A budget impact analysis of a digital monitoring solution in patients treated with oral anticancer agents: a medico-economic analysis of the randomized phase 3 CAPRI trial.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has demonstrated numerous benefits in cancer care, including improved quality of life, overall survival, and reduced medical resource use. This study presents a budget impact analysis of a nurse navigator-led RPM program, based on the CAPRI trial, from the perspective of the French national health insurance (NHI). The study aimed to assess the impact of the program on medical resource utilization and costs. METHODS: Medical resource utilization data were collected from both medico-administrative sources and patient-reported questionnaires. Costs were calculated by applying unit costs to resource utilization and estimating the average monthly cost per patient. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore different perspectives and varying resource consumption. RESULTS: The analysis included 559 cancer patients participating in the CAPRI program. From the NHI perspective, the program resulted in average savings of €377 per patient over the 4.58-month follow-up period, mainly due to reduced hospitalizations. The all-payers perspective yielded even greater savings of €504 per patient. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the findings. CONCLUSION: The budget impact analysis demonstrated that the CAPRI RPM program was associated with cost savings from the perspective of the NHI. The program's positive impact on reducing hospitalizations outweighed the additional costs associated with remote monitoring. These findings highlight the potential economic benefits of implementing RPM programs in cancer care. Further research is warranted to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness and scalability of such programs in the real-world settings.

Public Health Impact and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of 4-Component Meningococcal Serotype B Vaccination for Infants in France.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In France, meningococcal serogroup B (MenB) is the most common serogroup causing invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) in infants and young children. Our objective was to illustrate the impact of model choices on health outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of infant vaccination with the multicomponent meningococcal serogroup B vaccine (4CMenB) versus no vaccine in France. METHODS: A previously published dynamic transmission-based cost-effectiveness model was adapted for the French context using updated, French-specific demographic, epidemiological, and cost data. IMD incidence and long-term sequelae were derived through analysis of French healthcare and surveillance databases. A collective perspective over a 100-year time horizon was adopted, with a discount rate of 2.5%, reduced to 1.5% after the first 30 years. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, infant vaccination with 4CMenB avoided 3101 MenB IMD cases in infants aged < 1 year (- 54%) and 6845 cases in all age groups (- 21%). The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €316,272/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) but was highly sensitive to the types of sequelae included, MenB incidence, vaccine effectiveness parameters, and consideration of life-expectancy in IMD survivors (range: €65,272/QALY to €493,218/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Using economic models compliant with French methodology guidelines, 4CMenB does not seem cost-effective; however, results are sensitive to model choices and 4CMenB immunization is an effective strategy to prevent MenB IMD cases and to improve quality of life and economic burden associated with MenB IMD treatment, especially with regard to long-term sequelae.

Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is rare but can lead to lifelong disabilities and death. It is caused by a type of bacteria called Neisseria meningitidis. IMD is most common in infants and young children, and in this group it is mostly caused by Neisseria serogroup B bacteria. We analyzed the number of IMD cases caused by serogroup B in France, as well as sequelae (long-time effects of the disease), using data from national healthcare databases. The most common sequelae observed were epilepsy, severe neurological disorders, and anxiety, occurring in approximately 5% of patients. We then calculated the costs and benefits of the multicomponent meningococcal serogroup B vaccine (4CMenB) vaccine for infants and young children in France. The results showed that 4CMenB vaccination can reduce the number of IMD cases due to serogroup B by 3101 cases (− 54%) in infants under 1 year and by 6845 cases (− 21%) in all age groups. Over 100 years, vaccination could prevent over 2000 cases of IMD that result in disabilities and 438 deaths. The estimated cost-effectiveness ratio was high. However, costs per health benefit gained decreased when focusing on long-term health benefits. In France, there is no threshold for the cost-effectiveness ratio and the French Health Authority has included 4CMenB in its vaccination schedule. This recommendation reflects results from our study, which highlights the considerable burden on families and patients, mostly because of IMD-related disabilities. Early vaccination is a good way to protect infants and young children against this serious disease.

