Place of patient-reported outcomes & experiences measurements (PROMS/PREMS) in the assessment and pricing of Health technologies in France.

In the context of health technologies assessment, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become assessment criteria that are expected by evaluation agencies along with the other usual clinical criteria. PROMs instruments measure all aspects of patient experience in connection with their health: symptoms, activities of daily living (physical function, sleep, etc.), various aspects of health-related quality of life (QoL), compliance, global impression of change in wellbeing. PROMs are useful both as 1) a primary or secondary efficacy endpoints, and 2) a tolerability criterion to supplement vigilance data reported by clinicians. Measurement of PROMs must be subject to methodological rigor that is identical to that of other assessment criteria measured by an observer. Scales must be validated, suitable for the objective, and where possible specific to a disease. In addition to standard measures of quality of life, PROMs are taken into consideration in the assessments performed by the HAS, even if their impact on the conclusions is difficult to isolate, as assessments are multifactorial and take into account all data available with regard to the medical context. The CEPS will indirectly take into account PROMs in the fixing of the price or tariff only if they have contributed to the award of the ASA/ASMR by the ad hoc committee of the HAS. The working group has formulated three recommendations which aim to further the implementation of patient-reported outcome measures: (1) Better information for all parties involved in a dossier for technology assessment, (2) Systematization of the collection of PROMs for evaluation of health products, (3) Improved quality of dossiers thanks to the use of relevant and validated tools.

[Place of hospital at home cancer chemotherapy: Analysis of 2012 PMSI-HAD data]. / Analyse de l’activité de chimiothérapie anticancéreuse en hospitalisation à domicile à partir du PMSI-HAD.

HaH cancer chemotherapy activity was not evenly distributed throughout France, but was concentrated in few hospitals; 10% of hospitals accounted for 90% of home chemotherapy. However, the diseases treated were homogeneous..

Assessment and non-clinical impact of medical devices.

Medical devices (MDs) cover a wide variety of products. They accompany changes in medical practice in step with technology innovations. Innovations in the field of MDs can improve the conditions of use of health technology and/or modify the organisation of care beyond the strict diagnostic or therapeutic benefit for the patients. However, these non purely clinical criteria seem to be only rarely documented or taken into account in the assessment of MDs during reimbursement decisions at national level or for formulary listing by hospitals even though multidimensional models for the assessment of health technologies have been developed that take into account the views of all stakeholders in the healthcare system In this article, after summarising the background concerning the assessment of health technologies in France, a definition of non-clinical criteria for the assessment of MDs is proposed and a decision tree for the assessment of MDs is described. Future lines of approach are proposed as a conclusion.

[Haute Autorite de sante opinion on cost-effectiveness of health products : results and perspectives]. / Avis d’efficience relatifs aux produits de santé à la Haute Autorité de santé?: bilan et perspectives.

Since 3rd October 2013 in France, drug companies applying for reimbursement of an innovative and expensive drug or medical device are required to provide the French National Authority for Health (HAS) with a cost-effectiveness assessment of their product. After a methodological audit of the economic evaluation submitted by the drug company, the Health Economics and Public Health Committee (CEESP) issues an opinion on the expected or observed cost-effectiveness. This opinion is sent to the Pricing Committee (CEPS) which determines the price of the product. After summarizing the French reimburse'!lent and pricing system, the objective of this article is to review the first 22 months of activity, in which HAS issued 30 cost-effectiveness opinions. The process, based on exchanges between drug companies and HAS, allowed the pricing committee to document the economic criterion in the majority of applications, while characterizing the degree of uncertainty of the results. For ten applications, major methodological concerns led the CEESP to reject the drug company's assessment.

[Increase kidney transplant: guidelines of Haute Autorité de Santé]. / Développer la transplantation rénale: les recommandations de la Haute Autorité de Santé.

