme in another country and (4) real-world evidence transferred from completed CED schemes. Efficient use of available resources may be improved by adequately transferring evidence and policy tools from early technology adopter countries.


Subject(s)
Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Technology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Europe , Humans , Uncertainty
8.
Health Econ ; 31 Suppl 1: 179-194, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35220644

ABSTRACT

Health economists have written extensively on the design and implementation of coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes and have proposed theoretical frameworks based on cost-effectiveness modeling and value of information analysis. CED may aid decision-makers when there is uncertainty about the (cost-)effectiveness of a new health technology at the time of reimbursement. Medical devices are potential candidates for CED schemes, as regulatory regimes do not usually require the same level of efficacy and safety data normally needed for pharmaceuticals. The purpose of this research is to assess whether the actual practice of CED for medical devices in Europe meets the theoretical principles proposed by health economists and whether theory and practice can be more closely aligned. Based on decision-makers' perceptions of the challenges associated with CED schemes, plus examples from the schemes themselves, we discuss a series of proposals for assessing the desirability of schemes, their design, implementation, and evaluation. These proposals, while reflecting the practical challenges with developing CED programs, embody many of the principles suggested by economists and should support decision-makers in dealing with uncertainty about the real-world performance of devices.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Europe , Humans , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Uncertainty
9.
Eur J Hosp Pharm ; 29(6): 346-352, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33658228

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Early rescue surfactant therapy using less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) can reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and avoid complications in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. The purpose of this study was to estimate the budget impact of LISA compared with management based on continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) alone and rescue surfactant therapy in case of CPAP failure. METHODS: A budget impact model was built comparing LISA with CPAP alone in order to estimate the potential resource consumption and budget impact from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. A literature review was conducted to populate the model. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to characterise the existing uncertainty and to explore the contribution of individual model parameters to the overall budget impact. RESULTS: Early rescue with LISA is expected to reduce resource consumption and costs compared with conservative therapy based on CPAP alone for preterm infants born at 25-32 weeks gestation. Savings are higher for preterm infants of 25-28 weeks (expected budget impact -£5146 per case, 95% credible interval (CrI) -£22 403 to £13, probability of being cost saving 97.4%) than for preterm infants of 29-32 weeks (-£176, 95% CrI -£4279 to £339, probability of being cost saving 85%). The impact of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and intraventricular haemorrhage on resource consumption and the expected reduction in the incidence of BPD with LISA are the most influential parameters on the budget. CONCLUSIONS: Early rescue with LISA used in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome and fraction of inspired oxygen ≥0.3 is expected to be cost saving compared with management based on CPAP alone, particularly in those born at 25-28 weeks gestation.


Subject(s)
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia , Pulmonary Surfactants , Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Humans , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Infant, Premature , Surface-Active Agents/therapeutic use , State Medicine , Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn/drug therapy , Pulmonary Surfactants/therapeutic use , Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia/epidemiology , Oxygen/therapeutic use
10.
Health Policy ; 125(10): 1322-1329, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34353636

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Specific guidance and examples for health technology assessment (HTA) of medical devices are scarce in medical device development. A more intense dialogue of competent authorities, HTA agencies, and manufactures may improve evidence base on clinical and cost-effectiveness. Especially as the new Medical Device Regulation requires more clinical evidence. METHODS: We explore the perceptions of manufacturers, competent authorities, and HTA agencies towards such dialogues and investigate how they should be designed to accelerate the translational process from development to patient access using semi-structured interviews. We synthesized the evidence from manufacturers, competent authorities, and HTA agencies from 14 different jurisdictions across Europe. RESULTS: Eleven HTA agencies, four competent authorities, and eight manufacturers of high-risk devices expressed perceptions on the current situation and the expected development of three types of early dialogues. DISCUSSION: The MDR has to be taken into account when designing the early dialogue processes. Transferring insights from medicinal product regulation is limited as the regulatory pathways differ substantially. CONCLUSION: Early dialogues promise to accelerate the translational process and to provide faster access to innovative medical devices. However, health policy-makers should promote and fully establish regulatory and HTA early dialogues before introducing parallel early dialogues of regulatory, HTA agencies, and manufacturers. For initiating change, the legislator must create the legal basis and set the appropriate incentives for manufacturers.


