The novelties of the regulation on health technology assessment, a key achievement for the European union health policies

Health technology assessment in musculoskeletal radiology: the case study of EOSedge™

OBJECTIVES

Health technology assessment (HTA) is a systematic process used to evaluate the properties and effects of healthcare technologies within their intended use context. This paper describes the adoption of HTA process to assess the adoption of the EOSedge™ system in clinical practice.

METHODS

The EOSedge™ system is a digital radiography system that delivers whole-body, high-quality 2D/3D biplanar images covering the complete set of musculoskeletal and orthopedic exams. Full HTA model was chosen using the EUnetHTA Core Model® version 3.0. The HTA Core Model organizes the information into nine domains. Information was researched and obtained by consulting the manufacturers' user manuals, scientific literature, and institutional sites for regulatory aspects.

RESULTS

All nine domains of the EUnetHTA Core Model® helped conduct the HTA of the EOSedge, including (1) description and technical characteristics of the technology; (2) health problem and current clinical practice; (3) safety; (4) clinical effectiveness; (5) organizational aspects; (6) economic evaluation; (7) impact on the patient; (8) ethical aspects; and (9) legal aspects.

CONCLUSIONS

EOS technologies may be a viable alternative to conventional radiographs. EOSedge has the same intended use and similar indications for use, technological characteristics, and operation principles as the EOS System and provides significant dose reduction factors for whole spine imaging compared to the EOS System without compromising image quality. Regarding the impact of EOS imaging on patient outcomes, most studies aim to establish technical ability without evaluating their ability to improve patient outcomes; thus, more studies on this aspect are warranted.

Suitability of the Current Health Technology Assessment of Innovative Artificial Intelligence-Based Medical Devices: Scoping Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based medical devices have garnered attention due to their ability to revolutionize medicine. Their health technology assessment framework is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to analyze the suitability of each health technology assessment (HTA) domain for the assessment of AI-based medical devices.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping literature review following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. We searched databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library), gray literature, and HTA agency websites.

RESULTS

A total of 10.1% (78/775) of the references were included. Data quality and integration are vital aspects to consider when describing and assessing the technical characteristics of AI-based medical devices during an HTA process. When it comes to implementing specialized HTA for AI-based medical devices, several practical challenges and potential barriers could be highlighted and should be taken into account (AI technological evolution timeline, data requirements, complexity and transparency, clinical validation and safety requirements, regulatory and ethical considerations, and economic evaluation).

CONCLUSIONS

The adaptation of the HTA process through a methodological framework for AI-based medical devices enhances the comparability of results across different evaluations and jurisdictions. By defining the necessary expertise, the framework supports the development of a skilled workforce capable of conducting robust and reliable HTAs of AI-based medical devices. A comprehensive adapted HTA framework for AI-based medical devices can provide valuable insights into the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and societal impact of AI-based medical devices, guiding their responsible implementation and maximizing their benefits for patients and health care systems.

From volume to value: a watershed moment for the clinical laboratory

The clinical laboratory is often evaluated for the volume of testing. However, it is undeniable that laboratory tests affect clinical decision-making and are included in many clinical guidelines, meaning their contribution to determining clinical outcomes. Therefore, the clinical laboratory professional has the task of enhancing laboratory tests by optimizing the request and reporting phase and addressing patient outcomes. This opinion paper, presenting practical examples of managing value-based health care in the clinical laboratory context, underlines the need to shift towards value-based management to optimize outcome-based health care.

Striving for a pragmatic contribution of biomarkers results to lifelong health care

BACKGROUND

The increased role of preventive medicine in healthcare and the rapid technological advancements, have deeply changed the landscape of laboratory medicine. In particular, increased investments in newborn screening tests and policies have been observed. Aim of this paper is to characterize how laboratory professionals engaged in clinical chemistry or newborn screening, in collaboration with experts in econometric, bioinformatics, and biostatistics may address a pragmatic use of laboratory results in the decision-making process oriented toward improvement of health care outcomes.

CONTENT

The effectiveness of biomarkers on healthcare depends on several factors such as analytical performance, prevalence of the disease, integration of the test within the diagnostic algorithm, associated costs, and social/economic impact of false positive and false negative results. Cost-effectiveness analysis needs to be performed and reliability achieved, by overcoming analytical pitfalls and by improving interpretative criteria. These are challenging issues common to clinical chemistry and newborn screening tests. Following the experience in clinical chemistry, one of the main issues to be approached in newborn screening tests, is the lack of harmonization of results obtained by different methods and the limited healthcare effectiveness.

SUMMARY

The focus on prevention is a crucial opportunity for laboratory medicine to change how to approach the effectiveness of biomarkers on healthcare. The consolidation within clinical laboratories of professionals with different technical and methodological expertise coupled with the need to produce and manage large sets of data, require the cooperation of professionals from other disciplines to characterize the impact of the tests on epidemiological outcomes for health care policy making process.

Implications of Oncology Trial Design and Uncertainties in Efficacy-Safety Data on Health Technology Assessments

Background: Advances in cancer medicines have resulted in tangible health impacts, but the magnitude of benefits of approved cancer medicines could vary greatly. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a multidisciplinary process used to inform resource allocation through a systematic value assessment of health technology. This paper reviews the challenges in conducting HTA for cancer medicines arising from oncology trial designs and uncertainties of safety-efficacy data. Methods: Multiple databases (PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar) and grey literature (public health agencies and governmental reports) were searched to inform this policy narrative review. Results: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data from clinical trials and other relevant sources of evidence has made HTA for cancer medicines challenging. The approval of cancer medicines through expedited pathways has increased in recent years, in which surrogate endpoints or biomarkers for patient selection have been widely used. Using these surrogate endpoints has created uncertainties in translating surrogate measures into patient-centric clinically (survival and quality of life) and economically (cost-effectiveness and budget impact) meaningful outcomes, with potential effects on diverting scarce health resources to low-value or detrimental interventions. Potential solutions include policy harmonization between regulatory and HTA authorities, commitment to generating robust post-marketing efficacy-safety data, managing uncertainties through risk-sharing agreements, and using value frameworks. Conclusion: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data is a central problem for conducting HTA of cancer medicines, potentially resulting in misinformed resource allocation.