A systematic review of economic evaluations of advanced therapy medicinal products

Economic Evaluations of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapies for Hematologic and Solid Malignancies: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review evidence on the cost-effectiveness of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies for patients with cancer.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched in October 2022 and updated in September 2023. Systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and economic evaluations that compared costs and effects of CAR-T therapy in patients with cancer were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, synthesized results, and critically appraised studies using the Philips checklist. Cost data were presented in 2022 US dollars.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 1809 records, 47 of which were included. Most of included studies were cost-utility analysis, published between 2018 and 2023, and conducted in the United States. Tisagenlecleucel, axicabtagene ciloleucel, idecabtagene vicleucel, ciltacabtagene autoleucel, lisocabtagene maraleucel, brexucabtagene autoleucel, and relmacabtagene autoleucel were compared with various standard of care chemotherapies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for CAR-T therapies ranged from $9424 to $4 124 105 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in adults and from $20 784 to $243 177 per QALY in pediatric patients. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were found to improve over longer time horizons or when an earlier cure point was assumed. Most studies failed to meet the Philips checklist due to a lack of head-to-head comparisons and uncertainty surrounding CAR-T costs and curative effects.

CONCLUSIONS

CAR-T therapies were more expensive and generated more QALYs than comparators, but their cost-effectiveness was uncertain and dependent on patient population, cancer type, and model assumptions. This highlights the need for more nuanced economic evaluations and continued research to better understand the value of CAR-T therapies in diverse patient populations.

Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Systemic Treatments for Advanced and Metastatic Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in the development of biomarker-directed therapy and immunotherapy, for advanced and metastatic gastric cancers, have the potential to improve survival and quality of life. Much attention has been directed towards second- and later-line treatments, and the landscape here is evolving rapidly. However, uncertainty in relative effectiveness, high costs and uncertainty in cost effectiveness represent challenges for decision makers.

OBJECTIVE

To identify economic evaluations for the second-line or later-line treatment of advanced and metastatic gastric cancer. Also, to assess key criteria (including model assumptions, inputs and outcomes), reporting completeness and methodological quality to inform future cost-effectiveness evaluations.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (from database inception to 5 March 2023) of EconLit via EBSCOhost, Cochrane Library (restricted to National Health Service [NHS] Economic Evaluation Database and Health Technology Assessment [HTA] Database), Embase, MEDLINE and of grey literature was conducted. This aimed to identify systemic treatments that align with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines. Data were collected on key criteria and on reporting completeness and methodological quality. A narrative synthesis focussed on cost-effectiveness and cost-of-illness studies. Outcomes of interest included total and incremental costs and outcomes (life-years and quality-adjusted life-years), ratios of incremental costs per unit outcome and other summary cost and outcome measures. Also, for cost-effectiveness studies, reporting completeness and the methodological quality were assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and the Philips Checklist, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 19 eligible economic evaluations were identified (cost-effectiveness studies [n = 15] and cost-of-illness studies [n = 4]). There was a general lack of consistency in the methodological approaches taken across studies. In the main, the cost-effectiveness studies indicated that the intervention under consideration was more effective and more costly than the comparator(s). However, most interventions were not cost effective. No studies were fully compliant with reporting-completeness and methodological-quality requirements. Given the lack of consistency in the approaches taken across cost-of-illness studies, outcomes could not be directly compared.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first published systematic literature review that has qualitatively synthesised economic evaluations for advanced and metastatic gastric cancer. There were differences in the approaches taken across the cost-effectiveness studies and the cost-of-illness studies. The conclusions of most of the cost-effectiveness studies were consistent despite identified differences in approaches. In the main, the interventions under consideration were not cost effective, presenting challenges to sustainability and affordability. We highlight a requirement for cost-effectiveness evaluations and for second-line or later-line treatments of advanced and metastatic gastric cancer that consider all relevant comparators and that are compliant with reporting-completeness and methodological-quality requirements. By addressing the methodological gaps identified here, future healthcare decision-making, within the context of this rapidly changing treatment landscape, would be better informed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023405951.

