The Influence of Cost-Effectiveness and Other Factors on Nice Decisions

Institutional design and moral conflict in health care priority-setting

Priority-setting policy-makers often face moral and political pressure to balance the conflicting motivations of efficiency and rescue/non-abandonment. Using the conflict between these motivations as a case study can enrich the understanding of institutional design in developed democracies. This essay presents a cognitive-psychological account of the conflict between efficiency and rescue/non-abandonment in health care priority-setting. It then describes three sets of institutional arrangements-in Australia, England/Wales, and Germany, respectively-that contend with this conflict in interestingly different ways. The analysis yields at least three implications for institutional design in developed democracies: (1) indeterminacy at the level of moral psychology can increase the probability of indeterminacy at the level of institutional design; (2) situational constraints in effect require priority-setting policy-makers to adopt normative-moral pluralism; and (3) the U.S. health care system may be in an anti-priority-setting equilibrium.

A Prototype Software Framework for Transferable Computational Health Economic Models and Its Early Application in Youth Mental Health

We are developing an economic model to explore multiple topics in Australian youth mental health policy. To help make that model more readily transferable to other jurisdictions, we developed a software framework for authoring modular computational health economic models (CHEMs) (the software files that implement health economic models). We specified framework user requirements for: a simple programming syntax; a template CHEM module; tools for authoring new CHEM modules; search tools for finding existing CHEM modules; tools for supplying CHEM modules with data; reproducible analysis and reporting tools; and tools to help maintain a CHEM project website. We implemented the framework as six development version code libraries in the programming language R that integrate with online services for software development and research data archiving. We used the framework to author five development version R libraries of CHEM modules focussed on utility mapping in youth mental health. These modules provide tools for variable validation, dataset description, multi-attribute instrument scoring, construction of mapping models, reporting of mapping studies and making out of sample predictions. We assessed these CHEM module libraries as mostly meeting transparency, reusability and updatability criteria that we have previously developed, but requiring more detailed documentation and unit testing of individual modules. Our software framework has potential value as a prototype for future tools to support the development of transferable CHEMs.Code: Visit https://www.ready4-dev.com for more information about how to find, install and apply the prototype software framework.

Comparison of surgical or non-surgical management for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury: the ACL SNNAP RCT

Background

Anterior cruciate ligament injury of the knee is common and leads to decreased activity and risk of secondary osteoarthritis of the knee. Management of patients with a non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury can be non-surgical (rehabilitation) or surgical (reconstruction). However, insufficient evidence exists to guide treatment.

Objective(s)

To determine in patients with non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury and symptoms of instability whether a strategy of surgical management (reconstruction) without prior rehabilitation was more clinically and cost-effective than non-surgical management (rehabilitation).

Design

A pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial with two-arm parallel groups and 1:1 allocation. Due to the nature of the interventions, no blinding could be carried out.

Setting

Twenty-nine NHS orthopaedic units in the United Kingdom.

Participants

Participants with a symptomatic (instability) non-acute anterior cruciate ligament-injured knee.

Interventions

Patients in the surgical management arm underwent surgical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction as soon as possible and without any further rehabilitation. Patients in the rehabilitation arm attended physiotherapy sessions and only were listed for reconstructive surgery on continued instability following rehabilitation. Surgery following initial rehabilitation was an expected outcome for many patients and within protocol.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 4 at 18 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes included return to sport/activity, intervention-related complications, patient satisfaction, expectations of activity, generic health quality of life, knee-specific quality of life and resource usage.

Results

Three hundred and sixteen participants were recruited between February 2017 and April 2020 with 156 randomised to surgical management and 160 to rehabilitation. Forty-one per cent (n = 65) of those allocated to rehabilitation underwent subsequent reconstruction within 18 months with 38% (n = 61) completing rehabilitation and not undergoing surgery. Seventy-two per cent (n = 113) of those allocated to surgery underwent reconstruction within 18 months. Follow-up at the primary outcome time point was 78% (n = 248; surgical, n = 128; rehabilitation, n = 120). Both groups improved over time. Adjusted mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 4 scores at 18 months had increased to 73.0 in the surgical arm and to 64.6 in the rehabilitation arm. The adjusted mean difference was 7.9 (95% confidence interval 2.5 to 13.2; p = 0.005) in favour of surgical management. The per-protocol analyses supported the intention-to-treat results, with all treatment effects favouring surgical management at a level reaching statistical significance. There was a significant difference in Tegner Activity Score at 18 months. Sixty-eight per cent (n = 65) of surgery patients did not reach their expected activity level compared to 73% (n = 63) in the rehabilitation arm. There were no differences between groups in surgical complications (n = 1 surgery, n = 2 rehab) or clinical events (n = 11 surgery, n = 12 rehab). Of surgery patients, 82.9% were satisfied compared to 68.1% of rehabilitation patients. Health economic analysis found that surgical management led to improved health-related quality of life compared to non-surgical management (0.052 quality-adjusted life-years, p = 0.177), but with higher NHS healthcare costs (£1107, p < 0.001). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the surgical management programme versus rehabilitation was £19,346 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Using £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year thresholds, surgical management is cost-effective in the UK setting with a probability of being the most cost-effective option at 51% and 72%, respectively.

Limitations

Not all surgical patients underwent reconstruction, but this did not affect trial interpretation. The adherence to physiotherapy was patchy, but the trial was designed as pragmatic.

Conclusions

Surgical management (reconstruction) for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament-injured patients was superior to non-surgical management (rehabilitation). Although physiotherapy can still provide benefit, later-presenting non-acute anterior cruciate ligament-injured patients benefit more from surgical reconstruction without delaying for a prior period of rehabilitation.

Future work

Confirmatory studies and those to explore the influence of fidelity and compliance will be useful.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10110685; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02980367.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/140/63) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 27. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Rationing in an Era of Multiple Tight Constraints: Is Cost-Utility Analysis Still Fit for Purpose?

Cost-utility analysis may not be sufficient to support reimbursement decisions when the assessed health intervention requires a large proportion of the healthcare budget or when the monetary healthcare budget is not the only resource constraint. Such cases include joint replacement, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) interventions and settings where all resources are constrained (e.g. post-COVID-19 or in low/middle-income countries). Using literature on health technology assessment, rationing and reimbursement in healthcare, we identified seven alternative frameworks for simultaneous decisions about (dis)investment and proposed modifications to deal with multiple resource constraints. These frameworks comprised constrained optimisation; cost-effectiveness league table; 'step-in-the-right-direction' approach; heuristics based on effective gradients; weighted cost-effectiveness ratios; multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA); and programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). We used numerical examples to demonstrate how five of these alternative frameworks would operate. The modified frameworks we propose could be used in local commissioning and/or health technology assessment to supplement standard cost-utility analysis for interventions that have large budget impact and/or are subject to additional constraints.

Editor's Choice - Short Term Cost Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation and High Ligation and Stripping for Great Saphenous Vein Incompetence

OBJECTIVE

Superficial venous incompetence (SVI) is a common disease that causes significant quality of life (QoL) impairment. There is a need for more health economic evaluations of SVI treatment. The aim of this study was to perform a cost effectiveness analysis in patients with great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence comparing radiofrequency ablation (RFA), high ligation and stripping (HL/S), and no treatment or conservative treatment with one year follow up.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trial economic analysis from an ongoing trial; 143 patients (156 limbs) with GSV incompetence (CEAP clinical class 2 - 6) were included. Treatment was performed with RFA or HL/S. Follow up was performed up to one year using duplex ultrasound, revised venous clinical severity score (r-VCSS), Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), and EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L).

RESULTS

Seventy-eight limbs were treated with RFA and HL/S respectively. No treatment or conservative treatment was assumed to have zero in treatment cost and no treatment benefit. In the RFA group, one limb had reflux in the GSV after one month and three limbs after one year. In HL/S, two limbs had remaining reflux in the treated area at one month and one year. Both disease severity (r-VCSS, p = .004) and QoL (AVVQ, p = .021 and EQ-5D-3L, p = .028) were significantly improved over time. The QALY gain was 0.21 for RFA and 0.17 for HL/S. The cost per patient was calculated as €1 292 for RFA and €2 303 for HL/S. The cost per QALY (compared with no treatment or conservative treatment) was €6 155 for RFA and €13 549 for HL/S. With added cost for days absent from work the cost per QALY was €7 358 for RFA and €24 197 for HL/S. The cost per QALY for both methods was well below the threshold suggested by Swedish National Board of Health.

CONCLUSION

RFA is more cost effective than HL/S and no treatment or conservative treatment at one year follow up.

Systematic Review of the Relative Social Value of Child and Adult Health

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to synthesise knowledge on the relative social value of child and adult health.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative studies that evaluated the willingness of the public to prioritise treatments for children over adults were included. A search to September 2023 was undertaken. Completeness of reporting was assessed using a checklist derived from Johnston et al. Findings were tabulated by study type (matching/person trade-off, discrete choice experiment, willingness to pay, opinion survey or qualitative). Evidence in favour of children was considered in total, by length or quality of life, methodology and respondent characteristics.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight studies were included; willingness to pay (n = 9), matching/person trade-off (n = 12), discrete choice experiments (n = 29), opinion surveys (n = 22) and qualitative (n = 16), with one study simultaneously included as an opinion survey. From 88 studies, 81 results could be ascertained. Across all studies irrespective of method or other characteristics, 42 findings supported prioritising children, while 12 provided evidence favouring adults in preference to children. The remainder supported equal prioritisation or found diverse or unclear views. Of those studies considering prioritisation within the under 18 years of age group, nine findings favoured older children over younger children (including for life saving interventions), six favoured younger children and five found diverse views.