The Determination of Diabetes Utilities, Costs, and Effects Model: A Cost-Utility Tool Using Patient-Level Microsimulation to Evaluate Sensor-Based Glucose Monitoring Systems in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: Comparative Validation.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy and validity of the Determination of Diabetes Utilities, Costs, and Effects (DEDUCE) model, a Microsoft-Excel-based tool for evaluating diabetes interventions for type 1 and type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The DEDUCE model is a patient-level microsimulation, with complications predicted based on the Sheffield and Risk Equations for Complications Of type 2 diabetes models for type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. For this tool to be useful, it must be validated to ensure that its complication predictions are accurate. Internal, external, and cross-validation was assessed by populating the DEDUCE model with the baseline characteristics and treatment effects reported in clinical trials used in the Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Mount Hood Diabetes Challenges. Results from the DEDUCE model were evaluated against clinical results and previously validated models via mean absolute percentage error or percentage error. RESULTS: The DEDUCE model performed favorably, predicting key outcomes, including cardiovascular disease in type 1 diabetes and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes. The model performed well against other models. In the Mount Hood 9 Challenge comparison, error was below the mean reported from comparator models for several outcomes, particularly for hazard ratios. CONCLUSIONS: The DEDUCE model predicts diabetes-related complications from trials and studies well when compared with previously validated models. The model may serve as a useful tool for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of diabetes technologies.

Budget Impact Analysis of Expanding Gliflozin Coverage in the CKD Population: A French Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Gliflozins have historically been indicated for type 2 diabetes in France. However, their efficacy has recently been demonstrated in heart failure and chronic kidney disease (CKD), with positive recommendations by Haute Autorité de Santé for gliflozin therapies in these indications. The study objective was to investigate the 5-year budget impact associated with the introduction of gliflozins in addition to standard therapy in people with CKD and elevated albuminuria, regardless of diabetes status, from the perspective of the French healthcare system. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to estimate the 5-year implications of incorporating gliflozins in the treatment of patients with CKD in France, using efficacy data from the Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease (DAPA-CKD) trial. Direct medical costs associated with drug acquisition and management, treatment-related adverse events, dialysis and kidney transplantation, and adverse clinical outcomes were considered. Market share forecasts were estimated from historical data and expert opinions. Event rates were derived from trial data, while cost data were sourced from published estimates. RESULTS: The introduction of gliflozins was estimated to be cost saving compared to the no gliflozins scenario, with an expected cumulative 5-year budget impact of -€650 million, driven by slowed disease progression in patients treated with gliflozins, with fewer patients cumulatively progressing to end-stage kidney disease (84,526 vs. 92,062). This, in addition to fewer hospitalisations for heart failure and deaths from any cause, led to substantial medical care cost offsets (kidney-related: - €894 million; hospitalisation for heart failure: - €14.3 million; end-of-life care: - €17.3 million) to the additional drug acquisition (€273 million) and treatment-related adverse events costs (€2.98 million). CONCLUSION: In concert with early diagnosis and proactive management of CKD, the expansion of the gliflozin indications into the French CKD population presents the opportunity to reduce the substantial burden associated with cardio-renal complications which outweighs the additional cost of the new treatment. INFOGRAPHIC.

How are health technology assessment bodies responding to the assessment challenges posed by cell and gene therapy?

BACKGROUND: The aims of this research were to provide a better understanding of the specific evidence needs for assessment of clinical and cost-effectiveness of cell and gene therapies, and to explore the extent that the relevant categories of evidence are considered in health technology assessment (HTA) processes. METHODS: A targeted literature review was conducted to identify the specific categories of evidence relevant to the assessment of these therapies. Forty-six HTA reports for 9 products in 10 cell and gene therapy indications across 8 jurisdictions were analysed to determine the extent to which various items of evidence were considered. RESULTS: The items to which the HTA bodies reacted positively were: treatment was for a rare disease or serious condition, lack of alternative therapies, evidence indicating substantial health gains, and when alternative payment models could be agreed. The items to which they reacted negatively were: use of unvalidated surrogate endpoints, single arm trials without an adequately matched alternative therapy, inadequate reporting of adverse consequences and risks, short length of follow-up in clinical trials, extrapolating to long-term outcomes, and uncertainty around the economic estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The consideration by HTA bodies of evidence relating to the particular features of cell and gene therapies is variable. Several suggestions are made for addressing the assessment challenges posed by these therapies. Jurisdictions conducting HTAs of these therapies can consider whether these suggestions could be incorporated within their existing approach through strengthening deliberative decision-making or performing additional analyses.