A Review of the Cost-Effectiveness Evidence for FDA-Approved Cell and Gene Therapies

Cell and gene therapy (CGT) innovations have provided several significant breakthroughs in recent years. However, CGTs often come with a high upfront cost, raising questions about patient access, affordability, and long-term value. This study reviewed cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) studies that have attempted to assess the long-term value of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved CGTs. Two reviewers independently searched the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry to identify all studies for FDA-approved CGTs, per January 2023. A data extraction template was used to summarize the evidence in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and essential modeling assumptions, combined with a template to extract the adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The review identified 26 CEA studies for seven CGTs. Around half of the base-case cost-effectiveness results indicated that the cost per QALY was below $100,000-$150,000, often used as a threshold for reasonable cost-effectiveness in the United States. However, the results varied substantially across studies for the same treatment, ranging from being considered very cost-effective to far from cost-effective. Most models were based on data from single-arm trials with relatively short follow-ups, and different long-term extrapolations between studies caused large differences in the modeled cost-effectiveness results. In sum, this review showed that, despite the high upfront costs, many CGTs have cost-effectiveness evidence that can support long-term value. Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty regarding long-term value exists because so much of the modeling results are driven by uncertain extrapolations beyond the clinical trial data.

Learning of clinical pharmacology by future prescribers in Bologna: Teachers' and students' reflections on the way forward

AIMS

In this reflection paper, the authors, based on their experience as teachers and students of the courses of Pharmacology at the University of Bologna, reflect on their specific roles towards innovation in the teaching of Clinical Pharmacology.

METHODS

Strengths, weaknesses and challenges are presented as identified during the teaching and learning experience in the currently evolving medical degree programmes of the University in light of current trends in medical education.

RESULTS

Keeping in mind the identified challenges together with the features proposed for the model prescriber (knowledgeable, contemporary, communicative and safe), we indicate some ways to improve the students' experience and make sure they develop up-to-date skills in Clinical Pharmacology taking advantage of recent ongoing collaborations at European level. International collaboration is indeed necessary to adequately address the current challenges of teaching clinical pharmacology.

CONCLUSION

Our shared conclusion is that empowering students with a scientifically sound method to retrieve relevant information and developing their skills to communicate in an interprofessional and, wherever possible, international environment is the key to prepare future prescribers and, ultimately, to improve patient safety.

Looking to the Future: Drug Delivery and Targeting in the Prophylaxis and Therapy of Severe and Chronic Diseases

High molecular weight actives and cell-based therapy have the potential to revolutionize the prophylaxis and therapy of severe diseases. Yet, the size and nature of the agents - proteins, nucleic acids, cells - challenge drug delivery and thus formulation development. Moreover, off-target effects may result in severe adverse drug reactions. This makes delivery and targeting an essential component of high-end drug development. Loading to nanoparticles facilitates delivery and enables targeted mRNA vaccines and tumor therapeutics. Stem cell therapy opens up a new horizon in diabetes type 1 among other domains which may enhance the quality of life and life expectancy. Cell encapsulation protects transplants against the recipient's immune system, may ensure long-term efficacy, avoid severe adverse reactions, and simplify the management of rare and fatal diseases.The knowledge gained so far encourages to widen the spectrum of potential indications. Co-development of the active agent and the vehicle has the potential to accelerate drug research. One recommended starting point is the use of computational approaches. Transferability of preclinical data to humans will benefit from performing studies first on validated human 3D disease models reflecting the target tissue, followed by studies on validated animal models. This makes approaching a new level in drug development a multidisciplinary but ultimately worthwhile and attainable challenge. Intense monitoring of the patients after drug approval and periodic reporting to physicians and scientists remain essential for the safe use of drugs especially in rare diseases and pave future research.

Pricing and reimbursement mechanisms for advanced therapy medicinal products in 20 countries

Introduction: Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products are a type of therapies that, in some cases, hold great potential for patients without an effective current therapeutic approach but they also present multiple challenges to payers. While there are many theoretical papers on pricing and reimbursement (P&R) options, original empirical research is very scarce. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive international review of regulatory and P&R decisions taken for all ATMPs with centralized European marketing authorization in March 2022. Methods: A survey was distributed in July 2022 to representatives of 46 countries. Results: Responses were received from 20 countries out of 46 (43.5%). 14 countries reimbursed at least one ATMP. Six countries in this survey reimbursed no ATMPs. Conclusion: Access to ATMPs is uneven across the countries included in this study. This arises from regulatory differences, commercial decisions by marketing authorization holders, and the divergent assessment processes and criteria applied by payers. Moving towards greater equality of access will require cooperation between countries and stakeholders, for example, through the WHO Regional Office for Europe's Access to Novel Medicines Platform.

A systematic review on the cost-effectiveness assessment of tisagenlecleucel for refractory or relapsing B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL) treatment in children and young adults

BACKGROUND AIMS

The advanced therapy product tisagenlecleucel is a CD19-directed genetically modified autologous T-cell immunotherapy that has brought hope for children and young adults with relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel compared with conventional salvage therapies in pediatric and young adult patients with R/R B-ALL.

