Flexibility in assessment of rare disease technologies via NICE's single technology appraisal route: a thematic analysis
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: NICE's highly specialized technology (HST) evaluations are highly restrictive in terms of entry criteria and as a consequence, the vast majority of rare disease medicines are assessed through NICE's standard, single technology appraisal (STA) route. We explored whether NICE shows flexibility and pragmatism when evaluating treatments for rare diseases through its STA process. Materials & methods: We matched a sample of recent, randomly selected STAs for rare diseases to STAs for non-rare diseases and conducted a thematic analysis to identify patterns in NICE's decision-making, with a specific focus on the application of NICE's published methods and the handling of uncertainty. Results: Three themes emerged where some flexibility was shown: ‘handling of uncertainty and discretion’, ‘application of NICE methods’ and ‘commercial arrangements’. Rare disease technologies were generally subject to longer appraisal times than those for non-rare diseases. Conclusion: Although NICE shows a degree of flexibility and pragmatism toward uncertainties in the evidence base for rare disease medicines, this is often off-set by a lengthy appraisal process, which can lead to delays in patients receiving vital treatment.
Plain language summary
What is this article about?
In England and Wales, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) decides whether to recommend medicines for use by the National Health Service. It has a process for evaluating very rare disease medicines – the highly specialized technology route. However, the entry criteria for this process are very restrictive, so many rare disease medicines end up in NICE's standard STA process, which is deemed inadequate to account for the complex issues associated with rare diseases. We wanted to find out whether NICE considers these issues systematically when evaluating rare disease medicines via STA.
What were the results?
We randomly selected six treatments for rare diseases and six treatments for non-rare diseases and compared information taken from documents published on NICE's website. We found three main areas where NICE showed some flexibility for rare diseases: 1) taking into account a lack of clinical evidence; 2) lenient adherence to, and interpretation of, the NICE methods guide; 3) negotiating commercial arrangements that provide access to treatment while giving the manufacturer time to gather more information. However, appraisals generally took much longer for rare diseases than for non-rare diseases.
What do the results of the study mean?
The results show that NICE shows some flexibility when evaluating rare disease medicines. However, they also show that treatments for rare diseases can be disadvantaged by going through the STA process relative to non-rare diseases, resulting in the potential for substantially delayed access for patients.
Formats available
You can view the full content in the following formats:
References
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest
1.
Department of Health and Social Care. The UK rare diseases framework (2021). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-rare-diseases-framework/the-uk-rare-diseases-framework#introduction.
2.
Department of Health. The UK strategy for rare diseases (2013). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rare-diseases-strategy
3.
Department of Health and Social Care. England rare diseases action plan 2023: main report (2023). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/england-rare-diseases-action-plan-2023/england-rare-diseases-action-plan-2023-main-report
4.
Mellerio JE. The challenges of clinical trials in rare diseases. Br. J. Dermatol. 187(4), 453–454 (2022).
5.
Drummond MF, Wilson DA, Kanavos P, Ubel P, Rovira J. Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugs (2007). https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care/article/abs/assessing-the-economic-challenges-posed-by-orphan-drugs/9279ADA1E6557B1C6CAF8242A53F96DC
6.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE health technology evaluation topic selection: the manual (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg37/resources/nice-health-technology-evaluation-topic-selection-the-manual-pdf-72286780924357
7.
UK Parliament (Hansard). NICE appraisals: rare disease treatments. (2019). https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-21/debates/735963B4-2640-4CB1-98CF-290E2736796B/NICEAppraisalsRareDiseasesTreatments
8.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Risdiplam for treating spinal muscular atrophy. Response to consultee and commentator comments on the draft remit and draft scope (pre-referral) (2020). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta755/documents/scope-consultation-comments-and-responses
9.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Sapropterin for treating phenylketonuria. Response to consultee and commentator comments on the draft remit and draft scope (pre-referral) (2018). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta729/documents/scope-consultation-comments-and-responses
10.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Mexiletine for treating symptomatic myotonia in adults with non-dystrophic myotonic disorders. Response to consultee and commentator comments on the draft remit and draft scope (pre-referral) (2019). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta748/documents/scope-consultation-comments-and-responses
11.
Rare Disease UK. Illuminating the rare reality (2019). https://www.raredisease.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/02/Illuminating-the-rare-reality-2019.pdf
12.
Rare Disease UK. All party parliamentary group hearing on access to medicines in England (2016). https://www.raredisease.org.uk/our-work/coordination-of-care/all-party-parliamentary-group-hearing-on-access-to-medicines-in-england/
13.