Subject(s)
Government Agencies , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Europe , Health Policy , Humans
11.
Value Health ; 24(7): 1045-1058, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34243829

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: A recent debate in health economics and outcomes research community identified option value as one of the elements warranting consideration in the assessment of medical technologies. To conduct a scoping review of contributions on option value in the healthcare sector and identify relevant conceptual aspects and methods used to incorporate it in standard economic evaluations. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted up to July 2020 to identify contributions from electronic bibliographic database and gray literature. Data on the proposed definitions of option value, theoretical implications of its use in economic evaluations, and methods used to estimate it were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: We found 57 eligible studies. Three different definitions emerged: insurance value, real option value, and option value of survival. Focusing on the latter (24 studies), we analyzed in depth 8 empirical applications across 7 therapeutic areas. The most relevant methodological challenges were on the perspective used in economic evaluations and how to robustly manage forecasting uncertainty, update cost-effectiveness thresholds, and avoid double-counting issues. For empirical studies assessing the total value of the technology, including option value, estimates ranged from +7% to +469% of its conventional value. CONCLUSIONS: This review synthesizes theoretical and empirical aspects on option value of healthcare technologies and proposes a terminology to distinguish 3 different concepts identified. Future work should focus primarily on agreeing on whether option value should be included in economic evaluations and, if so, on developing and validating reliable methods for its ex-ante estimation.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Economics, Medical , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Databases, Factual , Decision Making
12.
Health Policy ; 125(9): 1238-1246, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34243979

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nutrition interventions have specific features that might warrant modifications to the methods used for economic evaluations of healthcare interventions. AIM: The aim of the article is to identify these features and when they challenge the use of cost-utility analysis (CUA). METHODS: A critical review of the literature is conducted and a 2 by 2 classification matrix for nutrition interventions is proposed based on 1) who the main party responsible for the implementation and funding of the intervention is; and 2) who the target recipient of the intervention is. The challenges of conducting economic evaluations for each group of nutrition interventions are then analysed according to four main aspects: attribution of effects, measuring and valuing outcomes, inter-sectorial costs and consequences and equity considerations. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: CUA is appropriate for nutrition interventions when they are funded from the healthcare sector, have no (or modest) spill-overs to other sectors of the economy and have only (or mainly) health consequences. For other interventions, typically involving different government agencies, with cost implications for the private sector, with important wellbeing consequences outside health and with heterogeneous welfare effects across socio-economic groups, other economic evaluation methods need to be developed in order to offer valid guidance to policy making. For these interventions, checklists for critical appraisal of economic evaluations may require some substantial changes.


Subject(s)
Nutritional Status , Private Sector , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans
13.
Eur J Health Econ ; 22(8): 1253-1273, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34117987

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Medical devices are potentially good candidates for coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes, as clinical data at market entry are often sparse and (cost-)effectiveness depends on real-world use. The objective of this research was to explore the diffusion of CED schemes for devices in Europe, and the factors that favour or hamper their utilization. METHODS: We conducted structured interviews with 25 decision-makers from 22 European countries to explore the characteristics of existing CED programmes for devices, and how decision makers perceived 13 pre-identified challenges associated with initiating and operating CED schemes for devices. We also collected data on individual schemes that were either initiated or still ongoing in the last 5 years. RESULTS: We identified seven countries with CED programmes for devices and 78 ongoing schemes. The characteristics of CED programmes varied across countries, including eligibility criteria, roles and responsibilities of stakeholders, funding arrangements, and type of decisions being contemplated at the outset of each scheme. We observed a high variability in how decision makers perceived CED-related challenges possibly reflecting country-specific arrangements and different experiences with CED. One general finding across all countries was that relatively little attention was paid to the evaluation of schemes, both during and at their completion. CONCLUSIONS: CED programmes for devices with different characteristics exist in Europe. Decision-makers' perceptions differ on the challenges associated with these schemes. More exchange of knowledge and experience will help decision makers anticipate the likely challenges in CED schemes for devices, and to learn from good practices existing elsewhere.


