1
|
Glaus CEG, Kloeti A, Vokinger KN. Defining 'therapeutic value' of medicines: a scoping review. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e078134. [PMID: 38110384 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In recent years, discussions on the importance and scope of therapeutic value of new medicines have intensified, stimulated by the increase of prices and number of medicines entering the market. This study aims to perform a scoping review identifying factors contributing to the definition of the therapeutic value of medicines. DESIGN Scoping review. DATA SOURCES We searched the MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Business Source Premier, EconLit, Regional Business News, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scope and Pool databases through December 2020 in English, German, French, Italian and Spanish. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Studies that included determinants for the definition of therapeutic value of medicines were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data were extracted using the mentioned data sources. Two reviewers independently screened and analysed the articles. Data were analysed from April 2021 to May 2022. RESULTS Of the 1883 studies screened, 51 were selected and the identified factors contributing to the definition of therapeutic value of medicines were classified in three categories: patient perspective, public health perspective and socioeconomic perspective. More than three-quarters of the included studies were published after 2014, with the majority of the studies focusing on either cancer disorders (14 of 51, 27.5%) or rare diseases (11 of 51, 21.6%). Frequently mentioned determinants for value were quality of life, therapeutic alternatives and side effects (all patient perspective), prevalence/incidence and clinical endpoints (all public health perspective), and costs (socioeconomic perspective). CONCLUSIONS Multiple determinants have been developed to define the therapeutic value of medicines, most of them focusing on cancer disorders and rare diseases. Considering the relevance of value of medicines to guide patients and physicians in decision-making as well as policymakers in resource allocation decisions, a development of evidence-based factors for the definition of therapeutic value of medicines is needed across all therapeutic areas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Camille E G Glaus
- Academic Chair for Regulation in Law, Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Law and Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Andrina Kloeti
- Academic Chair for Regulation in Law, Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Law and Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Kerstin N Vokinger
- Academic Chair for Regulation in Law, Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Law and Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang P, Chow SC. Innovative thinking of clinical investigation for rare disease drug development. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2023; 18:299. [PMID: 37740206 PMCID: PMC10517458 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-023-02909-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/05/2023] [Indexed: 09/24/2023] Open
Abstract
For the development of a test treatment or drug product, it is necessary to conduct composite hypothesis testing to test for effectiveness and safety simultaneously, since some approved drug products have been recalled due to safety concerns. One of the major issues in conducting a composite hypothesis testing for effectiveness and safety is the requirement of a huge sample size to achieve the desired power for detecting clinically meaningful differences in both safety and effectiveness. Situation can be much difficult in orphan drug development. In this article, a generalized two-stage innovative approach to test for effectiveness and safety simultaneously is proposed. Additionally, to alleviate the requirement of a large randomized clinical trial (RCT) and revealing effectiveness, real-world data is suggested to use in conjunction with RCT data for orphan drug development. The proposed approach can help investigators test for effectiveness and safety at the same time without worrying about the sample size. It also helps reduce the probability of approving a drug product with safety concerns.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peijin Wang
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
| | - Shein-Chung Chow
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Blonda A, Denier Y, Huys I, Kawalec P, Simoens S. How Can We Optimize the Value Assessment and Appraisal of Orphan Drugs for Reimbursement Purposes? A Qualitative Interview Study Across European Countries. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13:902150. [PMID: 35928274 PMCID: PMC9343828 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.902150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: The expansion of orphan drug treatment at increasing prices, together with uncertainties regarding their (cost-)effectiveness raises difficulties for decision-makers to assess these drugs for reimbursement. The present qualitative study aims to gain better insight into current value assessment and appraisal frameworks for orphan drugs, and provides guidance for improvement. Methods: 22 European experts from 19 different countries were included in a qualitative survey, followed by in-depth semi-structured interviews. These experts were academics, members of reimbursement agencies or health authorities, or members of regulatory or health/social insurance institutions. Adopting a Grounded Theory approach, transcripts were analysed according to the QUAGOL method, supported by the qualitative data analysis software Nvivo. Results: Although participants indicated several good practices (e.g., the involvement of patients and the presence of structure and consistency), several barriers (e.g., the lack of transparency) lead to questions regarding the efficiency of the overall reimbursement process. In addition, the study identified a number of "contextual" determinants (e.g., bias, perverse effects of the orphan drug legislation, and an inadequate consideration of the opportunity cost), which may undermine the legitimacy of orphan drug reimbursement decisions. Conclusion: The present study provides guidance for decision-makers to improve the efficiency of orphan drug reimbursement. In particular, decision-makers can generate quick wins by limiting the impact of contextual determinants rather than improving the methods included in the HTA. When implemented into a framework that promotes "Accountability for Reasonableness" (A4R), this allows decision-makers to improve the legitimacy of reimbursement decisions concerning future orphan drugs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandra Blonda