CONCLUSIONS

The balance of evidence suggests the general public favours prioritising children over adults, but this view was not found across all studies. There are research gaps in understanding the public's views on the value of health gains to very young children and the motivation behind the public's views on the value of child relative to adult health gains.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review is registered at PROSPERO number: CRD42021244593. There were two amendments to the protocol: (1) some additional search terms were added to the search strategy prior to screening to ensure coverage and (2) a more formal quality assessment was added to the process at the data extraction stage. This assessment had not been identified at the protocol writing stage.

Psychosocial Interventions for Children and Young People With Visible Differences Resulting From Appearance-Altering Conditions, Injury, or Treatment Effects: An Updated Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Children and young people with visible differences can experience psychosocial difficulties, such as anxiety and teasing by others. Interventions targeting difficulties have previously been reviewed by Jenkinson et al. This review aimed to identify and critically assess recent studies evaluating the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for children and young people with visible differences on psychosocial wellbeing, self-esteem, and social experiences and compare the findings with Jenkinson et al. using a replacement review process.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria are as follows: studies with participants aged 0-18 years with visible differences; investigating a psychosocial intervention; including comparison with an alternative intervention, control group, or pre- and post-intervention; and including a quantitative measure assessed pre- and post-intervention. Exclusion criteria are as follows: participants with body dysmorphic disorder or appearance changes due to eating disorders or obesity and studies not written in English. MEDLINE, AMED, and PsycInfo were searched and grey literature was included. Results were reviewed against eligibility criteria, data were extracted, and studies were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool.

RESULTS

Using Jenkinson et al. as one source of studies, 24 studies were included evaluating a range of interventions such as social interaction skills training, residential social camps, and cognitive behavioral therapy. Risk of bias was high in 20 studies and of some concern in four studies.

CONCLUSION

There is some evidence of the effectiveness of hypnotherapy, a relaxation response resiliency program, integrative body-mind-spirit group, and therapeutic patient education, but more rigorous research is needed to confirm their impact on psychosocial outcomes.

Qualitative assessment of the impact of restricting number of drug treatments for rheumatoid arthritis: Experience of prescribers and patients

INTRODUCTION

In 2020, almost half of all Clinical Commissioning Groups in England were restricting the number of higher cost drugs (HCDs) that could be prescribed for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) before an Individual Funding Request was required. We were interested in qualitatively exploring the experiences of prescribers affected by these restrictions and the experiences of patients who required four or more of these drugs.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with five prescribers in restricted areas and six patients from our own service who had received four or more HCDs. The interviews were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Prescribers reported feeling distressed and frustrated by the unsatisfactory service they were constrained to provide. Some prescribers continued partially effective treatments in order not to run out of options. They did not find Individual Funding Requests or the Blueteq High Cost Drug (HCD) System helpful in the management of these patients. The Blueteq HCD System is an electronic platform that allows health managers to monitor the prescribing of high-cost medicines and manage the complexities associated with their use. Patients expressed severe distress at the prospect of running out of options and anxiety around the process of gaining approval for their next treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Restricting drugs for RA by the number which can be prescribed results in persistence with partially effective treatments, which is unsatisfactory for prescribers and patients, further it does not save money. Patients need to travel in their journey with RA and be able to try the next drug even though they know that it may not work.

The reimbursement decision speed for oncology new drugs in China and its determinant factors

Introduction

China has initiated national price negotiations to improve access to innovative drugs. Learning the factors that contributed to the time gap from marketing authorization to reimbursement leads to more clarity to decision-making, which remains under-researched in China.

Methods

We collected new oncology drug approvals that were marketed before 30 Jun 2022, using the Listed Drug Database of the Chinese drug agency. Major information of each approval was obtained from the published review report, including the first approval region (China or the US) and the receipt of expedited review pathways (priority review and conditional approval). The reimbursement lists issued by China National Healthcare Security Administration from 2015 to 2023 were used to determine the reimbursement status of drugs. The duration from marketing authorization to reimbursement was defined as the reimbursement decision speed, and the Cox regression was performed to explore the underlying factors.

Results

A total of 186 oncology approvals were included. More than half of the approvals qualified for reimbursement (110[59.14%]), and the median reimbursement decision speed was accelerated from 540.5 days in the third-round negotiation to 448 days in the seventh-round. Domestic new drugs had a higher probability of being adopted by the Chinese payer than drugs developed by foreign companies (adjusted HR = 3.73, 95% CI 2.42 to 5.75; P < 0.001). Furthermore, new drug applications receiving the regular review pathway were more likely to be reimbursed (adjusted HR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.08; P = 0.020) compared to those approved under the conditional approval pathway.

Discussion

These findings indicate that the Chinese government is actively working toward improving access to new oncology drugs. The faster reimbursement decision speed for domestic drugs might be attributed to their pricing advantages and the regulator's efforts to stimulate innovation in the domestic pharmaceutical industry. However, concerns about the uncertainty in drug benefits can affect the reimbursement decision-making, which suggests the delicate tradeoff between drug accessibility and risk involved in the reimbursement process.

Comparative Assessment of Reimbursement Recommendations by NICE and HAS for Oncology New Medicines Indicated for the Treatment of Solid Tumors from 2015 to 2021

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare reimbursement recommendations by the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the French National Authority for Health (Haute Autorité de Santé; HAS) for oncology new medicines indicated for the treatment of solid tumors.

METHODS

Public assessment reports published on NICE and HAS Web sites between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2021, describing appraisals for public reimbursement for oncology new medicines indicated for the treatment of solid tumors were searched and systematically reviewed. Biosimilars and generic drugs were excluded from the analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 119 public assessment reports published by NICE and 134 by HAS were identified, with 101 interventions assessed by both agencies. Of 101, 38 (38%) interventions received similar recommendations, 38 (38%) were recommended for different populations, and 25 (25%) were endorsed by one agency but rejected by the other. The main reason NICE would not recommend a drug was due to lack of cost-effectiveness, whereas HAS would primarily reject a drug on the grounds of insufficient clinical evidence.

CONCLUSION

The major divergence between agencies is the key criterion used for reimbursement recommendations. NICE mainly considers cost-effectiveness, whereas HAS primarily focuses on the clinical value of interventions. This contributes to the variability in reimbursement recommendations and leads to differential access to oncology new medicines indicated for the treatment of solid tumors among patients in France, and England and Wales.

HIGHLIGHTS

Both the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the National Authority for Health (Haute Autorité de Santé; HAS) have established formal health technology assessment (HTA) processes and offer universal public health care coverage. However, both agencies diverge in the weight given to different elements of evidence during HTA evaluations. NICE uses cost-effectiveness as key criterion for recommendations on drug reimbursement, while HAS mostly limits its assessment to clinical value.For oncology new medicines indicated for treating solid tumors between 2015 and 2021, recommendations differed 62% of the time between NICE and HAS, primarily due to the distinct key decision-making criteria each HTA agency uses.For 4 interventions not endorsed by NICE, HAS saw these drugs as providing a substantial enhancement in clinical value over existing treatments, potentially providing an edge in price negotiations. Conversely, NICE deemed these drugs as not delivering adequate value for money in comparison with current therapies.A key difference between the 2 agencies is HAS's insistence on methodological rigor in efficacy results, compared with NICE's more flexible approach, considering descriptive efficacy results in cost-effectiveness modeling.

Health technology assessment criteria as drivers of coverage with managed entry agreements: a case study of cancer medicines in four countries

BACKGROUND

Managed entry agreements (MEAs) continue to emerge in health technology assessment (HTA)-based decision-making, to address evidentiary uncertainties arising therein. Evidence on the HTA criteria that influence MEAs' uptake remains scarce. This study explores the HTA criteria that determine (i) if an HTA funding decision will be listed with conditions (LWC) other than a MEA, or with a MEA as a condition (LWCMEA), and ii) the MEA type implemented (i.e., financial, outcomes based, or combination).

METHODS

HTA reports of all oncology medicines approved since 2009 in Australia, England, Scotland, and Sweden were searched to capture the clinical/economic evidence uncertainties raised in the decision-making process, the Social Value Judgements (SVJs) considered therein and the final coverage decision. Binary and multinomial logit models captured the probability (odds ratio (OR)) of a coverage decision being LWCMEA vs. LWC, and of the MEA being financial, outcomes based, or combination, based on the HTA criteria studied.

RESULTS

23 (12%) LWC and 163 (88%) LWCMEA decisions were identified; 136 (83.4%) comprised financial, 10 (6.2%) outcomes based and 17 (10.4%) combination MEAs. LWCMEA decisions were driven by economic model utilities' uncertainties (7.16 < OR < 26.7, p < .05), and the innovation (8.5 < OR < 11.7, p < .05) SVJ. Outcomes based contracts were influenced by clinical evidence (OR = 69.2, p < .05) and relevance to clinical practice (OR = 26.4, p < .05) uncertainties, and rarity (OR = 46.2, p < .05) and severity (OR = 23.3, p < .05) SVJs. Financial MEAs were influenced by innovation (8.9 < OR < 9.3, p < .05) and societal impact (OR = 17.7, p < .0001) SVJs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an empirical framework on the HTA criteria that shape payers' preferences in funding with MEAs, when faced with uncertainty.

Cost-effectiveness and willing-to-pay thresholds for vertebral augmentation of osteoporotic vertebral fractures, what are they based on: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Although there is substantial clinical evidence on the safety and effectiveness of vertebral augmentation for osteoporotic vertebral fractures, cost-effectiveness is less well known. The objective of this study is to provide a systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies and policy-based willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds for different vertebral augmentation (VA) procedures, vertebroplasty (VP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BK), for osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs).

