Towards compatibility of EUnetHTA JCA methodology and German HTA: a systematic comparison and recommendations from an industry perspective
-
Published:2021-11-12
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1618-7598
-
Container-title:The European Journal of Health Economics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Eur J Health Econ
Author:
Kisser Agnes,Knieriemen Joschua,Fasan Annette,Eberle Karolin,Hogger Sara,Werner Sebastian,Taube Tina,Rasch Andrej
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
The transferability of the EU joint clinical assessment (JCA) reports for pharmaceuticals for the German benefit assessment was evaluated by systematically comparing EU JCA and German clinical assessments (CA) based on established assessment elements for HTA and assessing the potential impact of differences on Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, G-BA) ability to derive the therapeutic added value.
Methods
Identification of all pharmaceuticals undergoing both, EU JCA and German CA between January 2016–June 2020. Qualitative review and data extraction from the assessments, assessment of methodological differences using a hierarchical model. Recommendations for harmonisation were developed and consented with pharmaceutical industry stakeholders.
Results
Differences with potentially major impact: (1) View on differing treatment algorithms and definition of corresponding subpopulations/respective comparators. (2) Clinical relevance of surrogate/intermediate endpoints. Inclusion of different/surrogate morbidity endpoints resulting in different relative effectiveness conclusions. (3) Tolerance of study interventions not used according to marketing authorisation. (4) Different operationalisation and/or weighting of individual safety endpoints leading to differing relative safety conclusions. Differences with potentially minor impact: (1) Disagreement in risk of bias assessment for overall survival and its robustness against study limitations. (2) Use of patient-reported outcome symptom scales as measurements for health-related quality of life instruments.
Conclusion
While many synergies between EU JCA and German CA exist, we identified several aspects in HTA methodology that would benefit of harmonisation and ensure the transferability of future EU JCA to the German HTA process without duplicated evaluation requirements. For those, a set of recommendations was developed.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
Reference46 articles.
1. Kleijnen, S., Fathallah, M., van der Linden, M.W., Vancraeynest, P., Dahmani, B., Timoney, A., et al.: Can a joint assessment provide relevant information for national/local relative effectiveness assessments? an in-depth comparison of pazopanib assessments. Value Health. 18(5), 663–672 (2015) 2. Kleijnen, S., George, E., Goulden, S., d’Andon, A., Vitre, P., Osinska, B., et al.: Relative effectiveness assessment of pharmaceuticals: similarities and differences in 29 jurisdictions. Value Health. 15(6), 954–960 (2012) 3. Allen, N., Liberti, L., Walker, S.R., Salek, S.: A comparison of reimbursement recommendations by European HTA agencies: is there opportunity for further alignment? Front Pharmacol. 8, 384 (2017) 4. Chassagnol, F., Marcelli, G., Wagle, J., Giuliani, G., Traub, D., Schaub, V., et al.: Review of Relative effectiveness assessments (REAs) of pharmaceuticals at the European network for health technology assessment (EUnetHTA): a first step towards a consolidated European perspective on comparative effectiveness & safety? Health Policy 124(9), 943–951 (2020) 5. European Commission. Mapping of HTA methodologies in EU and Norway2018. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/technology_assessment/docs/2018_mapping_methodologies_en.pdf.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|