Clarke S, Ellis M, Brownrigg J. The impact of rarity in NICE's health technology appraisals. Orphanet. J. Rare. Dis. 16(1), 218 (2021).
• Analysis of STA appraisals of orphan and non-orphan medicines
14.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Sapropterin for treating phenylketonuria [TA729] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta729
15.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Secukinumab for treating non-radiological axial spondyloarthritis [TA719] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta719
16.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Avacopan for treating severe active granulomatosis with polyangiitis or microscopic polyangiitis [TA825] (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta825
17.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Filgotinib for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis [TA792] (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta792
18.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Risdiplam for treating spinal muscular atrophy [TA755] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta755
19.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Empagliflozin for treating chronic heart failure with reduced injection fraction [TA773] (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta773
20.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Ravulizumab for treating atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome [TA710] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta710
21.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Inclisiran for treating primary hypercholesterolaemia or mixed dyslipidaemia [TA733] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta733
22.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Mexiletine for treating symptomatic myotonia in adults with non-dystrophic myotonic disorders [TA748] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta748
23.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Dapagliflozin for treating chronic kidney disease [TA775] (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta775
24.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Crizanlizumab for preventing sickle cell crises in sickle cell disease [TA743] (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta743
25.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Fremanezumab for preventing migraine [TA764] (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta764
26.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006).
• Describes the methods of the six-step thematic analysis
27.
Trim J, Nair M, Large S. Uncovering the hidden rare disease gap within NICE appraisals. Value. Health. 25(12), S343 (2022).
• Analysis of STA appraisals of orphan and non-orphan medicines
28.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Patient Access Schemes Liaison Unit. (2023). https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/patient-access-schemes-liaison-unit
29.
Pharmaphorum. How does rare disease prevalence impact drug pricing in England? (2022). https://pharmaphorum.com/market-access-2/how-does-rare-disease-prevalence-impact-drug-pricing-england/
30.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Fremanezumab for preventing migraine (rapid review of TA631 [ID3952]). Committee papers (2021). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta764/documents/committee-papers-3
31.
Foxon G, Craddy P, Wilson C. Does orphan drug status confer any benefits for products undergoing HTA appraisal by NICE in England? Value. Health. 25(1), S180 (2022).
32.
McCann E, Plested M. Exploring the role of the committee in the NICE appraisal process: how consistent are decisions across committees? Value. Health. 15(7), A318 (2012).
33.
McConaghie A. ‘Inflexible’ NICE blocking access to rare disease drugs (2019). https://www.pmlive.com/pharma_news/inflexible_nice_blocking_access_to_rare_disease_drugs_1278747
34.
Bryson R. Cait Cotter loses High Court battle for life-changing drug (2020). https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/18271320.cait-cotter-loses-high-court-battle-life-changing-drug
35.
Cohen D. MPs call for ‘life-changing’ Kuvan to be made affordable (2019). https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48218737
36.
Cohen D. UK patients who tested Kuvan for phenylketonuria will get supplies after trials end, says company. BMJ 365, l1874 (2019).
37.
Spinal News International. NICE draft guidance ‘minded no’ for access to Spinraza for SMA treatment disappoints Biogen (2018). https://spinalnewsinternational.com/nice-spinraza-biogen/
38.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Nusinersen for treating spinal muscular atrophy. Response to consultee and commentator comments on the draft remit and draft scope (pre-referral) (2018). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta588/documents/scope-consultation-comments-and-responses
39.
Luxner L. SMA groups outraged over UK rejection of Spinraza coverage as too expensive (2018). https://smanewstoday.com/news/sma-groups-outraged-over-uk-rejection-of-spinraza-coverage/
40.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Nusinersen for treating spinal muscular atrophy. Chair's presentation. 2nd appraisal committee meeting (2018). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta588/documents/1-2
41.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Zynteglo for treating transfusion-dependent beta-thalassaemia. Consultation comments on the draft scope (2019). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/gid-ta10334/documents/scope-consultation-comments-and-responses
42.
Lightning Health. NICE rejects gene therapy Zynteglo (2021). https://www.lightning.health/news/nice-rejects-gene-therapy-zynteglo/
43.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Betibeglogene autotemcel for treating transfusion-dependent beta-thalassaemia [ID968] (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/discontinued/gid-ta10334
44.
Dunleavy K. With the pricing situation ‘untenable’ in Europe, bluebird will wind down its operations in the ‘broken’ market (2021). https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/situation-untenable-bluebird-will-wind-down-its-operations-broken-europe
45.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE publishes new combined methods and processes manual and topic selection manual for its health technology evaluation programmes (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/news/article/nice-publishes-new-combined-methods-and-processes-manual-and-topic-selection-manual-for-its-health-technology-evaluation-programmes
46.
