scholarly journals 2017 Update of Recent Trends in Multiple Sclerosis-Related Health Technology Assessment Decisions: An Assessment of Five Countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. A729-A730
Author(s):  
RS Clark ◽  
CM Campbell ◽  
K Meyer
2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 62-63
Author(s):  
Jesmine Cai ◽  
Tina Wang ◽  
Neil McAuslane ◽  
Lawrence Liberti

Introduction:Timely recommendation by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies for drug reimbursement is critical to ensure patient access to medicines of therapeutic value. In this study, HTA performance was examined in terms of their outcome and timing by looking at how 103 drugs, which gained regulatory approval from 2013 to 2015, were assessed by HTA agencies from 2014 to 2016.Methods:Products must have received regulatory approval from one of the following regulatory agencies: EMA (Europe), Health Canada (Canada) and TGA (Australia). The first HTA recommendations were then collected from PBAC (Australia), CADTH (Canada), HAS (France), IQWiG (Germany), SMC (Scotland) and TLV (Sweden). The HTA decisions were classified as positive, positive with restrictions, negative and multiple.Results:Eighty-four drugs were approved in Europe before Australia and Canada. Of the studied HTA agencies, PBAC had the highest percentage of products recommended within a year from regulatory approval (93 percent). In addition, Australia had the shortest median time between first regulatory submission by any of the three agencies and HTA recommendation (553 days) as compared to Europe (616 days) and Canada (722 days). This can be attributed to the TGA/PBAC parallel process. However, Australia has the highest proportion of products receiving a negative PBAC recommendation (62 percent).Conclusions:The majority of drugs were first submitted for reimbursement in Europe, but the time from regulatory submission to HTA decision was the fastest in Australia. This can be attributed to the TGA/PBAC parallel review process, which showed its benefit in reducing the overall time. A parallel review process is also available in Canada; however, it is not utilized as frequently by companies as in Australia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-166
Author(s):  
Marjanne A. Piena ◽  
Olaf Schoeman ◽  
Gerard T. Harty ◽  
Schiffon L. Wong

ObjectiveGather health technology assessment (HTA) experts' insights on the desirability and acceptability of treatment-sequencing models applied to relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).Data source/study settingPrimary data.Study designIn-depth double-blind semi-structured telephone interviews.Data collection/extraction methodsGeneral themes were extracted from qualitative interviews.Principal findingsAlthough experts confirmed the importance of evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of treatments as part of a sequence, the current HTA decision making framework is not conducive to this. Developing an RRMS treatment-sequencing model that meets HTA requirements is difficult, in particular due to scarcity of effectiveness data in later treatment lines.ConclusionsAt present, a treatment-sequencing model for RRMS may be desirable yet not requested by HTA bodies for their decision making. However, there could be other areas where a treatment-sequencing model for RRMS is of use.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document