The Beneluxa Initiative domain task force health technology assessment: a comparison of member countries' past health technology assessments

被引:1
作者
Vreman, Rick A. [1 ,2 ]
van Hoof, Daan [1 ]
Nachtnebel, Anna [3 ]
Daems, Joel [4 ]
van de Casteele, Marc [4 ]
Fogarty, Emer [5 ,6 ]
Adams, Roisin [5 ,6 ]
Timmers, Lonneke [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Hlth Care Inst Zorginst Nederland, ZIN, Diemen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Utrecht Inst Pharmaceut Sci UIPS, Div Pharmacoepidemiol & Clin Pharmacol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Dachverband Osterreich Sozialversicherungen, DVSV, Austrian Social Insurance, Vienna, Austria
[4] Natl Inst Hlth Insurance & Disabil RIZIV INAMI, Brussels, Belgium
[5] Natl Ctr Pharmacoecon, Dublin, Ireland
[6] Trinity Coll Dublin, Sch Med, Dept Pharmacol & Therapeut, Dublin, Ireland
关键词
health technology assessment; Beneluxa; Beneluxa Initiative; DTF-HTA; comparative analysis; HTA systems science; international collaboration; added benefit; relative effectiveness assessment; cost-effectiveness assessment; RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENTS; RECOMMENDATIONS; DECISIONS; MEDICINES; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.1017/S0266462323000338
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare assessments between Beneluxa Initiative member countries' assessments and identify alignments and divergences. MethodsA retrospective comparative analysis was performed that investigated (i) number and type of assessed indications (for Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Ireland (IE), and the Netherlands (NL)); (ii) added benefit conclusions (for BE, IE, and NL); and (iii) the main arguments underlying differences in conclusions (for BE, IE, and NL). Data were retrieved directly from agency representatives and from public HTA reports. European Medicines Agency approved indications were included for drugs assessed between 2016 and 2020, excluding veterinary drugs, generics, and biosimilars. ResultsOnly 44 (10 percent) of the 444 included indications were assessed by all four member countries. Between any pair of two countries, the overlap was higher, from 63 (AT-NL) to 188 (BE-IE). Added benefit conclusions matched exactly in 62-74 percent of the indications, depending on the countries compared. In the remaining cases, most often a difference of one added benefit level was observed (e.g., higher vs. equal relative effect). Contradictory outcomes were very rare: only three cases were observed (lower vs. higher effect). When assessing the underlying arguments for seven cases with different outcomes, differences were attributable to slight differences in weighing of evidence and uncertainties rather than disagreement on aspects within the assessment itself. ConclusionsDespite high variability in European HTA procedures, collaboration on HTA between the Beneluxa Initiative member countries is very feasible and would likely not result in added benefit conclusions that would be very different from added benefit conclusions in national procedures.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [11] The HTA Core Model: A novel method for producing and reporting health technology assessments
    Lampe, Kristian
    Makela, Marjukka
    Garrido, Marcial Velasco
    Anttila, Heidi
    Autti-Ramo, Ilona
    Hicks, Nicholas J.
    Hofmann, Bjorn
    Koivisto, Juha
    Kunz, Regina
    Karki, Pia
    Malmivaara, Antti
    Meiesaar, Kersti
    Reiman-Mottonen, Paivi
    Norderhaug, Inger
    Pasternack, Iris
    Ruano-Ravina, Alberto
    Rasanen, Pirjo
    Saalasti-Koskinen, Ulla
    Saarni, Samuli I.
    Walin, Laura
    Kristensen, Finn Borlum
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2009, 25 : 9 - 20
  • [12] Forecasting drug utilization and expenditure: ten years of experience in Stockholm
    Linner, Love
    Eriksson, Irene
    Persson, Marie
    Wettermark, Bjorn
    [J]. BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [13] Does Conditional Approval for New Oncology Drugs in Europe Lead to Differences in Health Technology Assessment Decisions?
    Lipska, I.
    Hoekman, J.
    McAuslane, N.
    Leufkens, H. G. M.
    Hoevels, A. M.
    [J]. CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2015, 98 (05) : 489 - 491
  • [14] Health technology assessment agencies: An international overview of organizational aspects
    Martelli, Francesco
    La Torre, Giuseppe
    Ghionno, Elena D.
    Staniscia, Tommaso
    Neroni, Massimo
    Cicchetti, Americo
    Von Bremen, Konrade
    Ricciardi, Walter
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2007, 23 (04) : 414 - 424
  • [15] Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four European countries
    Nicod, Elena
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2017, 18 (06) : 715 - 730
  • [16] Developing an evidence-based methodological framework to systematically compare HTA coverage decisions: A mixed methods study
    Nicod, Elena
    Kanavos, Panos
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY, 2016, 120 (01) : 35 - 45
  • [17] Commonalities and differences in HTA outcomes: A comparative analysis of five countries and implications for coverage decisions
    Nicod, Elena
    Kanavos, Panos
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY, 2012, 108 (2-3) : 167 - 177
  • [18] Assessment of significant benefit for orphan medicinal products by European regulators may support subsequent relative effectiveness assessments by health technology assessment organizations
    Vreman, Rick A.
    de Ruijter, Angela S.
    Zawada, Anna
    Tafuri, Giovanni
    Stoyanova-Beninska, Violeta
    O'Connor, Daniel
    Naumann-Winter, Frauke
    Wolter, Franziska
    Mantel-Teeuwisse, Aukje K.
    Leufkens, Hubert G. M.
    Sidiropoulos, Iordanis
    Larsson, Kristina
    Goettsch, Wim G.
    [J]. DRUG DISCOVERY TODAY, 2020, 25 (07) : 1223 - 1231
  • [19] Decision Making Under Uncertainty: Comparing Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Reviews of Medicines in the United States and Europe
    Vreman, Rick A.
    Naci, Huseyin
    Goettsch, Wim G.
    Mantel-Teeuwisse, Aukje K.
    Schneeweiss, Sebastian G.
    Leufkens, Hubert G. M.
    Kesselheim, Aaron S.
    [J]. CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2020, 108 (02) : 350 - 357
  • [20] Differences in Health Technology Assessment Recommendations Among European Jurisdictions: The Role of Practice Variations
    Vreman, Rick A.
    Mantel-Teeuwisse, Aukje K.
    Hovels, Anke M.
    Leufkens, Hubert G. M.
    Goettsch, Wim G.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2020, 23 (01) : 10 - 16