Data Governance for Real-World Data Management: A Proposal for a Checklist to Support Decision Making.

OBJECTIVES: Real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) can provide extensive information on healthcare for use in health technology assessment and decision making. Nevertheless, there is a lack of consensus surrounding the appropriate data governance (DG) practices for RWD/RWE. Data sharing is also a large concern, especially considering evolving data protection regulations. Our objective is to propose recommendations for international standards of evaluating the acceptability of RWD governance practices. METHODS: After reviewing the literature, we created a checklist targeting DG practices for RWD/RWE. We then carried out a 3-round Delphi panel, including European policy makers, health technology assessment experts, and hospital managers. The consensus for each statement was measured and the checklist adjusted accordingly. RESULTS: The literature review identified the main topics regarding RWD/RWE DG practices: data privacy and security, data management and linkage, data access management, and the generation and use of RWE. Members of the Delphi panel (21 experts/25 invited) were presented a total of 24 statements related to each of the topics. Experts demonstrated a progressive level of consensus and importance ratings in all topics and to most statements. We suggest a refined checklist in which the statements rated less important or with less consensus have been removed. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests how the DG of RWD/RWE could be qualitatively evaluated. We propose checklists that could be used by all RWD/RWE users to help ensure the quality and integrity of RWD/RWE governance and complement data protection law.

Review and Assessment of Policy Options for Improving Access to Combination Therapies in Oncology in Europe.

OBJECTIVES: Combinations of on-patent therapies (CTs) are increasingly common in oncology. They cause challenges for funding and affordability, and hence patient access, especially when constituent therapies are owned by different manufacturers. The aim of our study was to develop policy proposals for the assessment, pricing, and funding of CTs and identify which might be relevant in different European countries. METHODS: Following a review of available literature, seven hypothetical policy proposals were developed and subsequently assessed through 19 semi-structured interviews with health policy, pricing, technology assessment and legal experts in seven European countries to identify those most likely to gain traction. RESULTS: Experts saw a need for agreed approaches within a country to manage affordability and funding challenges for CTs. Changes to health technology assessment (HTA) and funding models were considered unlikely, but other policy proposals were seen as mostly useful, with country-specific adaptations. Bilateral discussions between manufacturers and payers were deemed important, and less challenging and protracted than arbitrated dialogue between manufacturers. Usage-specific pricing, possibly using weighted average prices, was considered a prerequisite for the financial management of CTs. CONCLUSIONS: There is a growing need to ensure that CTs are affordable to health systems. It would appear that there is no one set of policies that is appropriate for all countries in Europe, so countries wishing to ensure that patients have (or continue to have) access to CTs of value to them must explore and implement the policies that are best suited to their general approach to funding health care and to the assessment and reimbursement of medicines.

The Real-World Evidence Workstream in EUreccA 2025: How the Task Was Addressed.

This is one of a series of articles that consider the barriers to optimal use of real-world evidence (RWE) in health technology assessment (HTA) as well as ways to overcome them. The work was carried out as part of EUreccA 2025 (European Initiative for New Reimbursement and Access Approaches 2025), in particular with the RWE workstream embodied within that collaboration. The starting premises of this workstream were as follows: (1) the acceptance of RWE by HTA agencies and payers in the assessment of drugs is suboptimal and variable between jurisdictions, and (2) if that were not the case, the path of new pharmaceuticals to patients could be quicker and less expensive. Elsewhere in this issue we set out the conclusions we had reached in the EUreccA RWE workstream. In this article, we set out the methodology used to conduct the totality of the EureccA 2025 RWE workstream effort, which led us to those conclusions. The main results, strengths, and limitations of the individual parts are discussed further in separate articles in this supplement. Through scoping work, we generated 4 key topics within which to identify and address the barriers to optimal RWE use in HTA. Through pragmatic literature searches, stakeholder engagement, and case studies, we suggest ways in which the problems identified may be addressed as a contribution to progress in this area.

