Key drivers of innovativeness appraisal for medicines: the Italian experience after the adoption of the new ranking system

被引:14
作者
Galeone, Carlotta [1 ,2 ]
Bruzzi, Paolo [3 ]
Jommi, Claudio [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Milano Bicocca, Bicocca Appl Stat Ctr B ASC, Milan, Lombardia, Italy
[2] Statinfo, Biostat & Outcome Res, Renate, Lombardia, Italy
[3] IRCCS AOU San Martino, Dept Clin Epidemiol, Genoa, Liguria, Italy
[4] Bocconi Univ Milano, SDA Bocconi Sch Management, CERGAS Ctr Res Hlth & Social Care Management, Milan, Italy
关键词
health policy; health services administration & management; public health; international health services; FRAMEWORK; DRUGS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041259
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective In 2017, the Italian Medicines Agency (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, AIFA) introduced a standardised process to appraise innovativeness of medicines. Innovative medicines are provided speeder market access and dedicated funds. Innovativeness criteria are: unmet therapeutic need, added therapeutic value and quality of the evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method). We investigated the role played by these three criteria on the final decision aimed to understand how the new Italian innovativeness appraisal framework was implemented. Design A desk research gathered AIFA's appraisal reports on innovativeness and data analyses were conducted. No patients were directly involved in this study. Setting and participants We scrutinised all 77 appraisal reports available on AIFA's website (2017-2020). Primary and secondary outcome measures The impact of the three domains on final decision was investigated through a series of univariate analyses. Results Among 77 appraisal reports on innovativeness available, 49 (64%) and 28 (36%) were for oncology and non-oncology medicines, respectively. The appraisals were equally distributed among 'fully innovative' (36%), 'conditionally innovative' (30%) and 'not innovative' (34%). Added therapeutic value was the most important driver on innovativeness decision, followed by quality of the evidence. Drugs for rare diseases and with paediatric/mixed indications were appraised 'innovative' by a larger proportion, but no statistical significance was found. Conclusions Despite some limitations, including the moderate number of appraisals, this paper provides an insight into the determinants of innovativeness appraisals for medicines in Italy and the accuracy of the appraisal process. This has important implications in terms of transparency and accountability in the prioritisation process applied to innovative medicines.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, FARM INN
[2]  
AIFA, 2017, CRIT CLASS FARM INN, V519
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2017, ABOUTPHARMA, V148, P28
[4]  
Atkins D, 2004, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V328, P1490
[5]   Comparative Assessment of Clinical Benefit Using the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale Version 1.1 and the ASCO Value Framework Net Health Benefit Score [J].
Cherny, Nathan I. ;
de Vries, Elisabeth G. E. ;
Dafni, Urania ;
Garrett-Mayer, Elizabeth ;
McKernin, Shannon E. ;
Piccart, Martine ;
Latino, Nicola J. ;
Douillard, Jean-Yves ;
Schnipper, Lowell E. ;
Somerfield, Mark R. ;
Bogaerts, Jan ;
Karlis, Dimitris ;
Zygoura, Panagiota ;
Vervita, Katerina ;
Pentheroudakis, George ;
Tabernero, Josep ;
Zielinski, Christoph ;
Wollins, Dana S. ;
Schilsky, Richard L. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 37 (04) :336-+
[6]   A Comparative Analysis of Two Contrasting European Approaches for Rewarding the Value Added by Drugs for Cancer: England Versus France [J].
Drummond, Michael ;
de Pouvourville, Gerard ;
Jones, Elizabeth ;
Haig, Jennifer ;
Saba, Grece ;
Cawston, Helene .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2014, 32 (05) :509-520
[7]   Using GRADE methodology to assess innovation of new medicinal products in Italy [J].
Fortinguerra, Filomena ;
Tafuri, Giovanni ;
Trotta, Francesco ;
Addis, Antonio .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2020, 86 (01) :93-105
[8]   Five years of EMA-approved systemic cancer therapies for solid tumours-a comparison of two thresholds for meaningful clinical benefit [J].
Groessmann, N. ;
Del Paggio, J. C. ;
Wolf, S. ;
Sullivan, R. ;
Booth, C. M. ;
Rosian, K. ;
Emprechtinger, R. ;
Wild, C. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2017, 82 :66-71
[9]  
Jommi C., 2015, PHARM PRICES 21 CENT, P131, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-12169-7_8
[10]   Implementation of Value-based Pricing for Medicines [J].
Jommi, Claudio ;
Armeni, Patrizio ;
Costa, Francesco ;
Bertolani, Arianna ;
Otto, Monica .
CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2020, 42 (01) :15-24