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Yvonne Denier
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Pawel Kawalec
- Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - Steven Simoens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zimmermann BM, Eichinger J, Baumgartner MR. A systematic review of moral reasons on orphan drug reimbursement. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2021; 16:292. [PMID: 34193232 PMCID: PMC8247078 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-021-01925-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2021] [Accepted: 06/20/2021] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The number of market approvals of orphan medicinal products (OMPs) has been increasing steadily in the last 3 decades. While OMPs can offer a unique chance for patients suffering from rare diseases, they are usually very expensive. The growing number of approved OMPs increases their budget impact despite their low prevalence, making it pressing to find solutions to ethical challenges on how to fairly allocate scarce healthcare resources under this context. One potential solution could be to grant OMPs special status when considering them for reimbursement, meaning that they are subject to different, and less stringent criteria than other drugs. This study aims to provide a systematic analysis of moral reasons for and against such a special status for the reimbursement of OMPs in publicly funded healthcare systems from a multidisciplinary perspective. RESULTS With a systematic review of reasons, we identified 39 reasons represented in 243 articles (scientific and grey literature) for and against special status for the reimbursement of OMPs, then categorized them into nine topics. Taking a multidisciplinary perspective, we found that most articles came from health policy (n = 103) and health economics (n = 49). More articles took the position for a special status of OMPs (n = 97) than those against it (n = 31) and there was a larger number of reasons identified in favour (29 reasons) than against (10 reasons) this special status. CONCLUSION Results suggest that OMP reimbursement issues should be assessed and analysed from a multidisciplinary perspective. Despite the higher occurrence of reasons and articles in favour of a special status, there is no clear-cut solution for this ethical challenge. The binary perspective of whether or not OMPs should be granted special status oversimplifies the issue: both OMPs and rare diseases are too heterogeneous in their characteristics for such a binary perspective. Thus, the scientific debate should focus less on the question of disease prevalence but rather on how the important variability of different OMPs concerning e.g. target population, cost-effectiveness, level of evidence or mechanism of action could be meaningfully addressed and implemented in Health Technology Assessments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bettina M Zimmermann
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
- Institute for History and Ethics in Medicine, Technical University of Munich School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Johanna Eichinger
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland
- Institute for History and Ethics in Medicine, Technical University of Munich School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Matthias R Baumgartner
- Division of Metabolism and Children's Research Center, University Children's Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Blonda A, Denier Y, Huys I, Simoens S. How to Value Orphan Drugs? A Review of European Value Assessment Frameworks. Front Pharmacol 2021; 12:631527. [PMID: 34054519 PMCID: PMC8150002 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.631527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2020] [Accepted: 03/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Decision-makers have implemented a variety of value assessment frameworks (VAFs) for orphan drugs in European jurisdictions, which has contributed to variations in access for rare disease patients. This review provides an overview of the strengths and limitations of VAFs for the reimbursement of orphan drugs in Europe, and may serve as a guide for decision-makers. Methods: A narrative literature review was conducted using the databases Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science. Only publications in English were included. Publications known to the authors were added, as well as conference or research papers, or information published on the website of reimbursement and health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. Additionally, publications were included through snowballing or focused searches. Results: Although a VAF that applies a standard economic evaluation treats both orphan drugs and non-orphan drugs equally, its focus on cost-effectiveness discards the impact of disease rarity on data uncertainty, which influences an accurate estimation of an orphan drug’s health benefit in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). A VAF that weighs QALYs or applies a variable incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) threshold, allows the inclusion of value factors beyond the QALY, although their methodologies are flawed. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) incorporates a flexible set of value factors and involves multiple stakeholders’ perspectives. Nevertheless, its successful implementation relies on decision-makers’ openness toward transparency and a pragmatic approach, while allowing the flexibility for continuous improvement. Conclusion: The frameworks listed above each have multiple strengths and weaknesses. We advocate that decision-makers apply the concept of accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to justify their choice for a specific VAF for orphan drugs and to strive for maximum transparency concerning the decision-making process. Also, in order to manage uncertainty and feasibility of funding, decision-makers may consider using managed-entry agreements rather than implementing a separate VAF for orphan drugs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandra Blonda
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Yvonne Denier
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Steven Simoens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Patient Organizations' Barriers in Pharmacovigilance and Strategies to Stimulate Their Participation. Drug Saf 2020; 44:181-191. [PMID: 32989664 DOI: 10.1007/s40264-020-00999-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION European drug regulations aim for a patient-centered approach, including involving patients in the pharmacovigilance (PV) systems. However many patient organizations have little experience on how they can participate in PV activities. AIM The aim of this study was to understand patient organizations' perceptions of PV, the barriers they face when implementing PV activities, and their interaction with other stakeholders and suggest methods for the stimulation of patient organizations as promoters of PV. METHODS A sequential qualitative method study was conducted and integrated with the quantitative study performed by Matos, Weits, and van Hunsel to complete a mixed method study. RESULTS The qualitative phase expands the understanding of the quantitative results from a previous study by broadening the knowledge on external barriers and internal barriers that patient organizations face when implementing PV activities. The strategies to stimulate patient-organization participation are the creation of more awareness campaigns, more research that creates awareness, education for patient organizations, communication of real PV examples, creation of a targeted PV system, creation of a PV communication network that provides feedback to patients, improvement of understanding of all stakeholders, and a more proactive approach from national competent authorities. CONCLUSION Both study phases show congruent results regarding patients' involvement and the activities patient organizations perform to promote drug safety. Patient organizations progressively position themselves as stakeholders in PV, carrying out many activities that stimulate awareness and participation of their members in drug safety, but still face internal and external barriers that can hamper their involvement.
Collapse
|
7
|
Schaaf J, Prokosch HU, Boeker M, Schaefer J, Vasseur J, Storf H, Sedlmayr M. Interviews with experts in rare diseases for the development of clinical decision support system software - a qualitative study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2020; 20:230. [PMID: 32938448 PMCID: PMC7493382 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-020-01254-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with rare diseases (RDs) are often diagnosed too late or not at all. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) could support the diagnosis in RDs. The MIRACUM (Medical Informatics in Research and Medicine) consortium, which is one of four funded consortia in the German Medical Informatics Initiative, will develop a CDSS for RDs based on distributed clinical data from ten university hospitals. This qualitative study aims to investigate (1) the relevant organizational conditions for the operation of a CDSS for RDs when diagnose patients (e.g. the diagnosis workflow), (2) which data is necessary for decision support, and (3) the appropriate user group for such a CDSS. METHODS Interviews were carried out with RDs experts. Participants were recruited from staff physicians at the Rare Disease Centers (RDCs) at the MIRACUM locations, which offer diagnosis and treatment of RDs. An interview guide was developed with a category-guided deductive approach. The interviews were recorded on an audio device and then transcribed into written form. We continued data collection until all interviews were completed. Afterwards, data analysis was performed using Mayring's qualitative content analysis approach. RESULTS A total of seven experts were included in the study. The results show that medical center guides and physicians from RDC B-centers (with a focus on different RDs) are involved in the diagnostic process. Furthermore, interdisciplinary case discussions between physicians are conducted. The experts explained that RDs exist which cannot be fully differentiated, but rather described only by their overall symptoms or findings: diagnosis is dependent on the disease or disease group. At the end of the diagnostic process, most centers prepare a summary of the patient case. Furthermore, the experts considered both physicians and experts from the B-centers to be potential users of a CDSS. The experts also have different experiences with CDSS for RDs. CONCLUSIONS This qualitative study is a first step towards establishing the requirements for the development of a CDSS for RDs. Further research is necessary to create solutions by also including the experts on RDs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jannik Schaaf
- Medical Informatics Group (MIG), University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