DESIGN

A systematic review targeting cost-effectiveness studies of VA procedures for OVFs.

DATA SOURCES

Six bibliographic databases were searched from inception up to May 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Studies were eligible if meeting all predefined criteria: (1) VP or BK intervention, (2) OVFs and (3) cost-effectiveness study. Articles not written in English, abstracts, editorials, reviews and those reporting only cost data were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Information was extracted on study characteristics, cost-effective estimates, summary decisions and payer WTP thresholds. Incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) was the main outcome measure. Studies were summarised by a structured narrative synthesis organised by comparisons with conservative management (CM). Two independent reviewers assessed the quality (risk of bias) of the systematic review and cost-effectiveness studies by peer-reviewed checklists.

RESULTS

We identified 520 references through database searching and 501 were excluded as ineligible by titles and abstract. Ten reports were identified as eligible from 19 full-text reviews. ICER for VP versus CM evaluated as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) ranged from €22 685 (*US$33 395) in Netherlands to £-2240 (*US$-3273), a cost-saving in the UK. ICERs for BK versus CM ranged from £2706 (*US$3954) in UK to kr600 000 (*US$90 910) in Sweden. ICERs were within payer WTP thresholds for a QALY based on historical benchmarks.

CONCLUSIONS

Both VP and BK were judged cost-effective alternatives to CM for OVFs in economic studies and were within WTP thresholds in multiple healthcare settings.

Health Technology Assessment-Informed Decision Making by the Federal Joint Committee/Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care in Germany and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England: The Role of Budget Impact

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to test (official) evaluation criteria including the potential role of budget impact (BI) on health technology assessment (HTA) outcomes published by the Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss [GBA]) and the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen [IQWiG]) in Germany as well as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England.

METHODS

Data were extracted from all publicly available GBA decisions and IQWiG assessments as well as NICE single technology appraisals between January 2011 and June 2018, and information with regard to evaluation criteria used by these agencies was collected. Data were analyzed using logistic regression to estimate the effect of the BI on the HTA outcomes while controlling for criteria used by GBA/IQWiG and NICE.

RESULTS

NICE recommendations are largely driven by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and, if applicable, by end-of-life criteria (P < .01). While IQWiG assessments are significantly affected by the availability of randomized controlled trials and patient-relevant endpoints (P < .01), GBA appraisals primarily focus on endpoints (P < .01). The BI correlated with NICE single technology appraisals (inverted-U relationship, P < .1) and IQWiG recommendations (increasing linear relationship, P < .05), but not with GBA decisions (P > .1). Nevertheless, given that IQWiG assessments seem to be more rigorous than GBA appraisals regarding the consideration of evidence-based evaluation criteria, decisions by GBA might be negatively associated with the BI.

CONCLUSIONS

Results reveal that GBA/IQWiG and NICE follow their official evaluation criteria consistently. After controlling for all significant variables, the BI seems to have an (independent) effect on HTA outcomes as well.

Algorithms and heuristics of health technology assessments: A retrospective analysis of factors associated with HTA outcomes for new drugs across seven OECD countries

CONTEXT

Positive health technology assessment (HTA) outcomes can have important implications for equity, efficiency and timely patient access to novel therapies. Several outcomes and dimensions of benefit beyond utility feed into HTA processes.

OBJECTIVE

We analyse a proprietary dataset of HTA outcomes in 7 countries, to (a) test whether HTA decision-making is grounded in welfarist or extra-welfarist approaches; and (b) empirically determine the factors associated with positive HTA outcomes, the time to achieve these and establish the magnitude of inter-country differences in assessment processes.

METHODS

Data were extracted from publicly available HTA reports on drugs that received marketing authorisation between 2009 and 2018 (N = 1415). The outcomes of interest were the probability of positive HTA outcomes and the time-to-HTA outcome; these were examined with respect to clinical, regulatory, product- and disease-related, evidence uncertainty and contextual variables. Econometric models utilising survival analysis and multinomial logistic regression were specified.

FINDINGS

Positive HTA outcomes accounted for 87.3% of the sample (n = 1235), of which 71% (n = 1004) were restricted. Drugs with positive HTA outcomes were subject to clinical restrictions (n = 652, 46%), financial risk-sharing (n = 439, 31%) or had been rejected at least once (n = 282, 20%). Significant predictors of positive HTA outcomes were orphan drugs with cancer indications, high quality of evidence linked to clinical and economic evidence uncertainties which had been overcome, and contextual considerations, particularly innovativeness and unmet need. Comparative analyses revealed systematic differences between countries in their propensity to accept the same drugs, particularly oncology and orphan drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results are contextual and reinforce arguments in favour of explicitly accounting for social value judgements, establishing separate assessment frameworks for highly uncertain products, adopting risk mitigation strategies for novel therapies with early phase evidence, and sharing of HTA practices across settings. Lastly, HTA agencies have adopted an extra-welfarist approach to value assessment and resource allocation.

HTA Barriers for Conditional Approval Drugs

BACKGROUND

Conditional approval pathways facilitate accelerated marketing authorisation based on immature clinical evidence for drugs that address an unmet medical need in a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition. Lowering evidence requirements for marketing authorisation results in higher clinical uncertainty, which may present challenges for the health technology assessment (HTA) of these products.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to assess whether conditionally approved drugs face higher probabilities of HTA rejection or delays in HTA approval relative to drugs with standard marketing authorisation.

METHODS

This paper adopts a mixed-methods approach to provide a meta-analysis of HTA outcomes across 80 drug-indication pairs in France, England, Scotland and Canada. Differences in the characteristics (i.e. disease rarity and clinical trial design) of conditionally approved drugs and drugs with standard marketing authorisation and drivers of HTA outcomes are assessed through logistics regressions. Delays in HTA approval are assessed through a survival analysis.

RESULTS

Relative to standard approval drugs, conditionally approved drugs are less likely to include phase III trial designs, less likely to include clinical endpoints and less likely to include an active comparator. Uncertainties in clinical and economic evidence are raised more frequently by HTA agencies for conditionally approved drugs, which have a marginally lower probability of receiving HTA approval relative to drugs with standard approval. Conditionally approved drugs face moderate delays (an average of 6 months) in receiving HTA approval relative to standard approval drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, conditionally approved drugs likely face increased barriers at the HTA level.

Long Term Results of a Randomised Trial of Stenting of the Superficial Femoral Artery for Intermittent Claudication

OBJECTIVE

Primary stenting of the superficial femoral artery (SFA) in intermittent claudication (IC) has been shown to increase health related quality of life (HRQoL) after 12 and 24 months. An extended follow up of HRQoL 36 and 60 months after randomisation is presented.

METHODS

A multicentre randomised controlled trial was conducted at seven vascular clinics in Sweden between 2010 and 2020. One hundred patients randomised to either primary stenting and best medical treatment (BMT; n = 48) or BMT alone (n = 52) were followed for 60 months. HRQoL, assessed by the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and EuroQoL 5 dimensions (EQ5D) 36 and 60 months after randomisation, was the primary outcome. Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) score, re-interventions, progression to chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI), amputation, and death were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

At the 36 month follow up, the stent group (n = 32) had statistically significantly better scores in the SF-36 domain "Role Physical" (p = .023) and the Physical Component Summary (p = .032) compared with the control group (n = 30); however, there was no statistically significant difference in EQ5D scores (p = .52). WIQ was statistically significantly better in the stent group compared with the control group (p = .029) at 36 months. At the 60 month follow up, no statistically significant difference in HRQoL was seen between patients in the stent (n = 31) and control groups (n = 32). Crossover from the control group to the stent group was 25% at 60 months. There were no differences in progression to CLTI, amputation (2.1% vs. 1.9%), or mortality (14.6% vs. 15.4%) between groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with IC caused by isolated SFA lesions, primary stenting conferred benefits to HRQoL until 36 months from treatment vs. BMT alone, but these benefits were no longer detectable at 60 months, where a high crossover rate affected the power of the final analysis.

The reimbursement process in three national healthcare systems: variation in time to reimbursement of pembrolizumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

In this article, we focus on the reimbursement process, and as an example, characterize the time to reimbursement of pembrolizumab, a PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor for treatment of metastatic NSCLC from publicly available websites, in three different healthcare systems: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) in Australia, and the National Advisory Committee for the Basket of Health Services in Israel, all who have publicly funded health systems which include drug coverage. Our study found that there are substantial differences in time to reimbursement of pembrolizumab for the same conditions in different countries, with NICE and The National Advisory Committee for the Basket of Health Services in Israel approving one condition at the same time, Israel approving two conditions earlier than NICE, and PBAC lagging behind for every condition. These differences could be due to the differences in health policy systems and the many factors that affect reimbursement. Comparing the reimbursement process between different countries can highlight the challenges facing their health systems in early adoption of new treatments.

Effects of different psychological interventions on quality of life and remission rate in patients with acute leukemia receiving chemotherapy: A randomized controlled trial

Aims

This study aimed to examine and compare different psychological intervention effects on the quality of life (QoL) and remission rates of patients with acute leukemia receiving chemotherapy.

Methods

A total of 180 participants were randomly divided into a cognitive intervention group, a progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) group, a cognitive intervention plus PMR group, and a usual care control group. QoL via the Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 and remission rate were assessed at baseline and immediate post-intervention. A Generalized Linear Mixed Model was used for statistical analysis. Cost-effectiveness analysis with the value of the Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio was conducted to realize the economic evaluation of psychological interventions.

Results

The total score of QoL and its most dimensions were significantly improved for participants in the intervention groups compared with the control group. The cognitive intervention plus PMR intervention was the most effective concerning QoL with cost-effectiveness. No significant improvements were indicated in participants' remission rates among the groups.