METHODS

This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses parameters as registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021266998). Literature was searched using the MEDLINE databases via PubMed, EMBASE, Lilacs, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science in January 2022. Titles were screened independently by two reviewers. Articles deemed to meet the inclusion criteria were screened independently on abstract, and full texts were reviewed.

RESULTS

In total, 5627 publications were identified, from which six eligible studies were selected. The conventional therapies identified were blinatumomab (Blina), clofarabine monotherapy (Clo-M), clofarabine combined with cyclophosphamide and etoposide (Clo-C) and the combination of fludarabine, cytarabine and idarubicin (FLA-IDA). The discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for tisagenlecleucel compared with Clo-C and Blina averages was $38 837 and $25 569, respectively. In relation to the cost of the drug, the average of tisagenlecleucel was approximately 4.3 times, 10.8 times or 4.7 times greater than the Clo-M, Clo-C and Blina, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlighted that tisagenlecleucel is a much more expensive therapy than conventional alternatives. However, tisagenlecleucel performed well on the ICER, not exceeding $100 000/QALY. It was also found that the advanced therapy product was more effective than the conventional small molecule and biological drugs, in terms of life years and QALY gained.

Capturing the Impact of Constraints on the Cost-Effectiveness of Cell and Gene Therapies: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Decision-makers need to resolve constraints on delivering cell and gene therapies to patients as these treatments move into routine care. This study aimed to investigate if, and how, constraints that affect the expected cost and health consequences of cell and gene therapies have been included in published examples of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs).

METHOD

A systematic review identified CEAs of cell and gene therapies. Studies were identified from previous systematic reviews and by searching Medline and Embase until 21 January 2022. Constraints described qualitatively were categorised by theme and summarised by a narrative synthesis. Constraints evaluated in quantitative scenario analyses were appraised by whether they changed the decision to recommend treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-two CEAs of cell (n = 20) and gene therapies (n = 12) were included. Twenty-one studies described constraints qualitatively (70% cell therapy CEAs; 58% gene therapy CEAs). Qualitative constraints were categorised by four themes: single payment models; long-term affordability; delivery by providers; manufacturing capability. Thirteen studies assessed constraints quantitatively (60% cell therapy CEAs; 8% gene therapy CEAs). Two types of constraint were assessed quantitatively across four jurisdictions (USA, Canada, Singapore, The Netherlands): alternatives to single payment models (n = 9 scenario analyses); improving manufacturing (n = 12 scenario analyses). The impact on decision-making was determined by whether the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios crossed a relevant cost-effectiveness threshold for each jurisdiction (outcome-based payment models: n = 25 threshold comparisons made, 28% decisions changed; improving manufacturing: n = 24 threshold comparisons made, 4% decisions changed).

CONCLUSION

The net health impact of constraints is vital evidence to help decision-makers scale up the delivery of cell and gene therapies as patient volume increases and more advanced therapy medicinal products are launched. CEAs will be essential to quantify how constraints affect the cost-effectiveness of care, prioritise constraints to be resolved, and establish the value of strategies to implement cell and gene therapies by accounting for their health opportunity cost.

How are health technology assessment bodies responding to the assessment challenges posed by cell and gene therapy?

BACKGROUND

The aims of this research were to provide a better understanding of the specific evidence needs for assessment of clinical and cost-effectiveness of cell and gene therapies, and to explore the extent that the relevant categories of evidence are considered in health technology assessment (HTA) processes.

METHODS

A targeted literature review was conducted to identify the specific categories of evidence relevant to the assessment of these therapies. Forty-six HTA reports for 9 products in 10 cell and gene therapy indications across 8 jurisdictions were analysed to determine the extent to which various items of evidence were considered.

RESULTS

The items to which the HTA bodies reacted positively were: treatment was for a rare disease or serious condition, lack of alternative therapies, evidence indicating substantial health gains, and when alternative payment models could be agreed. The items to which they reacted negatively were: use of unvalidated surrogate endpoints, single arm trials without an adequately matched alternative therapy, inadequate reporting of adverse consequences and risks, short length of follow-up in clinical trials, extrapolating to long-term outcomes, and uncertainty around the economic estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

The consideration by HTA bodies of evidence relating to the particular features of cell and gene therapies is variable. Several suggestions are made for addressing the assessment challenges posed by these therapies. Jurisdictions conducting HTAs of these therapies can consider whether these suggestions could be incorporated within their existing approach through strengthening deliberative decision-making or performing additional analyses.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel Versus Blinatumomab in Children and Young Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Partitioned Survival Model to Assess the Impact of an Outcome-Based Payment Arrangement

OBJECTIVE

This research assesses the impact of an outcome-based payment arrangement (OBA) linking complete remission (CR) to survival as a means of maintaining cost-effectiveness for a chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy in young patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

METHODS

A partitioned survival model (PSM) was used to model the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel versus blinatumomab in ALL from the Australian healthcare system perspective. A decision tree modeled different OBAs by funneling patients into a series of PSMs based on response. Outcomes were informed by individual patient data, while costs followed Australian treatment practices. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were combined to calculate a single incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), reported in US dollars (2022) at a discount rate of 5% on costs and outcomes.