| | - Hans-Ulrich Prokosch
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Department of Medical Informatics, Biometrics and Epidemiology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Martin Boeker
- Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Centre - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Johanna Schaefer
- Medical Informatics Group (MIG), University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Jessica Vasseur
- Medical Informatics Group (MIG), University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Holger Storf
- Medical Informatics Group (MIG), University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Martin Sedlmayr
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Carl Gustav Carus Faculty of Medicine Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Lasalvia P, Prieto-Pinto L, Moreno M, Castrillón J, Romano G, Garzón-Orjuela N, Rosselli D. International experiences in multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for evaluating orphan drugs: a scoping review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2019; 19:409-420. [PMID: 31210065 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1633918] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: Orphan diseases are low-prevalence conditions with chronically debilitating or life-threatening consequences. Their treatments are generally called orphan drugs (OD). Health-technology assessment processes have traditionally considered cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), when making reimbursement and pricing decisions for health-care plans. Valuing OD with standard CEA raises important issues due to uncertain evidence, inability to meet cost-effectiveness thresholds for reimbursement and high budget impact, among others. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) allows to overcome these issues and improve the technical and ethical quality of decisions regarding prioritization, coverage, and reimbursement of OD. Areas covered: A scoping review was conducted in order to characterize MCDA frameworks for assessing OD and implementation experiences. We reviewed electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, CINAHL, EconLit, Web of Science, LILACS, Google Scholar) key journals (Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases and Value in Health) and organization repositories. Expert opinion: The theoretical framework for MCDA considers areas related to characteristics of orphan diseases and their technologies' clinical and economic impact. Participation processes are critical in incorporating societal values in weighting different dimensions and constructing decision rules. Local implementation pilots considering different stakeholders are necessary in order to pinpoint specific barriers and opportunities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Lasalvia
- a NeuroEconomix , Pontificia Universidad Javeriana , Bogota , Colombia
| | - L Prieto-Pinto
- b NeuroEconomix , MSc Clinical Epidemiology , Bogota , Colombia
| | - M Moreno
- c Health Economics and Outcome Research , Novartis de Colombia S.A , Bogotá , Colombia
| | - J Castrillón
- d Health Economics and Outcome Research , Novartis de Colombia S.A , Bogota , Colombia
| | - G Romano
- e Health Economics department , NeuroEconomix , Bogota , Colombia
| | - N Garzón-Orjuela
- f Health Economics department , NeuroEconomix , Bogotá , Colombia
| | - D Rosselli
- e Health Economics department , NeuroEconomix , Bogota , Colombia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Contesse MG, Valentine JE, Wall TE, Leffler MG. The Case for the Use of Patient and Caregiver Perception of Change Assessments in Rare Disease Clinical Trials: A Methodologic Overview. Adv Ther 2019; 36:997-1010. [PMID: 30879250 PMCID: PMC6824378 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-00920-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The traditional model of evaluating treatments based primarily on primary outcome measures has stumbled in its application to rare disease. Rare disease clinical trials face the methodological challenges of small, heterogeneous patient populations and relatively few validated, disease-specific outcome measures. Incorporating qualitative research into rare disease clinical trials may help sponsors, regulators, payers, and prescribers to better understand the real-world and patient-specific impact of a potential therapy. This paper provides a methodologic overview of the use of Patient and Caregiver Perception of Change (PPC and CPC) Assessments utilizing patient and caregiver video interviews to complement the data captured by traditional endpoints in rare disease clinical trials. METHODS Incorporating qualitative patient and caregiver video interviews into clinical trials allows for the rigorous capture of patient experiences and caregiver observations. Interview guides informed by input from key stakeholders provide the opportunity to solicit structured feedback on experiences before, during, and after the clinical trial. Patients and caregivers can complete their video interviews in a study mobile application, and interview transcripts are analyzed by independent coders. Themes are summarized by the treatment group and individual patient, which adds context to the clinical outcome measures of how patients feel and function, as well as elucidates the degree of change that is meaningful to patients and caregivers. The qualitative results can be compared to the data captured in clinical trials to assess data concordance. CONCLUSION Capturing patient experience data with sufficient rigor allows it to contribute to the body of evidence utilized in regulatory, payer, and prescriber decision-making. Adding PPC and CPC Assessments to rare disease clinical trials offers an innovative and powerful way to tap into the unique insights of patients and their families to develop a fuller picture of the patient experience in the clinical trial. FUNDING Stealth BioTherapeutics Inc.