Conclusion

The cognitive intervention plus PMR intervention is the most effective in improving QoL with cost-effectiveness among patients with acute leukemia receiving chemotherapy. More rigorous randomized controlled trials with multiple follow-up points are suggested to clarify the psychological interventions on remission rates in this population.

The cost-effectiveness of unilateral magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound in comparison with unilateral deep brain stimulation for the treatment of medically refractory essential tremor in England

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to ascertain the cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) for the treatment of medically refractory Essential Tremor (mrET) in England. Essential Tremor (ET) is the most common movement disorder affecting approximately 1 million in the UK causing considerable societal impact affecting patients, carers and the wider healthservice. Medical treatment has mixed efficacy, with approximately 25-55% of ET medication refractory. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a proven neurosurgical treatment; however, the risks of surgery and anaesthesia mean some patients are ineligible. MRgFUS is an emerging noninvasive technique that causes tremor suppression by thermal ablation of tremor-sensitive brain tissue. Several international clinical trials have demonstrated MRgFUS is safe and clinically effective; however, to-date no cost-effectiveness study has been performed in Europe.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to assess two subpopulations of mrET - those eligible and those ineligible for neurosurgery - in the context specific to England and its healthcare system. For those eligible for neurosurgery, MRgFUS was compared to DBS, the current standard treatment. For those ineligible for neurosurgery, MRgFUS was compared to treatment with medication alone. The model calculated the Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with appropriate sensitivity and scenario analyses.

RESULTS

For those eligible for neurosurgery: In the model base case, the MRgFUS was economically dominant compared to DBS; MRgFUS was less costly (£19,779 vs £62,348) and more effective generating 0.03 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient (3.71 vs 3.68) over the 5-year time horizon.For those ineligible for neurosurgery: In the model base case, MRgFUS cost over £16,000 per patient more than medication alone (£19,779 vs £62,348) but yielded 0.77 additional QALYs per patient(3.71 vs 2.95), producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £20,851 per QALY. This ICER of £20,851 per QALY falls within the National Institute for Clinical Excellence's (NICE) willingness to pay threshold (WTP) of 20,000-30,000 demonstrating the cost-effectiveness profile of MRgFUS.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the favourable cost-effectiveness profile of MRgFUS for the treatment of mrET in England; in both patients suitable and not suitable for neurosurgery.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The introduction of MRgFUS as a widely available ET treatment in UK is currently undergoing the necessary stages of regulatory approval. As the first European study, these favourable cost-effectiveness outcomes (notably the model base case ICER falling within NICE's WTP) can provide a basis for future commissioning of brain MRgFUS treatments in the UK, Europe and globally.

The normative grounds for NICE decision-making: a narrative cross-disciplinary review of empirical studies

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is the UK's primary health care priority-setter, responsible for advising the National Health Service on its adoption of health technologies. The normative basis for NICE's advice has long been the subject of public and academic interest, but the existing literature does not include any comprehensive summary of the factors observed to have substantively shaped NICE's recommendations. The current review addresses this gap by bringing together 29 studies that have explored NICE decision-making from different disciplinary perspectives, using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods. It finds that although cost-effectiveness has historically played a central role in NICE decision-making, 10 other factors (uncertainty, budget impact, clinical need, innovation, rarity, age, cause of disease, wider societal impacts, stakeholder influence and process factors) are also demonstrably influential and interact with one another in ways that are not well understood. The review also highlights an over-representation in the literature of appraisals conducted prior to 2009, according to methods that have since been superseded. It suggests that this may present a misleading view of the importance of allocative efficiency to NICE's current approach and illustrates the need for further up-to-date research into the normative grounds for NICE's decisions.

Assessment of the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence in the reimbursement decisions of new cancer drugs

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence supporting reimbursement decisions of new cancer drugs and analyze the influence of trial characteristics and the cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) on the likelihood of reimbursement in Sweden.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from all appraisal dossiers for new cancer drugs seeking reimbursement in Sweden and claiming added therapeutical value between the years 2010 and 2020. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and logistic regression models were also used with the cost per QALY, study design, comparator, and evidence on final outcomes in the clinical trials as predictors of reimbursement.

RESULTS

All 60 included appraisals were based on trial evidence that assessed at least one final outcome (overall survival [OS] or quality of life [QoL]), although rarely as a primary outcome. Of the appraisals with a final decision (n = 58), 79% were approved for reimbursement. Among the reimbursed drugs, only half had trial evidence demonstrating improved OS or QoL. Only one drug had trial evidence supporting improvements in both OS and QoL. The average cost per QALY for reimbursed cancer drugs was estimated to be 748 560 SEK (€73 583). A higher cost per QALY was found to decrease the likelihood of reimbursement by 9.4% for every 100 000 SEK (€9830) higher cost per QALY (P = 0.03). For cost-effectiveness models without direct evidence of improvements in final outcomes, a larger QALY gain was observed compared with those with evidence mainly relying on intermediate and surrogate outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There are substantial uncertainties in the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence underlying reimbursement decisions of new cancer drugs. Decision makers should be cautious of the limited evidence on patient-centered outcomes and the implications of allocating resources to expensive treatments with uncertain value for money.

Factors Influencing Outcome Post–Radium-223 Dichloride in Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Review of Some Real-World Challenges

Aim Radium-223 has been the first-approved targeted Alpha therapy agent. We retrospectively assessed different factors influencing the overall survival (OS) and patient management.

Setting and Design Thirty-two metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients' hematological parameters, number of cycles, performance status, and toxicities were evaluated for OS. Radium 223 dichloride (Radium-223) was administered every 4 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. Primary and secondary end points were OS, progression free survival (PFS), therapy toxicities, change in performance status, biochemical response, and skeletal-related events (SREs).

Materials and Methods Patients' median age was 77 years (range: 57–90 years) and median follow-up was 399 days (range: 5–1,761 days). A total of 163 cycles were administered in 32 patients, with 4 or less cycles in 8 patients (25%) and 5 or more cycles in 24 patients (75%). Among eight patients with 4 or less cycles, three patients died, of which two patients died due to neutropenic sepsis.

Statistical Analysis Mann–Whitney test was used to compare the cycle groups; Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to see the relation of different variables with OS. Log rank test was used for group comparison while Kaplan–Meier survivorship was used for OS.

Results Statistical correlation was seen between the number of cycles (p=0.037) and hemoglobin (p=0.028). Kaplan–Meier OS (p=0.038) was correlated with the number of cycles (≤ 4 cycles and ≥ 5 cycles). OS was 173 days in patients with one to four cycles, 226 days in five cycles, and 493 days in six cycles. Myelosuppression leading to stopping of full six cycles was seen in 7 of 32 patients (22%) and significantly correlated to inferior OS (p=0.048).

Conclusion Higher number of Radium-223 cycles was seen to be associated with better OS. Prior myelosuppression was associated with poor OS. Patients with better hematological profile were more likely to complete the maximum number of the cycles with a better OS.

Cryostripping-A Safe and Efficient Alternative Procedure in Chronic Venous Disease Treatment

Objective: The presentation of cryostripping as an alternative procedure useful in venous insufficiency treatment. Methods: This retrospective study presents the results of 1087 operated patients, including follow-ups. Cryostripping was practised in all mentioned cases. Patient follow-up was performed at one week, one month, and six months postoperatively by clinical examination, Doppler ultrasonography, CIVIQ-20 and r-VCSS questionnaires. Outcomes, complications, surgery and hospitalisation period, and benefits of the method were analysed. Results: Generally, good functional and aesthetic outcomes defined by clinical symptom remission, absence of insufficient veins on Doppler ultrasonography, QoL and r-VCSS improvement (p < 0.001) were obtained. Complications included bruising ⌀ < 2 cm (32.38%), haematoma (8.92%), saphenous nerve injury (3.49%), deep vein thrombosis (0.18%). Recurrence was noted in 2.94% cases. Mean duration of procedure was 42 ± 12.5 min, mean duration of hospitalisation was 1.05 ± 0.36 days. Compared to high ligation and conventional stripping, the postoperative complications were reduced; compared to other minimally invasive procedures, the costs were reduced. Conclusions: Cryostripping seems to combine the radicality and efficacy of the stripping technique with the cosmetic advantage of the endothermal procedures, being an effective therapeutic method perfectly adapted to the economic conditions of middle-income countries health system. It is also suitable as day-case surgery.

Impact of Managed Entry Agreements on availability of and timely access to medicines: an ex-post evaluation of agreements implemented for oncology therapies in four countries

BACKGROUND

Despite the increased utilisation of Managed Entry Agreements (MEAs), empirical studies assessing their impact on achieving better access to medicines remains scarce. In this study we evaluated the role of MEAs on enhancing availability of and timely access to a sample of oncology medicines that had received at least one prior rejection from reimbursement.

METHODS

Funding decisions and their respective timelines for all oncology medicines approved between 2009 and 2018 in Australia, England, Scotland and Sweden were studied. A number of binary logit models captured the probability (Odds ratio (OR)) of a previous coverage rejection being reversed to positive after resubmission with vs. without a MEA. Gamma generalised linear models were used to understand if there is any association between time to final funding decision and the presence of MEA, among other decision-making variables, and if so, the strength and direction of this association (Beta coefficient (B)).