Lee D, McCarthy G, Saeed O, Allen R, Malottki K, Chandler F. The challenge for orphan drugs remains: three case studies demonstrating the impact of changes to NICE methods and processes and alternative mechanisms to value orphan products. Pharmacoecon. Open. (2022).
• Analysis of the impact of the 2022 NICE methods and process update on evaluation of orphan medicines.
47.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. CHTE methods review. Modifiers. Task and finish group report (2020). https://www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/About/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-guidance/chte-methods-consultation/Modifiers-task-and-finish-group-report.docx
48.
Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. Rescuing patient access to industry clinical trials in the UK (2022). https://www.abpi.org.uk/publications/rescuing-the-uk-industry-clinical-trials/
49.
Office for Life Sciences. Lord O'Shaughnessy to lead independent review into UK clinical trials (2023). https://www.gov.uk/government/news/lord-oshaughnessy-to-lead-independent-review-into-uk-clinical-trials
50.
Kollewe J. UK approved fewer new drugs than EU and US in year after Brexit transition (2022). https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/14/uk-approved-fewer-new-drugs-eu-us-year-after-brexit-transition
51.
Department of Health and Social Care. Policy paper: voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing and access (2018). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/voluntary-scheme-for-branded-medicines-pricing-and-access
52.
CSL. EMIG surveys member investment intentions related to 2023 VPAS rebate level (2022). https://www.csl-uk.com/emig-surveys-member-investment-intentions-related-to-2023-vpas-rebate-level/
53.
NHS England. The Innovative Medicines Fund principles (2022). https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/B1686-the-innovate-medicines-fund-principles-june-2022.pdf
54.
Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. The Innovative Medicines Fund - good news for patients but has an opportunity been missed to be more ambitious? (2022). https://www.abpi.org.uk/media/blogs/2022/june/the-innovative-medicines-fund-good-news-for-patients-but-has-an-opportunity-been-missed-to-be-more-ambitious/
55.
IPSEN. IPSEN's response to the Innovative Medicines Fund Consultation (2022). https://www.ipsen.com/uk-ireland/ipsens-response-to-the-innovative-medicines-fund-consultation/
56.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Taking a proportionate approach to technology appraisals (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/proportionate-approach-to-technology-appraisals
57.
Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. ABPI member survey: Reasons for NICE ‘optimised’ recommendations and terminated appraisals (2021). https://www.abpi.org.uk/media/udnpxhjx/abpi-member-survey_nice-optimised-and-terminated-appraisals.pdf
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2023 Cogentia Healthcare Consulting Ltd. This work is licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Unported License
History
Received: 14 June 2023
Accepted: 30 August 2023
Published online: 19 September 2023
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Flexibility in assessment of rare disease technologies via NICE's single technology appraisal route: a thematic analysis. (2023) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.57264/cer-2023-0093
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
Citing Literature
- Anas Hamad, Ahmed Al-Jedai, Rita Ojeil, Abdulrazaq Sheikh Al-Jazairi, Adel AlAssy, Yazed S. AlRuthia, Waiel Al Naeem, Hajer Almudaiheem, Mouza Alsaadi, Nada Alagil, Lina Wahba, Abdulmohsin Marghalani, Amna Al Hashar, Abdullah O. AlShehry, Sana Alblooshi, Ibtisam Alharbi, Marleine Bejjani Moukarzel, Sara Albalushi, Ahmed M. El-Sheashaey, Mohammed A. Aseeri, Farid Alenezy, Fathea Adheir, Abdulrahman Aloumi, Rehab Alnoaimi, Khalid A. Alnaqbi, Driving the future of value-based healthcare in the Gulf Cooperation Council: a roadmap for achieving sustainable access to specialty pharmaceuticals, Frontiers in Public Health, 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1667846, 13, (2025).
- Giovanni Tafuri, Andrea Bracco, Jens Grueger, Access and pricing of medicines for patients with rare diseases in the European Union: an industry perspective. A 2025 update, Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 10.1080/14737167.2025.2479131, 25, 5, (639-645), (2025).
- Constanza Vargas, Richard De Abreu Lourenco, Manuel Espinoza, Stephen Goodall, Systematic Literature Review of Access Pathways to Drugs for Patients with Rare Diseases, Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 10.1007/s40258-024-00939-4, 23, 2, (209-229), (2024).
- K. S. Radaeva, A. S. Kolbin, International experience in drug assessment for rare diseases: flexibility of approaches, Real-World Data & Evidence, 10.37489/2782-3784-myrwd-52, 4, 2, (3-12), (2024).