Across-Country Variations of Real-World Data and Evidence for Drugs: A 5-European-Country Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the role of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) in health technology assessment (HTA) in 5 European countries and to identify the hurdles to the acceptance of RWE and suggest directions toward its more effective use. METHODS: Authors from France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden used a common template to extract evidence. For England, the Cancer Drugs Fund was described and analyzed as a particular model for the use of RWD to provide evidence for coverage decisions and managed entry agreements. RESULTS: In all countries except Germany, HTA bodies acknowledged the relevance of RWD/RWE to address postlaunch uncertainties. In Germany, evidence from randomized controlled trials remains the gold standard, and evidence based on RWD is generally rejected. Multiple sources of RWD exist, but the quality, the immediate relevance of existing sources, and their interoperability limit their adaptation to the specifics of a given drug. This leads to skepticism about the validity of the evidence. Timing is also a key issue: the production of evidence may not be synchronized with the HTA and pricing bodies' agendas. The Cancer Drugs Fund case emphasizes that a strong partnership among all stakeholders and a pragmatic use of existing data, alongside clinical evidence provided by companies, are key success factors. CONCLUSIONS: A continuous investment in national health information systems is a key issue for providing valid RWE. Processes and aids to guide the acceptability and usage of RWE derived from pairing between sources and questions are essential.

Population norms in France with EQ-5D-5L: health states, value indexes, and VAS.

PURPOSE: To provide EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L French population norms based on a sample of 15,000 responders. METHODS: Based on the National Health and Wellness Survey, an international, annual, selfadministered Internet-based survey, this study extracted data from France for 2018 involving a sample of 15,000 respondents stratified by age and gender. Responses to the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, together with sociodemographic, health behavior, and disease status variables were collected. VAS, value indexes, the level sum score, and the distribution of levels per dimension were described. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify covariates with a statistically significant effect on the five dimensions and the three scores. RESULTS: The mean [standard deviation (SD)] VAS was 73.4 (22.2) for the entire sample (male 74.8 vs female 72.2, p < 0.0001). The Mean SD value index was 0.905 (0.158) (male 0.915 vs female 0.895, p < 0.0001). The mean SD level sum score was 7.6 (3.0) (7.4 for males vs. 7.9 for females p < 0.0001). Health state 11,111 (no problem in any dimension) represented 25.1% of all responses. "No problem" responses' proportions were Self Care (91.3%), Usual Activities (74.2%), Mobility (72.4%), Anxiety/Depression (52.6%) and Pain/Discomfort (37.7%). Multivariate regressions revealed a significant relationship for health states, value indexes, and VAS with age, income, employment, marital status, smoking and alcohol consumption, obesity, and the presence of one or more health problems. CONCLUSION: Based on a large sample, this study is the first to report EQ-5D-5L population norms for France.

Using Real-World Data in the Health Technology Assessment of Pharmaceuticals: Strengths, Difficulties, and a Pragmatic Way Forward.

In the past decade, there have been increasing calls for greater use of real-world evidence (RWE) and data (RWD), with the explicit goal of enabling faster provision of effective medicines to patients in need. The push for decision makers to accept RWE is especially noticeable in the pursuit of regulatory approval, but RWE, particularly when used to estimate the relative effectiveness of interventions, is not always readily accepted by agencies responsible for reimbursement and pricing of new pharmaceuticals and, to a varying degree, is not accepted across jurisdictions. This lack of trust hampers the use of RWE despite a very large and growing literature base on the principles of how RWE should be used. In this article, we suggest an important part of the explanation of why this situation has arisen and make suggestions for its alleviation. Given that problems commonly arise that are particular to the question being asked and the data sources being used, general guidance on the principles of how to use RWD cannot cover all eventualities. Therefore, we are suggesting the creation of an archive, or repository, to record uses of RWD in support of decisions by funding bodies or their advisors. This article introduces a proposed, structured classification of decision types using RWE, around which evidence can be assembled in a curated source (RWD/RWE taxonomy) and thus facilitate judgments on when evidence is "good enough." This article is part of a series in a special issue of this journal that looks at the barriers to optimal use of RWE in health technology assessment and how to overcome them. We begin significantly to populate our "taxonomy" with examples in an accompanying article. We also propose recommendations for international standards of evaluating the acceptability of RWD governance practices.