RESULTS

For the base case, incremental costs and benefit were $379,595 and 4.27 QALYs, giving an ICER of $88,979. The ICER was most sensitive to discount rate ($57,660-$75,081), "cure point" ($62,718-$116,206) and extrapolation method ($76,018-$94,049). OBAs had a modest effect on the ICER when response rates varied. A responder-only payment was the most effective arrangement for maintaining the ICER ($88,249-$89,434), although this option was associated with the greatest financial uncertainty. A split payment arrangement (payment on infusion followed by payment on response) reduced variability in the ICER ($82,650-$99,154) compared with a single, upfront payment ($77,599-$107,273).

CONCLUSION

OBAs had a modest impact on reducing cost-effectiveness uncertainty. The value of OBAs should be weighed against the additional resources needed to administer such arrangements, and importantly overall cost to government.

Challenges for Economic Evaluations of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are drugs for human use for the treatment of chronic, degenerative, or life-threatening diseases that are based on genes, tissues, or cells. This article aimed to identify and critically review published economic analyses of ATMPs.

METHODS

A systematic review of economic analyses of ATMPs was undertaken. Study characteristics, design, sources of data, resources and unit costs, modeling and extrapolation methods, study results, and sensitivity analyses were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 46 economic analyses of ATMP (from 45 articles) were included; 4 were cell therapy medicinal products, 33 gene therapy medicinal products, and 9 tissue-engineered products. 30 therapies had commercial marketing approval; 39 studies were cost-utility analysis, 5 were cost-effectiveness analysis, and 2 were cost only studies. Four studies predicted that the ATMP offered a step change in the management of the condition and 10 studies estimated that the ATMP would offer a lower mean cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparison with historical controls, pooling of data, and use of techniques such as mixture cure fraction models should be used cautiously. Sensitivity analyses should be used across a plausible range of prices. Clinical studies need to be designed to align with health technology assessment requirements, including generic quality of life, and payers should aim for clarity of criteria. Regulators and national payers should aim for compatibility of registers to allow interchange of data. Given the increasing reliance on industry-funded economic analyses, careful critical review is recommended.

Reported Challenges in Health Technology Assessment of Complex Health Technologies

OBJECTIVES

With complex health technologies entering the market, methods for health technology assessment (HTA) may require changes. This study aimed to identify challenges in HTA of complex health technologies.

METHODS

A survey was sent to European HTA organizations participating in European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA). The survey contained open questions and used predefined potentially complex health technologies and 7 case studies to identify types of complex health technologies and challenges faced during HTA. The survey was validated, tested for reliability by an expert panel, and pilot tested before dissemination.

RESULTS

A total of 22 HTA organizations completed the survey (67%). Advanced therapeutic medicinal products (ATMPs) and histology-independent therapies were considered most challenging based on the predefined complex health technologies and case studies. For the case studies, more than half of the reported challenges were "methodological," equal in relative effectiveness assessments as in cost-effectiveness assessments. Through the open questions, we found that most of these challenges actually rooted in data unavailability. Data were reported as "absent," "insufficient," "immature," or "low quality" by 18 of 20 organizations (90%), in particular data on quality of life. Policy and organizational challenges and challenges because of societal or political pressure were reported by 8 (40%) and 4 organizations (20%), respectively. Modeling issues were reported least often (n = 2, 4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Most challenges in HTA of complex health technologies root in data insufficiencies rather than in the complexity of health technologies itself. As the number of complex technologies grows, the urgency for new methods and policies to guide HTA decision making increases.