Collapse
|
10
|
Malinowski KP, Kawalec P, Trabka W, Sowada C, Pilc A. Reimbursement of Orphan Drugs in Europe in Relation to the Type of Authorization by the European Medicines Agency and the Decision Making Based on Health Technology Assessment. Front Pharmacol 2018; 9:1263. [PMID: 30483124 PMCID: PMC6240661 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2018.01263] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2018] [Accepted: 10/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To assess shares of reimbursed orphan drugs and agreement in reimbursement decision-making in different European Union member states as well as to define odds for reimbursement influenced by the presence of conditional approval or exceptional circumstances granted by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) or by type of the disease. Methods: The list of authorized drugs with current orphan designations was collected from the website of the EMA. For each drug, the information regarding conditional approval or approval under exceptional circumstances was collected. The reimbursement statuses were available on national reimbursement or HTA agencies websites. The agreement for reimbursement decisions between selected countries was assessed using the κ coefficient for the measurement of agreement. The impact of the EMA's conditional approval as well as approval under exceptional circumstances was assessed using the logistic regression and presented as odds ratio. Results: The percentage of reimbursed orphan drugs varied significantly from 27% in Poland to 88% in Denmark, with an average value of 51% (p < 0.0001). Regarding the reimbursement status, the highest, substantial agreement was observed between Spain and Italy, and the lowest agreement was observed between Germany and England, with κ of 0.64 and 0.01, respectively. Conditional approval status significantly decreased the chance for reimbursement in France, Italy, and Spain by 77-80%; however, approval granted under exceptional circumstances had significant impact only in Germany with 85% decrease in chances for reimbursement. The type of the disease (oncology or metabolic) was significantly associated with both conditional approval (p of 0.03-oncology drugs were more likely to be conditionally approved then the rest of analyzed drugs) and exceptional circumstances (p of 0.02-drugs for metabolic diseases were more likely to be approved under exceptional circumstances). Conclusions: Access to reimbursed orphan drugs varies significantly across EU countries. The highest, substantial agreement in reimbursement decisions was observed between Italy and Spain and the lowest between Germany and England. Conditional approval and approval under exceptional circumstances were significant negative predictors of reimbursement in some countries and they were significantly associated with the type of the disease (oncology or metabolic).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krzysztof Piotr Malinowski
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - Paweł Kawalec
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - Wojciech Trabka
- Bioinformatics and Public Health Department, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University, Krakow, Poland
| | - Christoph Sowada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
| | - Andrzej Pilc
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.,Institute of Pharmacology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Janssens R, van Overbeeke E, Verswijvel L, Meeusen L, Coenegrachts C, Pauwels K, Dooms M, Stevens H, Simoens S, Huys I. Patient Involvement in the Lifecycle of Medicines According to Belgian Stakeholders: The Gap Between Theory and Practice. Front Med (Lausanne) 2018; 5:285. [PMID: 30364285 PMCID: PMC6193089 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2018.00285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2018] [Accepted: 09/17/2018] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Patient involvement is often acknowledged as an important aspect of the lifecycle of medicines. Although different typologies exist, patient involvement has been described as the involvement of patients in decision-making regarding medicines. In view of the diversity of stakeholders and types of decisions in which patients might be involved, an in-depth understanding of these stakeholders' views toward involving patients in the lifecycle of medicines is essential. Methods: Interviews and surveys were used to gain insights into the perspectives and experiences of Belgian healthcare stakeholders. Interviews (n = 22) were conducted with academics, hospital pharmacists and representatives from health insurance funds, the Belgian reimbursement agency, pharmaceutical industry and patient organizations. Interviews underwent a framework analysis. Surveys (n = 108) were completed by hospital visitors and analyzed descriptively. Results: Despite an increasing amount of efforts to involve patients, interviewees labeled the level of actively involving patients as rather low and scattered across the different phases of the lifecycle of medicines. The main opportunities for patient involvement highlighted by interviewees were for: (i) informing early development decisions on which treatments to develop, (ii) clinical trial endpoint selection and (iii) clinical trial protocol design. However, remaining questions surrounding patient knowledge, and particularly how and which patients to involve represent important barriers toward implementing patient involvement in the lifecycle of medicines. Of survey participants, 77% indicated to be willing to participate in patient preference studies. Reasons for participating mentioned most frequently were "to improve development of treatments," because "it is important to explore and listen to patient preferences" and "to have a voice as patients". Conclusions: The barriers identified in this study hamper transitioning patient involvement from theory to practice. Bridging this gap requires addressing the identified barriers and unresolved questions surrounding the right methodology for involving patients, the "right patients" to involve and means to increase patient knowledge. In order to do so, further research should focus on assessing the value of methods that allow to indirectly capture patients' perspective both in the context of development as well as in the context of evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosanne Janssens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Eline van Overbeeke
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Lotte Verswijvel
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Lissa Meeusen
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Carolien Coenegrachts
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kim Pauwels
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Marc Dooms
- University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Hilde Stevens