Structure and Content of a Taxonomy to Support the Use of Real-World Evidence by Health Technology Assessment Practitioners and Healthcare Decision Makers.

This is one of a series of articles that consider the barriers to optimal use of real-world evidence (RWE) in health technology assessment and how to overcome them. The work was performed as part of EUreccA 2025, in particular with the RWE workstream embodied within that collaboration. Elsewhere in this issue we described the reasoning and process that led us to develop practical tools to support RWE use, including this taxonomy and explained the methods used to do so. The taxonomy classifies questions that are typically addressed using real-world data in health technology assessment and the data sources typically used to address these questions. In this article, we describe the taxonomy itself. For as many of the pairings as possible, we have provided links to advice and methods on how to address the associated question using those data. We have also provided links to examples of RWE use in practical decision making to answer the questions posed. Our work is not complete, but we believe it is sufficient to demonstrate the value of such a taxonomy and information source if it is completed and curated as a "wiki" by the community that would use it.

Real-world data and evidence in health technology assessment: When are they complementary, substitutes, or the only sources of data compared to clinical trials?

Within the life-cycle assessment of health technologies, real-world data (RWD) have until now been of secondary importance to clinical trial data. The availability of massive, better quality RWD, particularly with the emergence of connected devices, the improvement of methods for characterizing populations, make it possible to have a better insight into the effects of treatment, sometimes on a national scale the importance of RWD is likely to progress in the eyes of health technology assessors, going from being traditionally complementary to possibly replacing clinical trial data. This is the fundamental question that the round table, involving experts from the academic and/or hospital, institutional, and industrial worlds, set out to answer. This work served first to establish the current role of RWD in health technology assessment, by distinguishing the main purposes of RWD, the timing of the evaluation in relation to the life cycle of the technology, and then according to the party commissioning or receiving the outcomes of RWD-based studies. Secondly, the round table proposed six general recommendations for more intensive and decisive use of RWD in the assessment and decision-making process.

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.

A Discrete Choice Experiment to Derive Health Utilities for Aromatic L-Amino Acid Decarboxylase (AADC) Deficiency in France.

PURPOSE: Cost-effectiveness evaluations of interventions require health utility data. However, in medical conditions, such as aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase (AADC) deficiency, this presents problems due to the rarity of the disease. The study aim therefore was to employ a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to generate health utilities for AADC deficiency. METHODS: A previous literature review, clinician and parent interviews had identified six key AADC deficiency attributes: mobility, muscle weakness, oculogyric crises (OCG), feeding ability, cognitive impairment and screaming. A representative sample of the French general population was recruited. Participants rated 5 health state vignettes describing AADC deficiency using time-trade-off (TTO) and standard gamble (SG). Additionally, participants rated the worst health state using the Health Utility Index version 3 (HUI3). Subsequently, participants completed DCE 11 choice sets. Indirect DCE part-worth utilities were converted to health utilities using the anchors from the TTO, SG and HUI3. RESULTS: The DCE was completed online by 1001 participants (50.9% female; mean age 45.7 years). Most participants (596, 59.5%) provided consistent responses to the repeated choice task. Five models were evaluated, and one preference reversal ("head control"/"sitting unaided") was identified in all models. The rescaled utilities ranged from 0.3891 to 0.5577 (difference of 0.17 utilities) for TTO anchors corresponding to the worst (633233) and best (111111) health states. Health utilities ranged from 0.5534 to 0.7093 for the SG anchors. The disutility associated with a transition from "no problems walking" to "bedridden" was -0.0533, whereas disutility of moving from "constant screaming" relative to "no screaming" was -0.0248. The disutility associated with daily OCG was -0.0167. Disutilities for the other attributes were small although there were exceptions. CONCLUSION: A DCE was used to derive health utilities for AADC deficiency. These health utilities will subsequently be used in an economic model evaluating an AADC deficiency intervention.