RESULTS

Of the 59 previously rejected medicine-indication pairs studied, 88.2% (n = 45) received a favourable decision after resubmission with MEA vs. 11.8% (n = 6) without. Average time from original submission to final funding decision was 404 (± 254) and 452 (± 364) days for submissions without vs. with MEA respectively. Resubmissions with a MEA had a higher likelihood of receiving a favourable funding decision compared to those without MEA (43.36 < OR < 202, p < 0.05), although approval specifically with an outcomes-based agreement was associated with an increase in the time to final funding decision (B = 0.89, p < 0.01). A statistically significant decrease in time to final funding decision was observed for resubmissions in Australia and Scotland compared to England and Sweden, and for resubmissions with a clinically relevant instead of a surrogate endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

MEAs can improve availability of medicines by increasing the likelihood of reimbursement for medicines that would have otherwise remained rejected from reimbursement due to their evidentiary uncertainties. Nevertheless, approval with a MEA can increase the time to final funding decision, while the true, added value for patients and healthcare systems of the interventions approved with MEAs in comparison to other available interventions remains unknown.

Evidence of Chinese Herbal Medicine Use From an Economic Perspective: A Systematic Review of Pharmacoeconomics Studies Over Two Decades

Objectives: Pharmacoeconomics evaluation (PE) is increasingly used in the healthcare decision-making process in China. Little is known about PE conducted in Chinese Herbal Medicines (CHMs). We aimed to systematically review trends, characteristics, and quality of PE of CHMS. Methods: We systematically searched both Chinese (CNKI, WanFang, and VIP) and English (Pubmed) databases. Studies were included if they were PE studies comparing both costs and outcomes between two or more interventions published in Chinese or English. Assessment of the quality of studies was conducted using the Quality of Health Economic Analyses (QHES) instrument. T-test and Chi-square tests were used to compare the studies before and after the first edition of China Guidelines for PE published in 2011, and between studies published in Chinese and English. Results: A total of 201 articles were included. There was an increasing trend of PE studies on CHMs during the study period. The top three studied diseases were central nervous system (CNS), mental, and behavioral disorders; cardiovascular diseases; and blood, immune and endocrine diseases. The average QHES score for the included studies was 63.37. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) accounted for the majority (76.6%) of the included studies. Only a quarter of the articles (27.4%) were funded, and there were significantly more studies funded after the publication of China guidelines for PE. About 96.5% of studies did not specify evaluation perspectives and 89.6% of studies had a sample size of less than 300. Around half of the studies (55%) used incremental analysis, but only a few of them considered using a threshold. Half of the studies lacked sensitivity analysis. There was no significant improvement in the quality of studies published after the publication of China Guidelines for PE, and English articles had significantly higher quality than Chinese articles. Conclusion: This study identified several problems in PE studies on CHMs, including having small sample sizes, lacking necessary research elements, and using single evaluation methods. The quality of PE studies on CHMs was not sufficient. Researchers need to understand the standardized way to conduct PE studies and improve the quality and level of PE studies on CHMs.

The cost-per-QALY threshold in England: Identifying structural uncertainty in the estimates

Introduction

There are increasing numbers of estimates of opportunity cost to inform the setting of thresholds as ceiling cost-per-quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ratios. To understand their ability to inform policy making, we need to understand the degree of uncertainty surrounding these estimates. In particular, do estimates provide sufficient certainty that the current policy "rules" or "benchmarks" need revision? Does the degree of uncertainty around those estimates mean that further evidence generation is required?

Methods

We analyse uncertainty and methods from three papers that focus on the use of data from the NHS in England to estimate opportunity cost. All estimate the impact of expenditure on mortality in cross-sectional regression analyses and then translate the mortality elasticities into cost-per-QALY thresholds using the same assumptions. All three discuss structural uncertainty around the regression analysis, and report parameter uncertainty derived from their estimated standard errors. However, only the initial, seminal, paper explores the structural uncertainty involved in moving from the regression analysis to a threshold. We discuss the elements of structural uncertainty arising from the assumptions that underpin the translation of elasticities to thresholds and seek to quantify the importance of some of the effects.

Results

We find several sets of plausible structural assumptions that would place the threshold estimates from these studies within the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) range of £20,000 to £30,000 per QALY. Heterogeneity, an additional source of uncertainty from variability, is also discussed and reported.

Discussion

Lastly, we discuss how decision uncertainty around the threshold could be reduced, setting out what sort of additional research is required, notably in improving estimates of disease burden and of the impact of health expenditure on quality of life. Given the likely value to policy makers of this research it should be a priority for health system research funding.

How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence

BACKGROUND

Various forms of value-based pricing policies for new medicines have recently been introduced in OECD countries. While these initiatives are expected to have a positive impact on societal outcomes such as availability, affordability and value for money, scientific evidence on this impact is scarce due to confidential agreements.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the impact of value-based policy interventions in price negotiations on patient benefit in an experimental setting.

METHODS

An online experiment was conducted (n = 269). Participants were randomly assigned into the active role of either a buyer or seller in two intervention groups (cost-benefit, risk-sharing) and one control group. Decisions had real monetary consequences on other participants and through donations to a patient association.

RESULTS

Patient access, benefit and value for money were higher in the cost-benefit group than in the risk-sharing group. An available alternative to the agreement led to higher price offers. This effect was weaker in the cost-benefit group.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of price negotiations on patient benefit depend on the alternatives available for failed or delayed negotiations. A shared but voluntary valuation framework might increase patient access, benefit, and value for money. The cost containment effect of risk-sharing agreements may be offset by the negative impact on overall patient benefit. Further development of the approach could provide support for policy design of pharmaceutical pricing regulations.

What Aspects of Illness Influence Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK

BACKGROUND

Decisions on funding new healthcare technologies assume that all health improvements are valued equally. However, public reaction to health technology assessment (HTA) decisions suggests there are health attributes that matter deeply to them but are not currently accounted for in the assessment process. We aimed to determine the relative importance of attributes of illness that influence the value placed on alleviating that illness.

METHOD

We conducted a discrete choice experiment survey that presented general public respondents with 15 funding decisions between hypothetical health conditions. The conditions were defined by five attributes that characterise serious illnesses, plus the health gain from treatment. Respondent preferences were modelled using conditional logistic regression and latent class analysis.

RESULTS

905 members of the UK public completed the survey in November 2017. Respondents generally preferred to provide treatments for conditions with 'better' characteristics. The exception was treatment availability, where respondents preferred to provide treatments for conditions where there is no current treatment, and were prepared to accept lower overall health gain to do so. A subgroup of respondents preferred to prioritise 'worse' health states.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests a preference among the UK public for treating an unmet need; however, it does not suggest a preference for prioritising other distressing aspects of health conditions, such as limited life expectancy, or where patients are reliant on care. Our results are not consistent with the features currently prioritised in UK HTA processes, and the preference heterogeneity we identify presents a major challenge for developing broadly acceptable policy.

Non-Price-Related Determinants of Value and Access for Novel Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Treatments: A Cross-Country Review of HTA Decision Making

INTRODUCTION

Access and funding for newly approved treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are often dependent on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) involving cost-effectiveness analysis. Whilst methods used by HTA agencies share many similarities, final decisions may differ. This may be the result, not just of price considerations, but also of variation in value judgements by different agencies. The aim of this study was to review international HTA evaluations to identify determinants of value and access for NSCLC treatments.

METHODS

A targeted review and analysis was undertaken of published HTAs for NSCLC across HTA agencies in six countries (Australia, Canada, England, France, Ireland and Scotland). Analysis of extracted data consisted of three stages: descriptive analysis, bivariate analysis and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

The analysis included 163 HTAs that assessed oncological treatments for NSCLC from 2003 to 2019. The majority of HTA decisions (67.5%) were positive. However, some evidence of heterogeneity in HTA decisions and the factors informing them were identified. The most influential factors included in the multivariate model related to the HTA agency conducting the appraisal, the year of market authorisation, treatment type and the line of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Heterogenous decision-making frameworks can present a challenge to developing HTA submissions. This research contributes to understanding decision-making factors and why countries make different decisions.

Optimal surveillance strategies for patients with stage 1 cutaneous melanoma post primary tumour excision: three systematic reviews and an economic model

BACKGROUND

Malignant melanoma is the fifth most common cancer in the UK, with rates continuing to rise, resulting in considerable burden to patients and the NHS.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of current and alternative follow-up strategies for stage IA and IB melanoma.

REVIEW METHODS

Three systematic reviews were conducted. (1) The effectiveness of surveillance strategies. Outcomes were detection of new primaries, recurrences, metastases and survival. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk-of-Bias 2.0 tool. (2) Prediction models to stratify by risk of recurrence, metastases and survival. Model performance was assessed by study-reported measures of discrimination (e.g. D-statistic, Harrel's c-statistic), calibration (e.g. the Hosmer-Lemeshow 'goodness-of-fit' test) or overall performance (e.g. Brier score, R ²). Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). (3) Diagnostic test accuracy of fine-needle biopsy and ultrasonography. Outcomes were detection of new primaries, recurrences, metastases and overall survival. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Review data and data from elsewhere were used to model the cost-effectiveness of alternative surveillance strategies and the value of further research.

RESULTS

(1) The surveillance review included one randomised controlled trial. There was no evidence of a difference in new primary or recurrence detected (risk ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 1.31). Risk of bias was considered to be of some concern. Certainty of the evidence was low. (2) Eleven risk prediction models were identified. Discrimination measures were reported for six models, with the area under the operating curve ranging from 0.59 to 0.88. Three models reported calibration measures, with coefficients of ≥ 0.88. Overall performance was reported by two models. In one, the Brier score was slightly better than the American Joint Committee on Cancer scheme score. The other reported an R ² of 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.45 to 0.49). All studies were judged to have a high risk of bias. (3) The diagnostic test accuracy review identified two studies. One study considered fine-needle biopsy and the other considered ultrasonography. The sensitivity and specificity for fine-needle biopsy were 0.94 (95% confidence interval 0.90 to 0.97) and 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.90 to 0.97), respectively. For ultrasonography, sensitivity and specificity were 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.03 to 1.00) and 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99), respectively. For the reference standards and flow and timing domains, the risk of bias was rated as being high for both studies. The cost-effectiveness results suggest that, over a lifetime, less intensive surveillance than recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence might be worthwhile. There was considerable uncertainty. Improving the diagnostic performance of cancer nurse specialists and introducing a risk prediction tool could be promising. Further research on transition probabilities between different stages of melanoma and on improving diagnostic accuracy would be of most value.