- Institute for Interdisciplinary Innovation in Healthcare, Université Libre Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Steven Simoens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Schlander M, Dintsios CM, Gandjour A. Budgetary Impact and Cost Drivers of Drugs for Rare and Ultrarare Diseases. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2018; 21:525-531. [PMID: 29753348 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2017] [Revised: 09/19/2017] [Accepted: 10/18/2017] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To review recent studies reporting health care expenditures (budgetary impact) for orphan medicinal products (OMPs) in Europe and to contribute to our understanding of the cost drivers of nononcological OMPs by means of an empirical analysis in Germany. METHODS A systematic search for relevant studies on rare diseases was conducted in PubMed and Embase (until December 2016). In addition, annual treatment costs of nononcological OMPs in Germany were analyzed with respect to five explanatory variables: total prevalence of disease, prevalence with added benefit, availability of alternative treatments for the same indication, extent/probability of treatment benefit, and evidence for a treatment effect on mortality. RESULTS A total of nine studies with specific estimates of the budget impact of OMPs for a total of 11 countries were identified; one study addressed specifically ultrarare diseases. Annual per-capita spending for OMPs ranges from €1.32 in Latvia to €16 in France. Per-patient annual treatment costs vary between €27,811 and €1,647,627 in Germany. On the basis of the German data set, the regression analysis shows that log prevalence has a significant inverse relationship with log annual treatment cost. In this model, doubling the prevalence leads to a 43% decrease in annual treatment cost. CONCLUSIONS Despite per-patient annual treatment costs ranging up to several hundreds of thousands of euros for some OMPs, per-capita spending for OMPs is relatively small. In this study an inverse relationship between prevalence and annual treatment costs was found.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Schlander
- Institute for Innovation and Valuation in Health Care, Wiesbaden, Germany; German Cancer Research Center, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Charalabos-Markos Dintsios
- Institute for Health Services Research and Health Economics, Medical Faculty Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Young A, Menon D, Street J, Al-Hertani W, Stafinski T. Exploring patient and family involvement in the lifecycle of an orphan drug: a scoping review. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2017; 12:188. [PMID: 29273068 PMCID: PMC5741909 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-017-0738-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2017] [Accepted: 12/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients and their families have become more active in healthcare systems and research. The value of patient involvement is particularly relevant in the area of rare diseases, where patients face delayed diagnoses and limited access to effective therapies due to the high level of uncertainty in market approval and reimbursement decisions. It has been suggested that patient involvement may help to reduce some of these uncertainties. This review explored existing and proposed roles for patients, families, and patient organizations at each stage of the lifecycle of therapies for rare diseases (i.e., orphan drug lifecycle). METHODS A scoping review was conducted using methods outlined by Arksey and O'Malley. To validate the findings from the literature and identify any additional opportunities that were missed, a consultative webinar was conducted with members of the Patient and Caregiver Liaison Group of a Canadian research network. RESULTS Existing and proposed opportunities for involving patients, families, and patient organizations were reported throughout the orphan drug lifecycle and fell into 12 themes: research outside of clinical trials; clinical trials; patient reported outcomes measures; patient registries and biorepositories; education; advocacy and awareness; conferences and workshops; patient care and support; patient organization development; regulatory decision-making; and reimbursement decision-making. Existing opportunities were not described in sufficient detail to allow for the level of involvement to be assessed. Additionally, no information on the impact of involvement within specific opportunities was found. Based on feedback from patients and families, documentation of existing opportunities within Canada is poor. CONCLUSIONS Opportunities for patient, family, and patient organization involvement exist throughout the orphan drug lifecycle. However, based on the information found, it is not possible to determine which opportunities would be most effective at each stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Young
- Health Technology & Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada
| | - Devidas Menon
- Health Technology & Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada
| | - Jackie Street
- School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Walla Al-Hertani
- Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada
| | - Tania Stafinski
- Health Technology & Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
A review of international coverage and pricing strategies for personalized medicine and orphan drugs. Health Policy 2017; 121:1240-1248. [PMID: 29033060 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2016] [Revised: 08/12/2017] [Accepted: 09/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Personalized medicine and orphan drugs share many characteristics-both target small patient populations, have uncertainties regarding efficacy and safety at payer submission, and frequently have high prices. Given personalized medicine's rising importance, this review summarizes international coverage and pricing strategies for personalized medicine and orphan drugs as well as their impact on therapy development incentives, payer budgets, and therapy access and utilization. METHODS PubMed, Health Policy Reference Center, EconLit, Google Scholar, and references were searched through February 2017 for articles presenting primary data. RESULTS Sixty-nine articles summarizing 42 countries' strategies were included. Therapy evaluation criteria varied between countries, as did patient cost-share. Payers primarily valued clinical effectiveness; cost was only considered by some. These differences result in inequities in orphan drug access, particularly in smaller and lower-income countries. The uncertain reimbursement process hinders diagnostic testing. Payer surveys identified lack of comparative effectiveness evidence as a chief complaint, while manufacturers sought more clarity on payer evidence requirements. Despite lack of strong evidence, orphan drugs largely receive positive coverage decisions, while personalized medicine diagnostics do not. CONCLUSIONS As more personalized medicine and orphan drugs enter the market, registries can provide better quality evidence on their efficacy and safety. Payers need systematic assessment strategies that are communicated with more transparency. Further studies are necessary to compare the implications of different payer approaches.