Methods for Extrapolating Survival Analyses for the Economic Evaluation of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products

There are two significant challenges for analysts conducting economic evaluations of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs): (i) estimating long-term treatment effects in the absence of mature clinical data, and (ii) capturing potentially complex hazard functions. This review identifies and critiques a variety of methods that can be used to overcome these challenges. The narrative review is informed by a rapid literature review of methods used for the extrapolation of survival analyses in the economic evaluation of ATMPs. There are several methods that are more suitable than traditional parametric survival modelling approaches for capturing complex hazard functions, including, cure-mixture models and restricted cubic spline models. In the absence of mature clinical data, analysts may augment clinical trial data with data from other sources to aid extrapolation, however, the relative merits of employing methods for including data from different sources is not well understood. Given the high and potentially irrecoverable costs of making incorrect decisions concerning the reimbursement or commissioning of ATMPs, it is important that economic evaluations are correctly specified, and that both parameter and structural uncertainty associated with survival extrapolations are considered. Value of information analyses allow for this uncertainty to be expressed explicitly, and in monetary terms.

Value-based pricing for advanced therapy medicinal products: emerging affordability solutions

The emergence of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), a disruptive class of health technologies, is generating important challenges in terms of value assessment and their high prices introduce critical access and affordability concerns. The aim of this article is to analyze the challenges of traditional value assessment and price and reimbursement methods in the evaluation of ATMPs and to characterize the current and prospective financing solutions that may ensure patient access and affordability for these health technologies. Standard Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is not designed for ATMPs, and may delay access to these health technologies, thus a broader concept of value is required. As a consequence, value-based pricing methodologies have been gaining terrain to cope with the specific challenges of ATMPs. The pricing and reimbursement framework should ensure the balance between encouragements to innovation and maximization of value for money for payers, through the attribution of a fair price to new health technologies. Early scientific advice by regulatory and HTA bodies to developers is key, as it will contribute to diminish the perspective gap between developers, regulators and payers. The high efficacy/high price dynamic of many advanced therapies will demand novel financing models, both in the EU and US. Managed entry agreements (MEA), with financing being conditional to the submission of additional evidence, associated with methods of leased payments, may offer effective strategies to address the uncertainties caused by the evidence gap associated with ATMPs, ensuring affordable and sustained access.

Real World Data in Health Technology Assessment of Complex Health Technologies

The available evidence on relative effectiveness and risks of new health technologies is often limited at the time of health technology assessment (HTA). Additionally, a wide variety in real-world data (RWD) policies exist among HTA organizations. This study assessed which challenges, related to the increasingly complex nature of new health technologies, make the acceptance of RWD most likely. A questionnaire was disseminated among 33 EUnetHTA member HTA organizations. The questions focused on accepted data sources, circumstances that allowed for RWD acceptance and barriers to acceptance. The questionnaire was validated and tested for reliability by an expert panel, and pilot-tested before dissemination via LimeSurvey. Twenty-two HTA organizations completed the questionnaire (67%). All reported accepting randomized clinical trials. The most accepted RWD source were patient registries (19/22, 86%), the least accepted were editorials and expert opinions (8/22, 36%). With orphan treatments or companion diagnostics, organizations tended to be most likely to accept RWD sources, 4.3–3.2 on a 5-point Likert scale, respectively. Additional circumstances were reported to accept RWD (e.g., a high disease burden). The two most important barriers to accepting RWD were lacking necessary RWD sources and existing policy structures. European HTA organizations seem positive toward the (wider) use of RWD in HTA of complex therapies. Expanding the use of patient registries could be potentially useful, as a large share of the organizations already accepts this source. However, many barriers still exist to the widespread use of RWD. Our results can be used to prioritize circumstances in which RWD might be accepted.

Challenges in the market access of regenerative medicines, and implications for manufacturers and decision-makers: a systematic review

Aim: Regenerative medicines (RMs) are expected to transform the treatment paradigm of rare, life-threatening diseases, while substantial challenges impede its market access. This study aimed to present these challenges. Materials & methods: Publications identified in the Medline and Embase databases until December 2020 were included. Results: Uncertainties around the relative effectiveness and long-term benefits of RMs are most scrutinized. A new reference case for RMs is questionable, but examining impacts of study perspective, time horizon, discount rate and extrapolation methods on estimates is advised. Establishing reasonable prices of RMs requires increased transparency in the development costs and better values measurements. Outcome-based payments require considerable investments and potential legislative adjustments. Conclusion: Greater flexibility for health technology assessment and economic analyses of RMs is necessary. This comprehensive review may prompt more multi-stakeholder conversations to discuss the optimized strategy for value assessment, pricing and payment in order to accelerate the market access of RMs.

A Systematic Review of Health Technology Assessments of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapies in Young Compared With Older Patients

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to identify sources of variability in cost-effectiveness analyses of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies, tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel, evaluated by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies, focusing on young compared with older patients.

