RESUMO
Introduction: Primary immune thrombocytopenia is a rare autoimmune disease characterised by a decreased platelet count resulting in an increased risk of bleeding events and even life-threatening haemorrhages. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) are the standard of care second-line therapy for adult patients with chronic immune thrombocytopenia. The first TPO-RAs approved and reimbursed in Italy, eltrombopag and romiplostim, while effective, pose some issues in terms of safety (e.g., hepatotoxicity) or general management (e.g., dietary restrictions). Avatrombopag, an effective and well-tolerated TPO-RA, was recently granted reimbursement. Methods: A 3-year (2023-2025) budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted to estimate its impact on the Italian National Health Service (NHS). Two scenarios were compared, of which one represents the current situation, without avatrombopag, and the other provides for an increasing market share of avatrombopag (up to 26.6%). Results: BIA shows that the increase in the use of avatrombopag correlates with savings for NHS: in the first year, saving would be 1,300,564, increasing to 2,774,210 in the third year, for a total of 6,083,231 over the 3-year period. The sensitivity analysis confirmed these savings in the scenario with avatrombopag. Conclusions: Based on this BIA, the introduction and reimbursement of avatrombopag is an efficient and advantageous choice for the Italian NHS.
RESUMO
The evaluation of pharmaceutical innovation and therapeutic value is an increasingly complex exercise for which different approaches are adopted at the national level, despite the need for standardisation of processes and harmonisation of public health decisions. The objective of our analysis was to compare the approaches of the AIFA (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco) and the HAS (Haute Autorité de Santé) in assessing the same medicinal products. In Italy, the 1525/2017 AIFA Deliberation introduces a transparent scheme for the evaluation of innovative status (innovative, conditional, not innovative) based on the therapeutic added value (TAV), therapeutic need, and quality of evidence. In contrast, in France, the HAS makes judgements using the effective clinical benefit (Service Médical Rendu) and improvement of effective clinical benefit (Amélioration du Service Médical Rendu, ASMR). This analysis focused on medicinal products evaluated both by the AIFA and by the HAS from July 2017 to September 2021. Similarities between AIFA and HAS evaluations were investigated in terms of the TAV, recognition of innovativeness, and the ASMR. Both total and partial agreements were considered relevant. Therefore, raw agreement, Cohen's kappa (weighted and unweighted), and Bangdiwala's B-statistic were estimated. A total of 102 medicinal products were included in this study. Out of these, 38 (37.2%) were orphan drugs, while 56 (54.9%) had a clinical indication for the treatment of cancer. The AIFA and HAS reached a higher level of agreement on the innovativeness status compared with the TAV. A moderate total agreement emerged in the recognition of innovativeness (k = 0.463, p-value ≤0.0001), and partial agreement was substantial (equal weight k = 0.547, squared k = 0.638), while a lack of agreement resulted in a comparison of the TAV according to the AIFA and the ASMR recognised by the HAS. Indeed, whereas the AIFA determined the TAV to be important, the HAS considered it to be moderate. In addition, whereas the AIFA identified a bias towards a moderate TAV, the HAS identified a bias towards a minor ASMR. A higher level of agreement was reached, both on the TAV and on innovative status, for less critical medical products (non-cancer-related, or non-orphan, or with a standard European Medicines Agency approval). These results underline the importance of implementing European procedures that are more broadly aligned in terms of value definition criteria.