Value of a QALY for France: A New Approach to Propose Acceptable Reference Values.

OBJECTIVE: France has included health economic assessment (HEA) as an official criterion for innovative drug pricing since 2013. Until now, no cost-effectiveness threshold (CET) has been officially proposed to qualify incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Although the French health authorities have publicly expressed the need for such reference values, previous initiatives to determine these have failed. The study aims to propose a locally adapted method for estimating a preference-based value for a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) based on a rational approach to public policy choices in France. METHODS: We used the official French value of statistical life (VSL) of €3 million (USD 3.25 million), proposed in 2013 by the French General Commission on Strategy and Prediction. We first estimated the value of life-year (VoLY) by age category according to life expectancy and official discounts recommended for HEA in France. We then estimated a value of statistical QALY (VSQ) by weighting VoLYs with demographic data and French EQ-5D-3L tariffs. RESULTS: The estimated average VoLYs and VSQs were €120 185 (USD 130 000) and €147 093 (USD 159 022), respectively, assuming a discount rate of 2.5% and €166 205 (USD 179 681) and €201 398 (USD 217 728), respectively, assuming a discount rate of 4.5%. CONCLUSION: Assuming that, as in other public domains, equity in access to healthcare across all disease areas and between all users is desirable, we propose an estimate of VSQ that is consistent with this goal. Our estimates of €147 093 (USD 179,681) to €201 398 (USD 217 728) should be perceived as breakeven costs for a QALY rather than a market access threshold. Such VSQs could be used as reference values for ICERs in HEA in France.

Current challenges for assessing the long-term clinical benefit of cancer immunotherapy: a multi-stakeholder perspective.

Immuno-oncologics (IOs) differ from chemotherapies as they prime the patient's immune system to attack the tumor, rather than directly destroying cancer cells. The IO mechanism of action leads to durable responses and prolonged survival in some patients. However, providing robust evidence of the long-term benefits of IOs at health technology assessment (HTA) submission presents several challenges for manufacturers. The aim of this article was to identify, analyze, categorize, and further explore the key challenges that regulators, HTA agencies, and payers commonly encounter when assessing the long-term benefits of IO therapies. Insights were obtained from an international, multi-stakeholder steering committee (SC) and expert panels comprising of payers, economists, and clinicians. The selected individuals were tasked with developing a summary of challenges specific to IOs in demonstrating their long-term benefits at HTA submission. The SC and expert panels agreed that standard methods used to assess the long-term benefit of anticancer drugs may have limitations for IO therapies. Three key areas of challenges were identified: (1) lack of a disease model that fully captures the mechanism of action and subsequent patient responses; (2) estimation of longer-term outcomes, including a lack of agreement on ideal methods of survival analyses and extrapolation of survival curves; and (3) data limitations at the time of HTA submission, for which surrogate survival end points and real-world evidence could prove useful. A summary of the key challenges facing manufacturers when submitting evidence at HTA submission was developed, along with further recommendations for manufacturers in what evidence to produce. Despite almost a decade of use, there remain significant challenges around how best to demonstrate the long-term benefit of checkpoint inhibitor-based IOs to HTA agencies, clinicians, and payers. Manufacturers can potentially meet or mitigate these challenges with a focus on strengthening survival analysis methodology. Approaches to doing this include identifying reliable biomarkers, intermediate and surrogate end points, and the use of real-world data to inform and validate long-term survival projections. Wider education across all stakeholders-manufacturers, payers, and clinicians-in considering the long-term survival benefit with IOs is also important.