METHODS

HTA evaluations in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and adult diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) were included from Australia, Canada, England, Norway, and the United States. Key clinical evidence, economic approach, and outcomes (costs, quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios) were summarized.

RESULTS

Fourteen HTA evaluations were identified (5 ALL, 9 DLBCL [4 tisagenlecleucel, 5 axicabtagene]). Analyses were naive comparisons of prospective single-arm studies for the CAR-Ts with retrospective cohort studies for the comparators. Key clinical evidence and economic model approaches were generally consistent by CAR-T and indication, although outcomes varied. Notably, incremental QALYs varied substantially in ALL (3.67-10.6 QALYs gained), whereas variation in DLBCL was less (1.21-1.97 [tisagenlecleucel], 1.97-3.40 [axicabtagene]). Discounting of costs and outcomes varied, with the highest QALYs generated for tisagenlecleucel in ALL (10.95) associated with the lowest discount rate (1.5%) and vice versa (4.97 QALYs; 5% discount rate). The approach to extrapolation of overall survival data varied, even where the same empirical data were used.

CONCLUSION

Modeled, long-term treatment benefit in young patients may be associated with greater uncertainty compared with adults because of potential life-long benefits with cell and gene therapies. This reflects the methodological challenges identified by HTA agencies associated with single-arm, short-term studies.

A scoping review of patient and public perspectives on cell and gene therapies

Aim: The development and introduction of cell and gene therapies presents complex social and economic issues. Fully addressing these challenges requires engagement with patients and the public. Materials & methods: A systematically conducted scoping review was undertaken to gauge current patient and public knowledge and perspectives, and as such inform requirements for future research, education and engagement activities. Results: A heterogeneous collection of 35 studies were identified. Levels of knowledge among patients and the public were extremely variable. Studies indicated general acceptance of therapies. Conclusion: The review identified the need for tailored educational activities, and in particular the importance of addressing misconceptions. There is also a need for robust qualitative research considering perspectives on current and forthcoming licensed therapies.

Longevity leap: mind the healthspan gap

Life expectancy has increased by three decades since the mid-twentieth century. Parallel healthspan expansion has however not followed, largely impeded by the pandemic of chronic diseases afflicting a growing older population. The lag in quality of life is a recognized challenge that calls for prioritization of disease-free longevity. Contemporary communal, clinical and research trends aspiring to extend the health horizon are here outlined in the context of an evolving epidemiology. A shared action integrating public and societal endeavors with emerging interventions that target age-related multimorbidity and frailty is needed. A multidimensional buildout of a curative perspective, boosted by modern anti-senescent and regenerative technology with augmented decision making, would require dedicated resources and cost-effective validation to responsibly bridge the healthspan-lifespan gap for a future of equitable global wellbeing.

Regenerative Medicine in South Korea: Bridging the Gap Between Authorization and Reimbursement

Regenerative medicine (RM) has considerable potential to address the needs of aging-related and uncurable diseases. However, its incorporation into reimbursement of health insurance benefits poses many challenges, including uncertain evidence and insufficient investment. This paper examines the wide gap between manufacturers, regulatory bodies, and health technology bodies regarding reimbursements for RMs focused cell therapy products. In this mixed-methods study, we first analyzed the sales of RMs approved in South Korea. In addition to exploring beliefs related to the market value of RMs, in-depth interviews were conducted with 24 experts (17 from bio-industries, two from the regulatory body, three from a health technology assessment (HTA) body, and two from the Pharmaceutical Benefit Coverage Assessment Committee [PBCAC]). Lastly, we surveyed PBCAC members about the market value of RMs. In total, 15 of the 20 developed cell therapy products are on the market in South Korea, and amounted to 0.24% of total pharmaceutical expenditures in 2018. We identified a wide gap between stakeholders and regulators regarding the market value and pricing of RMs. The interviewees from the pharmaceutical manufacturer association raised the issue of rising manufacturing costs and proposed a specific pricing policy for RMs. To bridge the gap between approval and reimbursement, stakeholders demand an alternative framework of value-based pricing. Conditional health insurance reimbursement may be an alternative to the traditional process in order to generate evidence of the effects of RMs using “risk-based” or “outcome-based” approaches.

Do Advanced Therapies Have a Future in the Low- and Middle-Income Countries - The Case of Bulgaria, Romania, and Poland

Introduction: The significant therapeutic potential of the advanced therapies (ATs) has predetermined the increased interests in their development mainly in the context of rare diseases most of which are genetically determined. However, there are still many challenges in front of the health insurance funds related to the cost-effectiveness and budget impact issues of these therapies. Our aim was to review and analyze the potential of low- and middle-income countries for health technology assessment (HTA) of advanced therapies focusing on Bulgaria, Romania and Poland as reference countries. A literature review of the existing good practices related to HTA of advanced therapies across the world and comparison with the national reality were performed. A list of challenges and issues from the point of view of the payer institution of all analyzed countries was performed. Pilot recommendations on how to overcome the barriers were created based on the existing practices and the potential of the national system.