Collapse
|
15
|
DRUG EVALUATION AND DECISION MAKING IN CATALONIA: DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK BASED ON MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS (MCDA) FOR ORPHAN DRUGS. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2017; 33:111-120. [PMID: 28434413 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462317000149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to adapt and assess the value of a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework (EVIDEM) for the evaluation of Orphan drugs in Catalonia (Catalan Health Service). METHODS The standard evaluation and decision-making procedures of CatSalut were compared with the EVIDEM methodology and contents. The EVIDEM framework was adapted to the Catalan context, focusing on the evaluation of Orphan drugs (PASFTAC program), during a Workshop with sixteen PASFTAC members. The criteria weighting was done using two different techniques (nonhierarchical and hierarchical). Reliability was assessed by re-test. RESULTS The EVIDEM framework and methodology was found useful and feasible for Orphan drugs evaluation and decision making in Catalonia. All the criteria considered for the development of the CatSalut Technical Reports and decision making were considered in the framework. Nevertheless, the framework could improve the reporting of some of these criteria (i.e., "unmet needs" or "nonmedical costs"). Some Contextual criteria were removed (i.e., "Mandate and scope of healthcare system", "Environmental impact") or adapted ("population priorities and access") for CatSalut purposes. Independently of the weighting technique considered, the most important evaluation criteria identified for orphan drugs were: "disease severity", "unmet needs" and "comparative effectiveness", while the "size of the population" had the lowest relevance for decision making. Test-retest analysis showed weight consistency among techniques, supporting reliability overtime. CONCLUSIONS MCDA (EVIDEM framework) could be a useful tool to complement the current evaluation methods of CatSalut, contributing to standardization and pragmatism, providing a method to tackle ethical dilemmas and facilitating discussions related to decision making.
Collapse
|
16
|
Kim ES, Kim JA, Lee EK. National reimbursement listing determinants of new cancer drugs: a retrospective analysis of 58 cancer treatment appraisals in 2007-2016 in South Korea. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2017; 17:401-409. [PMID: 28010146 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2017.1276828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since the positive-list system was introduced, concerns have been raised over restricting access to new cancer drugs in Korea. Policy changes in the decision-making process, such as risk-sharing agreement and the waiver of pharmacoeconomic data submission, were implemented to improve access to oncology medicines, and other factors are also involved in the reimbursement for cancer drugs. The aim of this study is to investigate the reimbursement listing determinants of new cancer drugs in Korea. METHODS All cancer treatment appraisals of Health Insurance Review and Assessment during 2007-2016 were analyzed based on 13 independent variables (comparative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, drug-price comparison, oncology-specific policy, and innovation such as new mode of action). Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses were conducted. RESULTS Of 58 analyzed submissions, 40% were listed in the national reimbursement formulary. In univariate analysis, four variables were related to listing: comparative effectiveness, drug-price comparison, new mode of action, and risk-sharing agreement. In multivariate logistic analysis, three variables significantly increased the likelihood of listing: clinical improvement, below alternative's price, and risk-sharing arrangement. Cancer drug's listing increased from 17% to 47% after risk-sharing agreement implementation. CONCLUSION Clinical improvement, cost-effectiveness, and RSA application are critical to successful national reimbursement listing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eun-Sook Kim
- a School of Pharmacy , Sungkyunkwan University , Suwon , South Korea
| | - Jung-Ae Kim
- a School of Pharmacy , Sungkyunkwan University , Suwon , South Korea
| | - Eui-Kyung Lee
- a School of Pharmacy , Sungkyunkwan University , Suwon , South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Henrard S, Arickx F. Negotiating prices of drugs for rare diseases. Bull World Health Organ 2016; 94:779-781. [PMID: 27843170 PMCID: PMC5043200 DOI: 10.2471/blt.15.163519] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2015] [Revised: 04/12/2016] [Accepted: 04/18/2016] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Séverine Henrard
- Institute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30 B1.30.15, 1200 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Francis Arickx