A French Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop a French value set for the EQ-5D-5L, for academic and clinical research, and for regulatory requirements for price-setting of drugs and medical devices. METHOD: This study used the standardized valuation protocol developed by EuroQol, using computer-assisted personal interview software. A representative sample of 1048 French residents were interviewed by a market research company, under the supervision of the research team. Health states were valued using composite time trade-off and a discrete choice experiment. Modeling was used to create values for the 3125 possible health states. The composite time trade-off data were modeled using a Tobit model with censored observations at -1 and correcting for heteroscedasticity. A conditional logit model was used for the discrete choice results, and both models were combined using a hybrid model. An adjusted hybrid model was tested to correct for imbalance in the sample on age and sex compared with the general population. A comparison with the 3-level (3L) value set was performed. RESULTS: The adjusted model was preferred to comply with the representativeness of the general population. It provided a value set for which all coefficients were logically consistent. Values ranged from - 0.525 to 1. The distribution of values presented a shift towards higher values versus the 3L value set. Ranking of dimensions changed. Pain and discomfort and mobility were the dimensions with the highest potential for disutility compared with mobility and self-care for the 3L instrument. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a value set based on societal preferences of the French population, using an improved descriptive instrument of health-related quality-of-life health states. It will contribute to improve the quality of cost-effectiveness analysis in the French context and help stimulate disease-specific quality-of-life references for academic-, institutional-, and industry-promoted studies.

The contribution of real-world evidence to cost-effectiveness analysis: case study of Dabigatran etexilate in France.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the differences between an ex ante and an ex post cost-effectiveness analysis of Dabigatran etexilate vs VKAs for the prevention of thromboembolic events in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients and to draw lessons on the design and use of real-world data for decision making. METHODS: The same model was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness ratio using two sets of parameters. One set included the efficacy and safety outcomes data from RE-LY, the pivotal trial comparing Dabigatran to warfarin; cost data came from an ex ante publication. Outcomes data for the second set came from real-world data studies. Cost data were a mix of real-world data and other sources. Two treatment strategies were compared: treatment initiation by either Dabigatran or VKAs, followed by either VKAs or Dabigatran. A crude comparison of results was performed; the impact of data differences was then assessed. Probabilistic sensitivity results of the two analyses were compared. RESULTS: With real-world evidence, Dabigatran at both dosages was more effective for the prevention of ischemic strokes, intra-cranial haemorrhages, with less major extra-cranial haemorrhages and a similar risk of myocardial infarction. Using clinical trial data, Dabigatran150 mg (resp. Dabigatran110 mg) as a first-line treatment vs VKAs yielded an ICER of € 8077/QALY (resp. € 13,116/QALY). Real-world evidence scenarios were cost-saving and more effective for both dosages. CONCLUSION: The reassessment of outcomes and cost data had an impact on results, improving the efficiency of Dabigatran. We identify methodological issues which should be discussed if post-launch RWE based cost-effectiveness data become a standard in HTA decision making.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the SAPIEN 3 TAVI valve compared with surgery in intermediate-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the therapy of choice for treating severe aortic stenosis in patients at high-risk for surgery or where it is considered too risky to attempt. This uptake varies across geographies however, and its cost or value has frequently been cited as the reason for this. We sought to evaluate the potential cost and clinical impact of TAVI in intermediate risk patients from a French collective perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis was performed using a novel Markov model with data derived from the PARTNER II randomized controlled trial for survival, clinical event rates, and quality-of-life. The simulated time horizon was 15 years, costs were from French sources and presented in 2016 Euros. Discounting of all outcomes was at 4% annually and the effect of uncertainty in model parameters was explored by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: In comparison to surgery, TAVI resulted in improved clinical outcomes (life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy) and lower costs over a lifetime time horizon. The base case results showed increases of 0.42 years and 0.41 QALYs with lifetime cost savings of €439 for TAVI compared to surgery. PSA results showed a >50% likelihood of cost-effectiveness at €0 willingness-to-pay and a 100% likelihood at ∼€15,000. LIMITATIONS: Clinically, survival projections are based on limited follow-up data and introduce uncertainty into the outcomes from the model. Economically, procedure costs are derived from a heterogeneous mix of patient risk groups, although this is much more likely to bias against TAVI and under-estimate overall cost savings. CONCLUSIONS: In our analyses of intermediate risk patients, TAVI is associated with superior clinical outcomes compared to surgery and is cost saving. It could be expected that cost savings are conservative and likely to increase over time.