LIMITATIONS

Overall, few data of limited quality were available, and these related to earlier versions of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging. Consequently, there was considerable uncertainty in the economic evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite adoption of rigorous methods, too few data are available to justify changes to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations on surveillance. However, alternative strategies warrant further research, specifically on improving estimates of incidence, progression of recurrent disease; diagnostic accuracy and health-related quality of life; developing and evaluating risk stratification tools; and understanding patient preferences.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018086784.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol 25, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Big Data and Real-World Data based Cost-Effectiveness Studies and Decision-making Models: A Systematic Review and Analysis

Background: Big data and real-world data (RWD) have been increasingly used to measure the effectiveness and costs in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). However, the characteristics and methodologies of CEA based on big data and RWD remain unknown. The objectives of this study were to review the characteristics and methodologies of the CEA studies based on big data and RWD and to compare the characteristics and methodologies between the CEA studies with or without decision-analytic models. Methods: The literature search was conducted in Medline (Pubmed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library (as of June 2020). Full CEA studies with an incremental analysis that used big data and RWD for both effectiveness and costs written in English were included. There were no restrictions regarding publication date. Results: 70 studies on CEA using RWD (37 with decision-analytic models and 33 without) were included. The majority of the studies were published between 2011 and 2020, and the number of CEA based on RWD has been increasing over the years. Few CEA studies used big data. Pharmacological interventions were the most frequently studied intervention, and they were more frequently evaluated by the studies without decision-analytic models, while those with the model focused on treatment regimen. Compared to CEA studies using decision-analytic models, both effectiveness and costs of those using the model were more likely to be obtained from literature review. All the studies using decision-analytic models included sensitivity analyses, while four studies no using the model neither used sensitivity analysis nor controlled for confounders. Conclusion: The review shows that RWD has been increasingly applied in conducting the cost-effectiveness analysis. However, few CEA studies are based on big data. In future CEA studies using big data and RWD, it is encouraged to control confounders and to discount in long-term research when decision-analytic models are not used.

How Effective is Marginal Healthcare Expenditure? New Evidence from England for 2003/04 to 2012/13

BACKGROUND

The endogenous nature of healthcare expenditure means that instruments are often used when estimating the relationship between expenditure and mortality. Previous English studies of this relationship have largely relied on statistical tests to justify their instruments. A recent paper proposed that exogenous components of the resource allocation formula, used to distribute the national healthcare budget to local health authorities, be used as instruments.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the relationship between healthcare expenditure and mortality by disease area for England from 2003/4 to 2012/13 using exogenous elements from the resource allocation formula as instruments for expenditure. To use these disease-specific estimates to calculate the marginal cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for English NHS expenditure. To compare these estimates with those that relied on statistical tests to justify their instruments.

METHODS

The two-stage least squares estimator is used to determine the annual relationship between mortality and healthcare expenditure by disease area across 151 local authorities. These disease-specific outcome elasticities are combined with information about survival and morbidity disease burden in different disease areas to calculate the marginal cost per QALY for English National Health Service (NHS) expenditure.

RESULTS

The results suggest an annual marginal cost per QALY of between £5000 and £10,000. This is similar to that reported previously by studies that used statistical tests to justify their instruments.

CONCLUSION

These cost per QALY estimates are much lower than the threshold currently used by the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (£20,000 to £30,000) to assess whether a new pharmaceutical product should be funded by the NHS. Our estimates suggest that guidance issued by NICE is likely to do more harm than good, reducing health outcomes overall for the NHS. There may be legitimate reasons why such harms are deemed appropriate, but it is only through the type of empirical analysis in this paper that the reasons for these 'harms' are likely to be articulated and explicitly justified.

Estimating the shares of the value of branded pharmaceuticals accruing to manufacturers and to patients served by health systems

Previous studies have estimated that patients served by health systems accrue 59-98% of the value generated by new pharmaceuticals. This has led to questions about whether sufficient returns accrue to manufacturers to incentivize socially optimal levels of R&D. These studies have not, however, fully reflected the health opportunity costs imposed by payments for branded pharmaceuticals. We present a framework for estimating how the value generated by new branded pharmaceuticals is shared. We quantify value in net health effects and account for benefits and health opportunity costs in the patent period and post-patent period when generic/biosimilar products become available. We apply the framework to 12 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence appraisals and show that realized net health effects range from losses of 160%, to gains of 94%, of the potential net health benefits available. In many cases, even in the long run, the benefits of new medicines are not sufficient to offset the opportunity costs of payments to manufacturers, and approval is expected to reduce population health. This cannot be dynamically efficient as it incentivizes future innovation at prices which will also reduce population health. Further work should consider how to reflect these findings in reimbursement policies.

Necessity under construction - societal weighing rationality in the appraisal of health care technologies

Health care coverage decisions may employ many different considerations, which are brought together across two phases. The assessment phase examines the available scientific evidence, such as the cost-effectiveness, of the technology. The appraisal then contextualises this evidence to arrive at an (advised) coverage decision, but little is known about how this is done.In the Netherlands, the appraisal is set up to achieve a societal weighing and is the primary place where need- and solidarity-related ('necessity') argumentations are used. To elucidate how the Dutch appraisal committee 'constructs necessity', we analysed observations and recordings of two appraisal committee meetings at the National Health Care Institute, the corresponding documents (five), and interviews with committee members and policy makers (13 interviewees in 12 interviews), with attention to specific necessity argumentations.The Dutch appraisal committee constructs necessity in four phases: (1) allowing explicit criteria to steer the process; (2) allowing patient (representative) contributions to challenge the process; (3) bringing new argumentations in from outside and weaving them together; and (4) formulating recommendations to societal stakeholders. We argue that in these ways, the appraisal committee achieves societal weighing rationality, as the committee actively uses argumentations from society and embeds the decision outcome in society.

Health technology assessment (HTA) in England, France and Germany: what do matched drug pairs tell us about recommendations by national HTA agencies?

Aims: To explore health technology assessment (HTA) outcomes of matched drug pairs by national agencies in Germany (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, GBA), France (Haute Autorité de Santé, HAS) and England and Wales (NICE). Methods: We considered published GBA decisions, HAS reports and NICE guidance from January 2011 to June 2018. HTAs of matched pairs were compared overall, and for non-cancer and cancer drugs separately. We further analyzed the role of additional attributes related to cancer therapies. Results: Matched pairs show higher concordance for GBA/HAS than for GBA/NICE and HAS/NICE. Overall, NICE evaluated technologies more favorably than GBA and HAS. GBA appraisals of cancer drugs, however, tended to be more positive than cancer-related recommendations by NICE and HAS. Conclusion: The findings indicate substantial variations in HTAs, although cancer-related outcomes seem to diverge less than non-cancer results.

Evaluating cost-effectiveness in the management of neuroendocrine neoplasms

The rapid evolution of novel, costly therapies for neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN) warrants formal high-quality cost-effectiveness evaluation. Costs of individual investigations and therapies are high; and examples are presented. We aimed to review the last ten years of standalone health economic evaluations in NEN. Comparing to published standards, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database were searched for health economic evaluations (HEEs) in NEN published between 2010 and October 2019. Of 12 economic evaluations, 11 considered exclusively pharmacological treatment (3 studies of SSAs, 7 studies of sunitinib, everolimus and/or 177Lu-DOTATATE and 1 study of telotristat ethyl) and 1 compared surgery with intraarterial therapy. 7 studies of pharmacological treatment had placebo or best supportive care as the only comparator. There remains a paucity of economic evaluations in NEN with the majority industry funded. Most HEEs reviewed did not meet published health economic criteria used to assess quality. Lack of cost data collected from patient populations remains a significant factor in HEEs where clinical expert opinion is still often substituted. Further research utilizing high-quality effectiveness data and rigorous applied health economic analysis is needed.

Editor's Choice - Cost Effectiveness of Primary Stenting in the Superficial Femoral Artery for Intermittent Claudication: Two Year Results of a Randomised Multicentre Trial

OBJECTIVE

Invasive treatment of intermittent claudication (IC) is commonly performed, despite limited evidence of its cost effectiveness. IC symptoms are mainly caused by atherosclerotic lesions in the superficial femoral artery (SFA), and endovascular treatment is performed frequently. The aim of this study was to investigate its cost effectiveness vs. non-invasive treatment.

METHODS

One hundred patients with IC due to lesions in the SFA were randomised to treatment with primary stenting, best medical treatment (BMT) and exercise advice (stent group), or to BMT and exercise advice alone (control group). Patients were recruited at seven hospitals in Sweden. For this analysis of cost effectiveness after 24 months, 84 patients with data on quality adjusted life years (QALY; based on the EuroQol Five Dimensions EQ-5D 3L™ questionnaire) were analysed. Patient registry and imputed cost data were used for accumulated costs regarding hospitalisation and outpatient visits.

RESULTS

The mean cost per patient was €11 060 in the stent group and €4 787 in the control group, resulting in a difference of €6 273 per patient between the groups. The difference in mean QALYs between the groups was 0.26, in favour of the stent group, which resulted in an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of € 23 785 per QALY.