- National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance (RIZIV/INAMI), Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Zelei T, Molnár MJ, Szegedi M, Kaló Z. Systematic review on the evaluation criteria of orphan medicines in Central and Eastern European countries. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2016; 11:72. [PMID: 27259284 PMCID: PMC4893267 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-016-0455-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2016] [Accepted: 05/19/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In case of orphan drugs applicability of the standard health technology assessment (HTA) process is limited due to scarcity of good clinical and health economic evidence. Financing these premium priced drugs is more controversial in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region where the public funding resources are more restricted, and health economic justification should be an even more important aspect of policy decisions than in higher income European countries. Objectives To explore and summarize the recent scientific evidence on value drivers related to the health technology assessment of ODs with a special focus on the perspective of third party payers in CEE countries. The review aims to list all potentially relevant value drivers in the reimbursement process of orphan drugs. Methods A systematic literature review was performed; PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched for relevant publications until April 2015. Extracted data were summarized along key HTA elements. Results From the 2664 identified publications, 87 contained relevant information on the evaluation criteria of orphan drugs, but only 5 had direct information from the CEE region. The presentation of good clinical evidence seems to play a key role especially since this should be the basis of cost-effectiveness analyses, which have more importance in resource-constrained economies. Due to external price referencing of pharmaceuticals, the relative budget impact of orphan drugs is expected to be higher in CEE than in Western European (WE) countries unless accessibility of patients remains more limited in poorer European regions. Equity principles based on disease prevalence and non-availability of alternative treatment options may increase the price premium, however, societies must have some control on prices and a rationale based on multiple criteria in reimbursement decisions. Conclusions The evaluation of orphan medicines should include multiple criteria to appropriately measure the clinical added value of orphan drugs. The search found only a small number of studies coming from CEE, therefore European policies on orphan drugs may be based largely on experiences in WE countries. More research should be done in the future in CEE because financing high-priced orphan drugs involves a greater burden for these countries. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13023-016-0455-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamás Zelei
- Department of Health Policy and Health Economics, Institute of Economics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány Péter sétány 1/A, 1117, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Mária J Molnár
- Institute of Genomic Medicine and Rare Disorders, Semmelweis University, Tömő u. 25-29, 1083, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Márta Szegedi
- Institute of Genomic Medicine and Rare Disorders, Semmelweis University, Tömő u. 25-29, 1083, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Zoltán Kaló
- Department of Health Policy and Health Economics, Institute of Economics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány Péter sétány 1/A, 1117, Budapest, Hungary. .,Syreon Research Institute, Mexikói út 65/A, 1142, Budapest, Hungary.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gammie T, Lu CY, Babar ZUD. Access to Orphan Drugs: A Comprehensive Review of Legislations, Regulations and Policies in 35 Countries. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0140002. [PMID: 26451948 PMCID: PMC4599885 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 156] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2015] [Accepted: 09/02/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To review existing regulations and policies utilised by countries to enable patient access to orphan drugs. METHODS A review of the literature (1998 to 2014) was performed to identify relevant, peer-reviewed articles. Using content analysis, we synthesised regulations and policies for access to orphan drugs by type and by country. RESULTS Fifty seven articles and 35 countries were included in this review. Six broad categories of regulation and policy instruments were identified: national orphan drug policies, orphan drug designation, marketing authorization, incentives, marketing exclusivity, and pricing and reimbursement. The availability of orphan drugs depends on individual country's legislation and regulations including national orphan drug policies, orphan drug designation, marketing authorization, marketing exclusivity and incentives such as tax credits to ensure research, development and marketing. The majority of countries (27/35) had in place orphan drug legislation. Access to orphan drugs depends on individual country's pricing and reimbursement policies, which varied widely between countries. High prices and insufficient evidence often limit orphan drugs from meeting the traditional health technology assessment criteria, especially cost-effectiveness, which may influence access. CONCLUSIONS Overall many countries have implemented a combination of legislations, regulations and policies for orphan drugs in the last two decades. While these may enable the availability and access to orphan drugs, there are critical differences between countries in terms of range and types of legislations, regulations and policies implemented. Importantly, China and India, two of the largest countries by population size, both lack national legislation for orphan medicines and rare diseases, which could have substantial negative impacts on their patient populations with rare diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Todd Gammie
- University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Christine Y. Lu
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | | |
Collapse
|