Considerations in the Assessment of Clinical Benefit with a Focus on Pain: a Regulatory Perspective.

In the USA, the regulatory standard for demonstration of efficacy of a drug is evidence of clinical benefit from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials. Understanding the natural history of disease and how treatment is expected to alter its course, and gathering input from relevant stakeholders, such as patients, caregivers, and clinicians, is essential to understand the best way to measure clinical benefit in a clinical trial. Though pain intensity has been the primary outcome measure in clinical trials for pain, an array of measures assessing clinical outcomes from multiple perspectives can allow for more comprehensive interpretation of how a treatment affects patients' lives. Careful consideration should be given to how pain affects the feeling and functioning of each distinct patient population and which outcome assessment, or combination of outcome assessments, may be necessary to provide a more comprehensive view of the patient experience. The early stages of medical product development are an important opportunity to engage with regulatory agencies to discuss potential approaches to clinical trial design and outcome measurement strategies.

Measuring quality of urology care using a qualified clinical data registry.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Qualified clinical data registries (QCDRs) serve as a framework for quality improvement efforts, clinical research endeavors, and participation in reimbursement incentive programs. However, the measurement of quality and the recommendations to guide QCDRs in developing new quality measures is a complex process. In this review, we highlight the government policies that lead to the creation of QCDRs, how QCDR quality measures are developed, and the current QCDRs that focus on urological care. RECENT FINDINGS: QCDRs facilitate participation in the merit-based incentive payment system for reimbursement adjustments. Most QCDRs leverage existing clinical guidelines in the development of new quality measures. In 2018, there are four urology QCDRs with quality measures for many urological conditions. These QCDRs form the infrastructure for quality improvement and provide new resources for research endeavors. SUMMARY: Quality measurement within QCDRs will allow urologists to focus improvement efforts to deliver high-quality urological care while also facilitating reimbursement incentives and creating novel research datasets.

Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs; Organ Procurement Organization Reporting and Communication; Transplant Outcome Measures and Documentation Requirements; Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs; Payment to Nonexcepted Off-Campus Provider-Based Department of a Hospital; Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program; Establishment of Payment Rates Under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for Nonexcepted Items and Services Furnished by an Off-Campus Provider-Based Department of a Hospital. Final rule with comment period and interim final rule with comment period.

This final rule with comment period revises the Medicare hospital outpatient prospective payment system (OPPS) and the Medicare ambulatory surgical center (ASC) payment system for CY 2017 to implement applicable statutory requirements and changes arising from our continuing experience with these systems. In this final rule with comment period, we describe the changes to the amounts and factors used to determine the payment rates for Medicare services paid under the OPPS and those paid under the ASC payment system. In addition, this final rule with comment period updates and refines the requirements for the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program and the ASC Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program. Further, in this final rule with comment period, we are making changes to tolerance thresholds for clinical outcomes for solid organ transplant programs; to Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) definitions, outcome measures, and organ transport documentation; and to the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Programs. We also are removing the HCAHPS Pain Management dimension from the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program. In addition, we are implementing section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 relating to payment for certain items and services furnished by certain off-campus provider-based departments of a provider. In this document, we also are issuing an interim final rule with comment period to establish the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule payment rates for the nonexcepted items and services billed by a nonexcepted off-campus provider-based department of a hospital in accordance with the provisions of section 603.

[Functional Electrical Stimulation in a Case of Drop Foot and Atactic Gait: Expert Assessment of Contested Medical Aids]. / Funktionelle Elektrostimulation bei Fußheberschwäche und ataktischem Gangbild: Gutachterliches Vorgehen bei streitiger Hilfsmittelversorgung.