Discussion: 15 out of 80 articles identified in PubMed were found as applicable to the study scope as most of them were published in the period 2019–2021. Undoubtedly, the main challenges correspond to the high treatment costs, the uncertainty in clinical effectiveness, and poor HTA methodological approaches applicable for ATs worldwide. The issues identified for low and middle-income countries are similar having as well the lack of enough qualified health economists for the purposes of assessment and appraisal of HTA dossiers of the advanced therapies, lack of adequate existing separate financial programs for those therapies, and not preparedness of the health system and the society as a whole for such therapies.

Conclusions: Despite the difficulties and challenges, the advanced therapies can be defined as a futuristic therapy for which great discoveries are yet to come. Therefore, each country should consider the implementation of reliable and nationally oriented programs for HTA and adequate financial coverage of these therapies.

Economic Evidence on Potentially Curative Gene Therapy Products: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to summarize all available evidence on the cost effectiveness of potentially curative gene therapies and identify challenges that economic evaluations face in this area.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of four databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, EconLit) and grey literature sources. We conducted the search on August 23, 2019 and updated it on November 26, 2020. We included all English, French and Spanish language studies that addressed a gene therapy that had received regulatory approval or had entered a phase III trial, and also reported on costs related to the therapy. Critical appraisal was conducted to assess quality of reporting in included studies.

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies were identified. Of the 42 full economic evaluations, 71% (n = 30) evaluated chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, most used either a Markov model (n = 17, 40%) and/or a partitioned survival model (n = 17, 40%), and 76% (n = 32) adopted a public or private payer perspective. The model characteristics with the greatest impact on cost effectiveness included assumptions about the efficacy of the treatment and the comparators used.

CONCLUSION

All gene therapies in this review were shown to be more effective than their comparators, although due to high costs not all were considered cost effective at standard cost-effectiveness thresholds. Despite their high cost, some gene therapies have the potential to dominate the alternatives in conditions with high mortality/disability. The choice of comparator and assumptions regarding long-term effectiveness had substantial impacts on cost-effectiveness estimates and need to be carefully considered. Both the quality of inputs and the quality of reporting were highly variable.

Mesenchymal Stem Cells and COVID-19: Cure, Prevention, and Vaccination

COVID-19 disease has been a global health problem since late 2019. There are many concerns about the rapid spread of this disease, and yet, there is no approved treatment for COVID-19. Several biological interventions have been under study recently to investigate efficient treatment for this viral disease. Besides, many efforts have been made to find a safe way to prevent and vaccinate people against COVID-19 disease. In severe cases, patients suffer from acute respiratory distress syndrome usually associated with an increased level of inflammatory cytokines, called a cytokine storm. It seems that reequilibrating the hyperinflammatory response of the host immune system and regeneration of damaged cells could be the main way to manage the disease. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been recently under investigation in this regard, and the achieved clinical outcomes show promising evidence for stem cell-based therapy of COVID-19. MSCs are known for their potential for immunomodulation, defense against virus infection, and tissue regeneration. MSCs are a newly emerged platform for designing vaccines and show promising evidence in this area. In the present study, we provided a thorough research study on the most recent clinical studies based on stem cells in the treatment of COVID-19 while introducing stem cell exclusivities for use as an immune disorder or lung cell therapy and its potential application for protection and vaccination against COVID-19.

Value of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Gene Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

PURPOSE

To use discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis to estimate the value creation associated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) genetic therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

DESIGN

Economic analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults undergoing serial intravitreal anti-VEGF injections in 1 eye for nAMD.

METHODS

Discounted cash flow modeling with scenario analysis was used to derive a present value for a 1-time alternative treatment to lifelong anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed on the basis of patient age at time of first injection and frequency interval of intravitreal injection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Present values of DCF and scenario analyses.

