Open access

Industry Update

10 January 2025

Access in all areas? A roundup of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 6

Authors: Annie Jullien Pannelay, Ramiro E Gilardino, and Sreeram V Ramagopalan [email protected]Author Info & Affiliations

Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Volume 14, Number 3

https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0239

PDF OtherFormats

Abstract

In this update, we discuss an article covering the implementation challenges of the upcoming European Union Health Technology Assessment regulation, particularly focusing on the complexity of population, intervention, comparator and outcomes requirements across member states; a user guide to applying generalized cost–effectiveness analysis for broader value assessment and finally highlight an ongoing debate surrounding National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's severity modifier implementation.

Formats available

You can view the full content in the following formats:

View PDF View Full Text

References

1.

Gilardino R, Treharne C, Mardiguian S, Ramagopalan SV. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 1. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 12(10), e230129 (2023).

2.

van Engen A, Krüger R, Parnaby A et al. The impact of additive population(s), intervention, comparator(s), and outcomes in a European joint clinical health technology assessment. Value Health 27(12), 1722–1731 (2024).

3.

Castanon A, Sloan R, Arocha LS, Ramagopalan SV. EU HTA Joint Clinical Assessment: are patients with rare disease going to lose out? J. Comp. Eff. Res. 13(6), e240052 (2024).

4.

Macabeo B, Rotrou T, Millier A, François C, Laramée P. The acceptance of indirect treatment comparison methods in oncology by health technology assessment agencies in England, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. Pharmacoecon. Open 8(1), 5–18 (2024).

5.

Ramagopalan SV, Diaz J, Mitchell G, Garrison LP Jr, Kolchinsky P. Is the price right? Paying for value today to get more value tomorrow. BMC Med. 22(1), 45 (2024).

6.

Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost–effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost–effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 316(10), 1093–1103 (2016).

7.

Lakdawalla DN, Doshi JA, Garrison LP Jr, Phelps CE, Basu A, Danzon PM. Defining elements of value in health care-a health economics approach: an ISPOR Special Task Force Report [3]. Value Health 21(2), 131–139 (2018).

8.

Breslau RM, Cohen JT, Diaz J, Malcolm B, Neumann PJ. A review of HTA guidelines on societal and novel value elements. Int. J. Technol. Assess Health Care 39(1), e31 (2023).

9.

Beattie A, Olivença F, Treharne C, Ramagopalan SV. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and HTA: part 5. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 13(11), e240179 (2024).

10.

Secretary of State makes economic growth a priority. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/secretary-of-state-makes-economic-growth-a-priority

11.

Angelis A, Harker M, Cairns J et al. The evolving nature of health technology assessment: a critical appraisal of NICE's new methods manual. Value Health 26(10), 1503–1509 (2023).

12.

Wise J. Does NICE's “severity modifier” for assessing diseases need to change? BMJ 387, q2620 (2024).

13.

Understanding societal preferences for priority by disease severity in England & Wales - OHE. (2024). Available at: https://www.ohe.org/publications/understanding-societal-preferences-for-priority-by-disease-severity-in-england-wales/

14.

Reviewing the impact of the updated NICE Health Technology Evaluation Manual (CONNIE). (2023). Available at: https://www.abpi.org.uk/publications/reviewing-the-impact-of-the-updated-nice-health-technology-evaluation-manual-connie/

15.

NICE Board says new method allowing greater weight to be given to severe diseases is working. (2024). Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/news/articles/nice-board-says-new-method-allowing-greater-weight-to-be-given-to-severe-diseases-is-working

|