Assessing the Joint Value of Genomic-Based Diagnostic Tests and Gene Therapies

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.

Gene Therapy Evidence Generation and Economic Analysis: Pragmatic Considerations to Facilitate Fit-for-Purpose Health Technology Assessment

Gene therapies (GTs) are considered to be a paradigm-shifting class of treatments with the potential to treat previously incurable diseases or those with significant unmet treatment needs. However, considerable challenges remain in their health technology assessment (HTA), mainly stemming from the inability to perform robust clinical trials to convince decision-makers to pay the high prices for the potential long-term treatment benefits provided. This article aims to review the recommendations that have been published for evidence generation and economic analysis for GTs against the feasibility of their implementation within current HTA decision analysis frameworks. After reviewing the systematically identified literature, we found that questions remain on the appropriateness of GT evidence generation, considering that additional, broader values brought by GTs seem insufficiently incorporated within proposed analytic methods. In cases where innovative methods are proposed, HTA organizations remain highly conservative and resistant to change their reference case and decision analysis framework. Such resistances are largely attributed to the substantial evidence uncertainty, resource-consuming administration process, and the absence of consensus on the optimized methodology to balance all the advantages and potential pitfalls of GTs.

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.

Understanding decisions to participate in genomic medicine in children's cancer care: A comparison of what influences parents, health care providers, and the general community

BACKGROUND

The emerging role of genomically guided precision medicine in pediatric cancer care presents significant clinical, practical, and ethical challenges. We investigated the factors that influence decision-making in genomic medicine from the perspective of different stakeholders in the context of difficult-to-treat childhood cancer.

METHODS

Health care providers (HCPs), parents of childhood cancer survivors, and general community members completed an online discrete choice experiment survey. Respondents considered whether to recommend (HCPs) or choose (parents/community) a genomically guided approach to pediatric cancer treatment. Respondents completed eight choice questions varying by survival benefit, prognosis, likelihood of finding a target, quality of life (QoL), HCP/parent preference, need for biopsy, cost, and who pays. Data were analyzed using a probability regression model, with findings expressed as relative importance, stated importance, and marginal willingness to pay (mWTP).

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-six HCPs, 130 parents, and 531 community members participated. The probability of recommending/choosing genomically guided treatment increased significantly with better prognosis, survival benefit, improvements in QoL, and decision-making partner support. It decreased with increasing costs and if parents paid for treatment. HCPs were more responsive to all factors but were most influenced by survival outcomes, and parents and community members by QoL. In contrast to these forced choice preference results, HCPs stated they were most influenced by QoL and community members by survival.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the primacy of QoL in genomic decision-making, with some differences across stakeholders in the other factors influencing decision-making. These findings emphasize the need for high-quality information giving and communication to support genomic medicine choices.

Market access of gene therapies across Europe, USA, and Canada: challenges, trends, and solutions

This review can inform gene therapy developers on challenges that can be encountered when seeking market access. Moreover, it provides an overview of trends among challenges and potential solutions.