RESULTS

Discounted cash flow analysis of intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD resulted in a base-case valuation of $208 420.61, $219 093.31, and $17 379.41 for a 1-time alternative treatment to aflibercept, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab, respectively. This figure covaried significantly with anti-VEGF agent according to the patient age at first injection ($78 323.19-$292 449.87) and frequency of injections ($148 422.91-$388 096.81). In addition, for bevacizumab, variability was driven by the hypothetical degree of clinical superiority of 1-time therapy to repeated intravitreal injections due to reduction in adverse events ($17 379.41-$18 250.79) or reduction in direct or indirect costs associated with age-related macular degeneration ($17 379.41-$657 406.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-VEGF gene therapy approaches can create significantly different value propositions based on the agent modeled, patient age at first injection, frequency of injections, and clinical profile of the medication. Although the use of aflibercept or ranibizumab as a comparative cost metric is logical from a bioequivalence perspective, the disparity in medication costs should not be the primary value driver in applied models. Instead, bevacizumab should be the base case ($17 379.41), with additional value driven from an improvement in quality of life through clinical superiority. A reduction in direct and indirect costs can be used to approximate the value from maintained visual acuity, which is elaborated in the DCF analysis approach described in this article. This model can serve as a basis for assessing the price ceiling of myriad gene therapy approaches. Given the high present values for these therapeutics, innovative costing and reimbursement mechanisms should be further explored, with contingencies for sustained efficacy.

Mesenchymal stromal cells and their secreted extracellular vesicles as therapeutic tools for COVID-19 pneumonia?

The COVID-19 epidemic represents an unprecedented global health emergency, further aggravated by the lack of effective therapies. For this reason, several clinical trials are testing different off-label drugs, already approved for other pathologies. Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) have been tested during the last two decades for the treatment of various pathologic conditions, including acute and chronic lung diseases, both in animal models and in patients. In particular, promising results have been obtained in the experimental therapy of acute respiratory distress syndrome, which represents the most threatening complication of COVID-19 infection. Furthermore, more recently, great interest has been devoted to the possible clinical applications of extracellular vesicles secreted by MSCs, nanoparticles that convey much of the biological effects and of the therapeutic efficacy of their cells of origin. This review summarizes the experimental evidence underlying the possible use of MSCs and of MSC-EVs in severe COVID-19 infection and underlines the need to evaluate the possible efficacy of these therapeutic approaches through controlled studies under the supervision of the Regulatory Authorities.

Managing access to advanced therapy medicinal products: Challenges for NHS Wales

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), which include gene, somatic cell therapies and tissue-engineered medicines, have the potential to transform current care pathways by offering durable and potentially curative outcomes. However, they are exceptionally expensive, with prices exceeding £1m per patient in some cases. With an expectation that a large number of ATMPs will soon gain marketing authorisation (global market is estimated to reach £9bn to £14bn by 2025), healthcare payers and providers face a number of challenges to facilitate patient access to this new category of medicines. This viewpoint reflects on the experience of introducing ATMPs into the National Health Service in Wales where £1 in every £200 spent on medicines (2019/2020) is expected to be on ATMPs for just 20 patients. Evidence to date makes it apparent that decisions regarding clinical and cost-effectiveness and the scale of the budget impact of implementing ATMPs create both financial and health service risks. Consequently, there are significant policy implications. A critical examination is made of the approaches taken for the health technology assessment and appraisal of ATMPs, the methods of payment and service impacts of these medicines, and the approach taken to horizon scanning and subsequent modelling of the financial impact over the next 10 years.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of advanced therapy medicinal products

Aims

Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) represent a new category of medicinal products with a potential for transformative improvements in health outcomes but at exceptionally high prices. Routine adoption of ATMPs requires robust evidence of their cost‐effectiveness.

Methods

A systematic literature review of economic evaluations of ATMPs, including gene therapies, somatic cell therapies and tissue‐engineered products, was conducted. Literature was searched using MedLine, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Register, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the grey literature of health technology assessment organisations with search terms relating to ATMPs and economic evaluations. Titles were screened independently by 2 reviewers. Articles deemed to meet the inclusion criteria were screened independently on abstract, and full texts reviewed. Study findings were appraised critically.

Results

4514 articles were identified, of which 23 met the inclusion criteria. There was some evidence supporting the cost‐effectiveness of: chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell therapy axicabtagene–ciloleucel (Yescarta), embryonic neural stem cells, tumour infiltrating lymphocytes, in vitro expanded myoblast, autologous chondrocyte implantation, ex vivo gene therapy (Strimvelis) and voretigene neparvovec (Luxturna). However, estimates of cost‐effectiveness were associated with significant uncertainty and high likelihood of bias, resulting from largely unknown long‐term outcomes, a paucity of evidence on health state utilities and extensive modelling assumptions.

Conclusion

There are critical limitations to the economic evidence for ATMPs, most notably in relation to evidence on the durability of treatment effect, and the reliability of opinion‐based assumptions necessary when evidence is absent.