Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Procedure Compared With Surgery in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Low Risk of Surgical Mortality in France.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical and cost-saving benefits of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high or intermediate risk of surgical mortality are supported by a growing evidence base. The PARTNER 3 trial (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial) demonstrated clinical benefits with SAPIEN 3 TAVI compared with SAVR in selected patients at low risk of surgical mortality. This study uses PARTNER 3 outcomes in combination with a French national hospital claim database to inform a cost-utility model and examine the cost implications of TAVI over SAVR in a low-risk population. METHODS: A 2-stage cost-utility analysis was developed to estimate changes in both direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life using TAVI with SAPIEN 3 compared with SAVR. Early adverse events associated with TAVI were captured using the PARTNER 3 data set. These data fed into a Markov model that captured longer-term outcomes of patients, after TAVI or SAVR intervention. RESULTS: TAVI with SAPIEN 3 offers meaningful benefits over SAVR in providing both cost saving (€12 742 per patient) and generating greater quality-adjusted life-years (0.89 per patient). These results are robust with TAVI with SAPIEN 3 remaining dominant across several scenarios and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This model demonstrated that TAVI with SAPIEN 3 was dominant compared with SAVR in the treatment of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who are at low risk of surgical mortality. These findings should help policy makers in developing informed approaches to intervention selection for this patient population.

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.

Early patient access to health technologies: Is innovation needed for early management?

The question of early patient access to innovative health technologies arises from the assumption that, once a certain level of effectiveness or efficiency is achieved, waiting for mainstream coverage would represent a loss of opportunity for patients or for the community. This was the premise on which the round table based its dialogue. Early access is understood as the funding of a technology that comes within this field and is CE-marked but has not yet attained "mainstream" coverage. There are several early access schemes in France ("forfait innovation", early coverage, exceptional coverage, RIHN). This round table was an opportunity to establish mapping, extended to devices not dedicated to early access but which could nevertheless provide some patients with access to non-mainstreamed technologies (Article 51, ETAPES experiments, DGOS call for projects, local schemes). It is an initial step that would need to be further developed and complemented by the dissemination of common communication materials available to all, including patients. The existing schemes are in fact still poorly known. Consideration would also have to be given to the advisability of developing these schemes in order to adapt them to the new European requirements. More generally, early access schemes must be integrated into an ecosystem that is conducive for their relevance: consideration of procedures associated with medical devices benefiting from early access; short time frames of examination; patient information. Finally, the round table proposes the creation of a new early access scheme, complementary to those that exist and that would be positioned, after CE marking, between the "forfait innovation" and mainstreaming: PRESTO (Prise En charge Sécurisée et Temporaire de technologies innOvantes) (secure and temporary coverage for innovative technologies).

Hospital-based health technology assessment in France: A focus on medical devices.

Hospital-based health technology assessment (HTA) guides decisions as to whether new healthcare products should be made available within hospital structures. Its extension to medical devices (MDs) makes it possible to analyse several relevant aspects of these healthcare products in addition to their clinical value, and such evaluations are of interest to national health authorities, other healthcare establishments and industry. The aim of this work was to formulate several recommendations for a blueprint for hospital-based HTA for MDs in France. Five themes based on the work of the European Adopting hospital-based HTA in the EU (AdHopHTA) project were defined. Each member of the roundtable was then allocated a documentation task based on their experience of the theme concerned, and a literature review was carried out. An inventory of hospital-based HTA was performed and six recommendations aiming to strengthen and improve this approach were put forward: (1) encouragement of the spread of the hospital-based HTA culture and participation in communications and the promotion of this approach to hospital decision-makers; (2) adaptation of hospital-based HTA to the needs of decision-makers, taking into account the financial timetable and strategic objectives of the healthcare establishment; (3) harmonisation of the dossiers requested from industry between healthcare establishments, based on a common core; (4) promotion of the sharing of hospital-based HTA data under certain conditions, with data dissociable from the HTA report and the use of a validated methodology for the literature review; (5) creation of a composite indicator reflecting data production effort and the sharing of HTA activities, to be taken into account in the distribution of funds allocated for teaching, research and innovation missions considered of general interest; (6) the transmission of information directly from local to national level by pioneering centres. This work highlights the major issues at stake in hospital-based HTA and the need to valorise such activities in France.

Organisational impact: Definition and assessment methods for medical devices.

Health technology assessment (HTA) is a rapidly developing area and the value of taking non-clinical fields into consideration is growing. Although the health-economic aspect is commonly recognised, evaluating organisational impact has not been studied nearly as much. The goal of this work was to provide a definition of organisational impact in the sector of medical devices by defining its contours and exploring the evaluation methods specific to this field. Following an analysis of the literature concerning the impact of technologies on organisations as well as the medical literature, and also after reviewing the regulatory texts in this respect, the group of experts identified 12 types of organisational impact. A number of medical devices were carefully screened using the criteria grid, which proved to be operational and to differentiate properly. From the analysis of the practice and of the methods described, the group was then able to derive a few guidelines to successfully evaluate organisational impact. This work shows that taking organisational impact into consideration may be critical alongside of the other criteria currently in favour (clinically and economically). What remains is to confer a role in the decision-making process on this factor and one that meets the economic efficiency principle.

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.

Promoting the place of the allied health professions in clinical research.

Clinical research is of major importance to today's society, as scientific evidence is increasingly demanded as a basis for progress, whether this involves developing new healthcare products, improving clinical practice and care protocols or progress in prevention. Clinical research therefore requires professionals who are both experienced and increasingly well trained. Against this background, allied health professionals are becoming involved more and more, both as team members supporting clinical research projects and as managers or coordinators of projects in their own field. Clinical research activities provide an ideal opportunity for continuing professional development. All of this means that the professional skills of the allied health professions and clinical research support professions must be enhanced, their role promoted in the context of lecturer status and in the longer term, their status recognised by the supervisory authorities.