CONCLUSION

The costs associated with primary stenting in the SFA for the treatment of IC were higher than for exercise advice and BMT alone. With concurrent improvement in health related quality of life, primary stenting was a cost effective treatment option according to the Swedish national guidelines (ICER < €50 000 - €70 000) and approaching the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold for willingness to pay (ICER < £20 000 - £30 000). From a cost effectiveness standpoint, primary stenting of the SFA can, in many countries, be used as an adjunct to exercise training advice, but it must be considered that successful implementation of structured exercise programmes and longer follow up may alter these findings.

Development and Critical Evaluation of a Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measure Sensitive to Binaural Hearing in Adults: The York Binaural Hearing-Related Quality-of-Life System

OBJECTIVES

The widely-used generic preference-based measures of health-related quality of life-the EuroQol Descriptive System (EQ-5D) and the Health Utilities Index (HUI3)-are limited in their response to technologies that improve hearing. The EQ-5D lacks construct validity for hearing, while the HUI3 is restricted by a ceiling effect and by using speech reception as the only evidence of the ability to hear. Consequently, neither measure consistently registers benefits from binaural hearing, such as those from bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implantation. The objectives were to test whether informants value binaural hearing, to develop a condition-specific preference-based measure sensitive to binaural hearing, to assess the psychometric properties of the new instrument, and to determine whether it meets requirements for informing judgments of cost-effectiveness: does it measure greater gains than do the generic preference-based measures, while avoiding exaggerating losses, and displaying sensitivity to side effects?

DESIGN

Three levels of function, ranging from no difficulty to great difficulty, were defined on each of three dimensions where listening is easier or more successful when hearing is binaural rather than monaural: perception of speech in spatially separated noise, localization of sounds, and effort and fatigue. Informants (N = 203) valued the 27 combinations of levels and dimensions in a time trade-off task with a 10-year time frame to provide a value of binaural-related quality of life ("binaural utility") for each combination. A questionnaire was compiled to allow respondents to report their level of function on each dimension so that a value of binaural utility could be assigned to them. The questionnaire and the age-standardized valuations constitute The York Binaural Hearing-Related Quality-of-Life System (YBHRQL). Adult users of unilateral implants (N = 8), bilateral implants (N = 11), or bimodal aiding (N = 9) undertook performance tests of spatial listening and completed the HUI3, EQ-5D, and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaires. They completed the YBHRQL questionnaire 24 and 38 mo later.

RESULTS

Despite long intervals between measurements, the YBHRQL demonstrated desirable psychometric properties: good construct validity evidenced by significant correlations with performance measures and the SSQ index; a greater ability than the EQ-5D or HUI3 to distinguish unilateral, bimodal, and bilateral listening; and good reproducibility. The YBHRQL did not exaggerate losses of utility but was insensitive to a potential side effect of implantation (pain/discomfort). It measured a gain in utility from bilateral compared with unilateral implantation (median = 0.11, interquartile range, 0.03 to 0.16) that was greater than the gain measured by the EQ-5D (0.00, 0.00 to 0.00) but not the HUI3 (0.00, 0.00 to 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

The YBHRQL summarizes the contribution of binaural hearing to quality of life by combining the functional status of a listener with the preferences of independent informants. It would be an efficient clinical outcome measure. In addition, if used alongside the EQ-5D or HUI3, it would provide evidence which could beneficially modulate confidence in the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Further research on its sensitivity to side effects, and on the size of the gains in utility which it measures, is needed to determine whether it could stand alone to inform resource-allocation decisions.

Accounting for inflation within NICE cost-effectiveness thresholds

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) makes recommendations on the reimbursement of new drugs utilizing an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) threshold range that has been in use since 2004 and has remained unchanged.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

To model how the NICE cost-effectiveness thresholds would vary if inflation was accounted for and their potential effects on appraisal outcomes, all single technology appraisal (STA) recommendations published in 2019 were identified. The outcome and most plausible ICERs were then evaluated against thresholds, after taking inflation into account.

RESULTS

41 STAs with base-case ICERs were identified. For general STAs, 46% of ICERs were ≤£20,000/QALY, 27% were £20,000-£30,000/QALY and 27% >£30,000/QALY. Cumulatively, there was a 43% decrease in the purchasing power of the pound from 2004 to 2019 due to inflation. To compensate, the NICE ICER threshold would have to increase to £28,584-£42,876/QALY. Using inflation-adjusted thresholds led to an absolute increase of 18% and 12% of STAs whose ICERs fell below the lower and upper bounds of this threshold range, respectively.

CONCLUSION

By not adjusting for inflation, the NICE ICER thresholds have declined in real terms. Whether ICER thresholds should be dynamic to reflect factors like inflation requires further research.

An Exploration on Attribute Non-attendance Using Discrete Choice Experiment Data from the Irish EQ-5D-5L National Valuation Study

BACKGROUND

Generic measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) permit comparisons of competing demands for healthcare resources using outcomes that reflect the preferences of tax payers. EQ-5D instruments are the most commonly used generic, preference-based measures of HRQoL. The EQ-5D-5L enables respondents to describe their health state using five dimensions of health, each with five response levels. The standardised protocol for the valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states comprises use of the composite time trade-off valuation technique, supplemented by a discrete choice experiment (DCE).

OBJECTIVE

This paper presents the first exploration on attribute non-attendance (ANA) to the dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L using DCE data collected following the standardised protocol.

METHOD

This paper uses the equality constrained latent class model and the endogenous attribute attendance model to examine ANA to the dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L.

RESULTS

The results suggest that respondents are less likely to consider the physical dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L (such as self-care and usual activities) when evaluating the health states. The effects of ANA on utility scores depends on the interpretation of the underlying reasons for ANA.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that future value sets based in whole or in part on DCE data examine the impact of and reasons for non-attendance in national valuation studies.

Assessing social preferences in reimbursement negotiations for new Pharmaceuticals in Oncology: an experimental design to analyse willingness to pay and willingness to accept

Background

Price negotiations for specialty pharmaceuticals take place in a complex market setting. The determination of the added value of new treatments and the related societal willingness to pay are of increasing importance in policy reform debates. From a behavioural economics perspective, potential cognitive biases and other-regarding concerns affecting outcomes of reimbursement negotiations are of interest. An experimental setting to investigate social preferences in reimbursement negotiations for novel, oncology pharmaceuticals was used. Of interest were differences in social preferences caused by incremental changes of the patient outcome.

Methods

An online experiment was conducted in two separate runs (n = 202, n = 404) on the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform. Populations were split into two (run one) and four (run two) equally sized treatment groups for hypothetical reimbursement decisions. Participants were randomly assigned to the role of a public price regulator for pharmaceuticals (buyer) or a representative of a pharmaceutical company (seller). In run two, role groups were further split into two different price magnitude framings (“real world” vs unconverted “real payoff” prices). Decisions had real monetary effects on other participants (in the role of premium payers or investors) and via charitable donations to a patient organisation (patient benefit).

Results

56 (run one) and 59 (run two) percent of participants stated strictly monotone preferences for incremental patient benefit. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) against standard of care (SoC) was higher than the initial ICER of the SoC against no care. Regulators stated lower reservation prices in the “real world” prices group compared to their colleagues in the unconverted payoff group. No price group showed any reluctance to trade. Overall, regulators rated the relevance of the patient for their decision higher and the relevance of their own role lower compared to sellers.

Conclusions

The price magnitude of current oncology treatments affects stated preferences for incremental survival, and assigned responsibilities lead to different opinions on the relevance of affected stakeholders. The design is useful to further assess effects of reimbursement negotiations on societal outcomes like affordability (cost) or availability (access) of new pharmaceuticals and test behavioural policy interventions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06231-8.

Investigation of Factors Considered by Health Technology Assessment Agencies in Eight Countries

BACKGROUND

Health technology assessment (HTA) organizations play a crucial role in optimizing healthcare resources, but the factors influencing decision making vary by country.

OBJECTIVE

HTAs of cancer and hepatitis C drugs were evaluated across developed countries to understand differences in decision processes and criteria.

METHODS

The HTA organizations evaluated are from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, Canada and Japan. Economic evaluation types and 28 factors in the following categories were evaluated: clinical uncertainties/issues; disease/population/treatment consideration factors including National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE) special circumstances factors (e.g. end-of-life and innovation); and International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) additional value elements. Qualitative and correspondence analyses were conducted to assess the differences across organizations.

RESULTS

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) using quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was evaluated in Canada, the UK, Australia and Japan. The highest observed clinical uncertainties were clinical benefits and comparator. For cancer drugs, correspondence analysis showed France, Australia, Canada and the UK to have common attributes observed, such as unmet needs and stakeholder persuasion. In addition, the UK reported end-of-life, issues around current treatment and innovation, whereas Germany reported manageable/insignificant adverse events more frequently. Finally, fear of contagion, equity and scientific spillover value elements were only observed in Australia.

CONCLUSION

Although clinical factors play a predominant role in the decision to reimburse medicine, HTA organizations consider additional aspects as well. If the methodology of HTA was clearly outlined, there would be more transparency in HTA systems leading to better understanding amongst stakeholders about decision making.