Subject(s)
Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Europe , Humans , Longitudinal Studies
14.
Health Policy ; 125(5): 602-608, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33820679

ABSTRACT

Differing contexts have greatly influenced HTA development in various countries, with considerable effort recently made by international HTA networks (e.g., EUnetHTA) and the European Union (EU) to make HTA a more coherent, equal, and efficient process. Medical devices (MDs) present particular challenges for HTA because of frequent, rapid innovation, outcomes influenced by end-user competence, dynamic pricing and often low-quality scientific evidence. Our objective is to describe the development, structure and governance of a National HTA Program for MDs (PNHTADM) in Italy, a highly participatory, stakeholder-engaged, evidence-based process to reform a fragmented system of appraisal and approval. Based largely on EUnetHTA methods, the resulting process delineates a standardized system for proposing MDs by any stakeholders, accrediting HTA producers, setting criteria for prioritization and appraisals, and innovatively linking recommendations with coverage, reimbursement and procurement of MDs. Expected benefits include reduced disparities in pricing and reimbursement policies and improved access to new technologies across 21 regional healthcare systems in Italy's decentralized, universal system, complete with provisions to require additional evidence collection and centrally monitor diffusion. Though devised for Italy, the design, resources and underlying analysis provide a framework for other nations seeking to consolidate HTA initiatives, particularly in light of new EU regulation.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , European Union , Humans , Italy
15.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res ; 21(2): 197-209, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33439090

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Performance-based risk-sharing agreements (PBRSAs), between payers, health care providers, and technology manufacturers can be useful when there is uncertainty about the (cost-) effectiveness of a new technology or service. However, they can be challenging to design and implement. AREAS COVERED: A total of 18 performance-based agreements were identified through a literature review. All but two of the agreements identified were pay-for-performance schemes, agreed between providers and payers at the national level. No examples were found of agreements between health care providers and manufacturers at the local level. The potential for these local agreements was illustrated by hypothetical case studies of water quality management and an integrated chronic kidney disease program. EXPERT OPINION: Performance-based risk-sharing agreements can work to the advantage of patients, health care providers, payers, and technology manufacturers, particularly if they facilitate the introduction of technologies or systems of care that might not have been introduced otherwise. However, the design, conduct, and implementation of PBRSAs in renal care pose a number of challenges. Efforts should be made to overcome these challenges so that more renal care patients can benefit from technological advances and new models of care.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/economics , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Risk Sharing, Financial , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Reimbursement, Incentive , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/economics , Uncertainty , Water Quality/standards
16.
Int J Health Policy Manag ; 10(2): 102-105, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32610778

ABSTRACT

In this commentary, we discuss early stage assessments of innovative medical technologies both in terms of methods applied as well as their use in healthcare decision-making. We argue that cost-effectiveness alone may be too reductive if taken as the only decision rule, and it would benefit from being used within a broader evaluation framework. We discuss innovative methods which may contribute to better estimate the potential costs and consequences of a technology in the absence of solid clinical data, as frequently the case in early assessments. Finally, we comment on the potential synergies which may take place should early economic models be used not only by technology developers alone but as a negotiating base during early dialogues with health technology assessment (HTA) bodies.


Subject(s)
Models, Economic , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Biomedical Technology , Cost-Benefit Analysis
17.
Clin Ther ; 42(8): 1535-1548.e2, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32768246