The Haute Autorité de santé, in association with the Agence de la biomédecine, realizes, at the request of the Caisse nationale d'assurance maladie des travailleurs salariés and the Direction générale de l'offre de soins, a medical economic evaluation on treatment's alternative of terminal chronic renal insufficiency. To answer at this request, a multiannual working program was set up. A first part of this work concerned specifically the development of the kidney transplant. Indeed, the kidney transplant occupies a particular place among the various modalities of treatment of the terminal chronic renal insufficiency because it is at the same time the most effective on a medical plan and the least expensive, thus the most efficient. However, its development is constraint by the lack of the transplants and the number of patients registered on the national list of wait increases every year. The objective of this article is to present the method of work as well as the main identified axes of development.

Medico-economic evaluation of health products in the context of the Social Security Financing Act for 2012.

The participants in round table 6 of the Giens Workshops 2012 drafted recommendations based on the collective interpretation of important elements of the decree concerning the medico-economic evaluation of health products published a few days earlier (02 October 2012). The medico-economic evaluation (MEE), becomes an additional determinant for fixing the prices of health products by the Health products economic committee (Comité économique des produits de santé, CEPS) via the hierarchisation of treatment strategies, and thus modifies the market access conditions. Limiting the analysis to medicinal products and medical devices for which a major, important or moderate improvement in the medical service rendered (ASMR) or of the expected service (ASA) has been requested and presenting a significant budget impact on the Social Security expenses, excludes health products with ASMR or ASA with a lower level requested which often create complex price fixing problems and often have a major budget impact. This latter concept remains to be defined in detail. The MEE envisaged for the first registration must include the need to confirm or refute the initial hypotheses especially concerning the actual position in the therapeutic strategy at the time of renewal of the registration. For the first registration, the conventional reference to European prices guaranteeing a minimum price to innovative medicinal products, the medico-economic models submitted by the industry to the French Drug Authority (Haute autorité de santé, HAS) must be used to guide the compilation of new data to be requested at the time of the registration renewal and to negotiate the level of the discounts in the framework of a price-volume agreement, if applicable. The MEE will allow comparing the result of the analysis to the model hypothesis at the time of the renewal of the registration, which may contribute to the renegotiation (either up or down) of the price of health goods. The costs related to obtaining new data must be controlled. In order for the MEE to allow confirming the relationship between the price requested and the benefit expected, the group privileges the definition of reference values with an indicative and non-normative value, likely to evolve with time rather than a threshold. Concerning the evaluation procedure: the time to market access must not be lengthened; while the possibility of regular meetings between the industry and the HAS is recommended to avoid methodological divergences. A transitory period should allow the implementation of the entire evaluation procedure which must also take into account the specificities of health products registered before the 3 October 2013.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal newborn screening for medium chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency in France.

BACKGROUND: Five diseases are currently screened on dried blood spots in France through the national newborn screening programme. Tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) is a technology that is increasingly used to screen newborns for an increasing number of hereditary metabolic diseases. Medium chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency (MCADD) is among these diseases. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of introducing MCADD screening in France. METHODS: We developed a decision model to evaluate, from a societal perspective and a lifetime horizon, the cost-effectiveness of expanding the French newborn screening programme to include MCADD. Published and, where available, routine data sources were used. Both costs and health consequences were discounted at an annual rate of 4%. The model was applied to a French birth cohort. One-way sensitivity analyses and worst-case scenario simulation were performed. RESULTS: We estimate that MCADD newborn screening in France would prevent each year five deaths and the occurrence of neurological sequelae in two children under 5 years, resulting in a gain of 128 life years or 138 quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The incremental cost per year is estimated at €2.5 million, down to €1 million if this expansion is combined with a replacement of the technology currently used for phenylketonuria screening by MS/MS. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is estimated at €7 580/QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicate that while the results are robust to variations in the parameters, the model is most sensitive to the cost of neurological sequelae, MCADD prevalence, screening effectiveness and screening test cost. The worst-case scenario suggests an ICER of €72 000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Although France has not defined any threshold for judging whether the implementation of a health intervention is an efficient allocation of public resources, we conclude that the expansion of the French newborn screening programme to MCADD would appear to be cost-effective. The results of this analysis have been used to produce recommendations for the introduction of universal newborn screening for MCADD in France.