NICE's Discounting Review: Clear Thinking on Rational Revision Meets Obstacle of Industrial Interests

The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recently published a review of discounting practice and theory as part of a consultation on its current methods guidelines. The review examines the case for revision or retention of current methods. The changes considered include eliminating favourable rates in certain special cases and the reduction of the base-case rate for costs and health effects from 3.5 to 1.5%. The review also notes the potential need to reduce the cost-effectiveness threshold to accommodate a discount rate reduction, explaining that an agreement between the UK government and the pharmaceutical industry proscribes changing NICE's threshold range until the end of 2023. We believe NICE should be commended for a useful overview of the existing literature and relevant issues. We firmly endorse NICE's view that favourable discount rates are not a good way to apply a preference for certain interventions. Similarly, we support the option of reducing the discount rate to 1.5%, which better accords with real government borrowing costs. We suggest further work to clarify the appropriate theoretical basis for the NICE's social discount rate and the sensitivity of the threshold to changes in discounting. The prospects of a necessary discount rate reduction appear to depend on whether a threshold reduction can be achieved within NICE's current range or if the range itself must be revised downwards. NICE has usefully informed the debate around discount rates. Ultimately, the path to a methodologically consistent and evidence-based revision of discounting depends on whether NICE needs to adjust the threshold too and if it is free to do so.

Social tariffs and democratic choice-Do population-based health state values reflect the will of the people?

In economic evaluations of health technologies, health outcomes are commonly measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). QALYs are the product of time and health-related quality of life. Health-related quality of life, in turn, is determined by a social tariff, which is supposed to reflect the public's preference over health states. This study argues that, because of the tariff's role in the societal decision-making process, it should not be understood as merely an operational (statistical) definition of health, but as a major instrument of democratic participation. I outline what implications this might have for both the method used to aggregate individual preferences, and the set of individuals whose preferences should count. Alternative tariff specifications and decision rules are explored, and future research directions are proposed.

Combining Model-Based Clinical Trial Simulation, Pharmacoeconomics, and Value of Information to Optimize Trial Design

The Bayesian decision‐analytic approach to trial design uses prior distributions for treatment effects, updated with likelihoods for proposed trial data. Prior distributions for treatment effects based on previous trial results risks sample selection bias and difficulties when a proposed trial differs in terms of patient characteristics, medication adherence, or treatment doses and regimens. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the utility of using pharmacometric‐based clinical trial simulation (CTS) to generate prior distributions for use in Bayesian decision‐theoretic trial design. The methods consisted of four principal stages: a CTS to predict the distribution of treatment response for a range of trial designs; Bayesian updating for a proposed sample size; a pharmacoeconomic model to represent the perspective of a reimbursement authority in which price is contingent on trial outcome; and a model of the pharmaceutical company return on investment linking drug prices to sales revenue. We used a case study of febuxostat versus allopurinol for the treatment of hyperuricemia in patients with gout. Trial design scenarios studied included alternative treatment doses, inclusion criteria, input uncertainty, and sample size. Optimal trial sample sizes varied depending on the uncertainty of model inputs, trial inclusion criteria, and treatment doses. This interdisciplinary framework for trial design and sample size calculation may have value in supporting decisions during later phases of drug development and in identifying costly sources of uncertainty, and thus inform future research and development strategies.

How to assess the value of low-value care

Background

Many of the strategies designed to reduce “low-value care” have been implemented without a consensus on the definition of the term “value”. Most “low value care” lists are based on the comparative effectiveness of the interventions.

Main text

Defining the value of an intervention based on its effectiveness may generate an inefficient use of resources, as a very effective intervention is not necessarily an efficient intervention, and a low effective intervention is not always an inefficient intervention. The cost-effectiveness plane may help to differentiate between high and low value care interventions. Reducing low value care should include three complementary strategies: eliminating ineffective interventions that entail a cost; eliminating interventions whose cost is higher and whose effectiveness is lower than that of other options (quadrant IV); and eliminating interventions whose incremental or decremental cost-effectiveness is unacceptable in quadrants I and III, respectively. Defining low-value care according to the efficiency of the interventions, ideally at the level of subgroups and individuals, will contribute to develop true value-based health care systems.

Conclusion

Cost-effectiveness rather than effectiveness should be the main criterion to assess the value of health care services and interventions. Payment-for-value strategies should be based on the definition of high and low value provided by the cost-effectiveness plane.

Evaluation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Diagnostics Assessment Program Decisions: Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio Thresholds and Decision-Modifying Factors

OBJECTIVES

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Diagnostics Assessment Programme (DAP) evaluates the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic technologies. A decision-making process benchmarking the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) against a threshold while considering decision-modifying factors is common to NICE evaluations. This study investigated whether DAP decisions are consistent with the ICER thresholds described in the DAP manual, and to assess the impact of decision-modifying factors.

METHODS

DAP evaluations published before March 2018 were reviewed, and the following items were extracted: diagnostic technologies evaluated, decision problems assessed, Diagnostics Advisory Committee (DAC) decisions, incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental costs, ICERs considered to be most plausible by the DAC, and decision justifications.

RESULTS

All 30 evaluations were reviewed; 8 were excluded because the DAC concluded there was "insufficient evidence" for decision making. In the remaining 22 evaluations, 91 decision problems were identified for further analysis, of which 52, 15, and 24 received "recommended," "not recommended," and "not recommended-only in research" guidance, respectively. The overall consistency rate of the DAC decisions with the £20 000/QALY threshold was 73.6%. Diagnostic technologies that were not recommended, despite an ICER less than £20 000/QALY, were associated with a larger number of decision-modifying factors favoring the comparator, versus recommended diagnostic technologies with ICERs less than £20 000/QALY. For technologies with ICERs greater than £20 000/QALY, the number of decision-modifying factors was comparable for positive and negative recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Most DAP decisions were consistent with the ICER threshold. However, cost-effectiveness was not the only determining factor in decision making; recommendations also considered patient- and healthcare-centric factors and uncertainty.

Factors Influencing the Cost-Effectiveness Outcomes of HPV Vaccination and Screening Interventions in Low-to-Middle-Income Countries (LMICs): A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer ranks fourth amongst the commonest malignancies worldwide and the second most prevalent cancer afflicting women in low-to-middle income countries (LMICs), hence, of great public health importance. LMICs are the most affected regions as evidenced by their high prevalence of the disease. Mortality associated with cervical neoplasms is preventable through the implementation of recommended preventive approaches.

AIMS

This review aimed to appraise evidence on the cost effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention interventions in LMICs involving cervical screening and human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination programmes.

METHODS

A search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science was elicited and studies published between 1st January 2008 and 31st December 2018 were retrieved. Two authors independently undertook the screening, review, selection of studies, and data extraction with disagreements being resolved through discussion and consensus.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were selected. The cost-effectiveness outcomes of HPV vaccination and screening interventions are dependent on age, screening method used, intervention coverage, and the number of doses or visits required for vaccination and screening, respectively. A combination of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) screening and HPV vaccination appears to be the most cost-effective approach in reducing the lifetime risk for HPV-linked cervical neoplasms. Similarly, vaccination as a stand-alone intervention is potentially cost effective provided the coverage is maintained between 70 and 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV vaccination and screening interventions may be cost effective in LMICs and potentially reduce the lifetime risk, economic burden, and associated mortality. However, it is important to consider the factors that influence the cost effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention interventions for better outcomes to be realised.

The Arthroplasty Candidacy Help Engine tool to select candidates for hip and knee replacement surgery: development and economic modelling

BACKGROUND

There is no good evidence to support the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in setting preoperative thresholds for referral for hip and knee replacement surgery. Despite this, the practice is widespread in the NHS.

OBJECTIVES/RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Can clinical outcome tools be used to set thresholds for hip or knee replacement? What is the relationship between the choice of threshold and the cost-effectiveness of surgery?

METHODS

A systematic review identified PROMs used to assess patients undergoing hip/knee replacement. Their measurement properties were compared and supplemented by analysis of existing data sets. For each candidate score, we calculated the absolute threshold (a preoperative level above which there is no potential for improvement) and relative thresholds (preoperative levels above which individuals are less likely to improve than others). Owing to their measurement properties and the availability of data from their current widespread use in the NHS, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) were selected as the most appropriate scores to use in developing the Arthroplasty Candidacy Help Engine (ACHE) tool. The change in score and the probability of an improvement were then calculated and modelled using preoperative and postoperative OKS/OHSs and PROM scores, thereby creating the ACHE tool. Markov models were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of total hip/knee arthroplasty in the NHS for different preoperative values of OKS/OHSs over a 10-year period. The threshold values were used to model how the ACHE tool may change the number of referrals in a single UK musculoskeletal hub. A user group was established that included patients, members of the public and health-care representatives, to provide stakeholder feedback throughout the research process.

RESULTS

From a shortlist of four scores, the OHS and OKS were selected for the ACHE tool based on their measurement properties, calculated preoperative thresholds and cost-effectiveness data. The absolute threshold was 40 for the OHS and 41 for the OKS using the preferred improvement criterion. A range of relative thresholds were calculated based on the relationship between a patient's preoperative score and their probability of improving after surgery. For example, a preoperative OHS of 35 or an OKS of 30 translates to a 75% probability of achieving a good outcome from surgical intervention. The economic evaluation demonstrated that hip and knee arthroplasty cost of < £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for patients with any preoperative score below the absolute thresholds (40 for the OHS and 41 for the OKS). Arthroplasty was most cost-effective for patients with lower preoperative scores.

LIMITATIONS

The ACHE tool supports but does not replace the shared decision-making process required before an individual decides whether or not to undergo surgery.

CONCLUSION

The OHS and OKS can be used in the ACHE tool to assess an individual patient's suitability for hip/knee replacement surgery. The system enables evidence-based and informed threshold setting in accordance with local resources and policies. At a population level, both hip and knee arthroplasty are highly cost-effective right up to the absolute threshold for intervention. Our stakeholder user group felt that the ACHE tool was a useful evidence-based clinical tool to aid referrals and that it should be trialled in NHS clinical practice to establish its feasibility.

FUTURE WORK

Future work could include (1) a real-world study of the ACHE tool to determine its acceptability to patients and general practitioners and (2) a study of the role of the ACHE tool in supporting referral decisions.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.