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Electrochemotherapy is increasingly entering into national and international guidelines, requiring formal evaluation of treatment costs and cost-effectiveness to ensure that its uptake provides value to budget-constrained health care systems. This study analyzed the early cost-effectiveness of electrochemotherapy in patients with Stage IIIc/IV skin melanoma in clinical practice in Slovenia. The costs of electrochemotherapy were compared to those of the standard of care, consisting of palliative treatment and therapy for symptoms. METHODS: wThe study enrolled 23 patients treated with electrochemotherapy at the Institute of Oncology (Ljubljana, Slovenia). The mean cost of electrochemotherapy was estimated using patient-specific cost data on electrochemotherapy procedures and subsequent follow-up. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated by collecting EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at baseline, after complete or partial response following the treatment, and after a relapse of skin lesions. A discrete-time Markov model was built to estimate the lifetime costs and consequences of using electrochemotherapy compared to standard of care, from the perspective of the Slovenian health care system. The analysis was conducted separately in the whole patient sample and in the subset of patients with bleeding lesions. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test model assumptions and to characterize the uncertainty around model parameters. FINDINGS: In the whole patient population, electrochemotherapy for skin melanoma Stage IIIc/IV was expected to increase QALYs by 0.29 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.10-0.50), at the higher cost of 6568 EUR (95% CrI, 4593-8928) in comparison to the standard of care. At the cost-effectiveness threshold of 20,000 EUR/QALY, the estimated probabilities of electrochemotherapy being cost-effective compared to standard of care were 0.30 and 0.91 in the whole patient sample and in patients with bleeding lesions, respectively. In the whole sample population, a 50% reduction in the price of the electrodes was expected to increase the probability of electrochemotherapy being cost-effective from 0.30 to ~0.64. IMPLICATIONS: The findings from this cost-effectiveness analysis of data from clinical practice were based on a small sample size (ie, 23 patents), which made the subgroup of patients with bleeding lesions very small. Therefore, the findings in this patient population should be carefully interpreted.


Subject(s)
Electrochemotherapy/economics , Melanoma/economics , Skin Neoplasms/economics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Health Care Costs , Humans , Male , Melanoma/drug therapy , Middle Aged , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy
18.
Pharmacoeconomics ; 38(10): 1055-1070, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32572825

ABSTRACT

In the drive towards faster patient access to treatments, health technology assessment (HTA) agencies are increasingly faced with reliance on evidence from surrogate endpoints, leading to increased decision uncertainty. This study undertook an updated survey of methodological guidance for using surrogate endpoints across international HTA agencies. We reviewed HTA and economic evaluation methods guidance from European, Australian and Canadian HTA agencies. We considered how guidelines addressed the methods for handling surrogate endpoints, including (1) level of evidence, (2) methods of validation, and (3) thresholds of acceptability. Across the 73 HTA agencies surveyed, 29 (40%) had methodological guidelines that made specific reference to consideration of surrogate outcomes. Of the 45 methods documents analysed, the majority [27 (60%)] were non-technology specific, 15 (33%) focused on pharmaceuticals and three (7%) on medical devices. The principles of the European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) guidelines published in 2015 on the handling of surrogate endpoints appear to have been adopted by many European HTA agencies, i.e. preference for final patient-relevant outcomes and reliance on surrogate endpoints with biological plausibility and epidemiological evidence of the association between the surrogate and final endpoint. Only a small number of HTA agencies (UK National Institute for Care and Excellence; the German Institute for Medical Documentation and Information and Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care; the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee; and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health) have developed more detailed prescriptive criteria for the acceptance of surrogate endpoints, e.g. meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials showing strong association between the treatment effect on the surrogate and final outcomes. As the decision uncertainty associated with reliance on surrogate endpoints carries a risk to patients and society, there is a need for HTA agencies to develop more detailed methodological guidance for consistent selection and evaluation of health technologies that lack definitive final patient-relevant outcome evidence at the time of the assessment.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Technology , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Biomarkers , Canada , Humans
20.
Clin Ther ; 42(1): 25-33, 2020 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31932079

ABSTRACT

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are any report of the status of a patient's health condition that comes directly from the patient (or in some cases from a caregiver or surrogate responder), without interpretation by a practitioner or anyone else. PROs are increasingly used as a valuable source of data in different domains of health care, including research, clinical practice, health care management, and decision making on the regulation, coverage, and reimbursement of new technologies. Several factors must be considered when selecting which PRO measure to use to ensure their appropriate use and interpretation as well as their relevance for decision makers. The increasing availability of PRO data, its integration with other data sources, and the improvements in data analytics offer a valuable opportunity to place the patient at the center of any health care process. However, several issues need to be addressed, including interoperability, data governance, security, privacy, and ethics, to realize an effective, integrated, standardized, real-time assessment of PROs in the health care systems.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Decision Making , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...