Expert medical opinions are necessary in pretrial cases and other legal matters. They act as means of evidence for administrative bodies and courts. It may be necessary to adapt the method of evaluation depending upon the issue or subject matter to be evaluated. We report on a social court case, which needed to answer the question of the medical necessity of a functional electrical stimulation orthosis prescribed to improve the function of a drop foot accompanied by an atactic gait disorder. The claimant suffered from a stroke, which had occurred several years before. Her aids were an ankle-foot-orthosis for foot lift and a wheeled walker. The current treatment was to be augmented by the disputed device. The statutory health insurance declined to meet the costs. They failed to find relevant benefits after analysis of video tapes of the patient's gait while using an electrical stimulation orthosis. The social court requested an expert opinion to answer the question as to whether or not there was a relevant functional benefit to using functional electrical stimulation over the existing orthosis or to an alternative treatment. Video documentation was desired by the court. We used the clinic's gait analysis laboratory, which is equipped with a gait course and the claimed video documentation. Standardised video documentation offers substantial advantages for answering forensic questions such as these. It assures reproducibility and comparability of all tested scenarios, with objectification of the individual advantages or limitations. This gain in both validity and reliability fulfills the scientific requirements placed upon an expert assessment.

[Impact of early benefit assessment on patients with epilepsy in Germany: Current healthcare provision and therapeutic needs]. / Auswirkungen der frühen Nutzenbewertung auf Patienten mit Epilepsie in Deutschland : Aktuelle Versorgungsrealität und therapeutischer Bedarf.

Epilepsy is one of the most common chronic neurological diseases and represents a significant burden for patients, their families and society. In more than 75 % of patients anticonvulsant therapy consists of valproate, carbamazepine, lamotrigine or levetiracetam. There is a need for polytherapy in drug-refractory patients and they suffer from negative effects on quality of life and employment that is associated with high indirect costs. To allow a comprehensive treatment in this patient group, access to new anticonvulsants with novel modes of action is needed; however, all applications for new antiepileptic drugs failed to prove added benefits during the Pharmaceutical Market Restructuring Act (AMNOG) in Germany. One of the main reasons is the mandatory definition of a standard comparative therapy. It remains unclear whether there will be studies in the future which will fulfill the requirements of the current version of AMNOG. Observational studies after approval and marketing of new antiepileptic drugs could be better alternatives to prove added benefits for individual patients in the current German healthcare system.

[Requirements for drug approval and additional benefits assessment: Regulatory aspects and experiences]. / Anforderungen an Zulassung und Zusatznutzenbewertung von Arzneimitteln : Regulatorische Aspekte und Erfahrungen.

The early assessment of benefits of newly approved drugs with novel active substances or new applications, which came into force on 1 January 2011 still represents a challenge to all parties involved. This article highlights the definitions, regulatory requirements and interaction between drug marketing approval and early assessment of benefits in Germany. The constellation of an extensively harmonized European and even international drug authorization process with a predominantly national regulation of drug reimbursement situation inevitably causes friction, which could be markedly reduced through early joint advisory discussions during the planning phase for pivotal clinical trials. During the year 2015 the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) carried out 300 scientific advice procedures of which 34 were concerned with applications in the field of indications for the central nervous system (CNS). In comparison 98 advisory meetings were held by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) of which the BfArM provided advice in 12 instances and in 2 cases on CNS indications. Study design, endpoints and appropriate comparative therapies are the key issues in exchanges and discussions between the BfArM, the G­BA and applicants. Under these aspects the BfArM and G­BA promote an early and consistent involvement in early advice procedures regarding the prerequisites for drug approval and assessment of additional benefits.

[Significance of the German Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal Products for psychopharmacotherapy]. / Bedeutung des Arzneimittelmarktneuordnungsgesetzes für die Psychopharmakotherapie.

The German Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal Products (AMNOG) will lead to rapid disappearance of many new psychotropic drugs from the market in Germany over the next few years or their not being introduced in the first place. This article lists the reasons and discusses possible solutions. In the long term, the AMNOG could not only lead to an improvement of psychopharmacology but also contribute to the development of psychiatry as a whole, especially if its standards become an international reference.

[The new German drug market law AMNOG from a child and adolescent psychiatry perspective]. / Das Arzneimittelmarktneuordnungsgesetz aus kinder- und jugendpsychiatrischer Perspektive.

BACKGROUND: The European Union (EU) regulation 1901/2006 plus the implementation of pediatric investigational plans by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have contributed to more clinical studies in pediatric psychopharmacology. A new drug market law (AMNOG) has been in force in Germany since 2011 that requires an additional process of assessment of benefits of newly authorized medications by the Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, G­BA), which also holds for medications licensed for pediatric populations. OBJECTIVES: Summary of early assessments of benefits for newly registered compounds in the treatment of psychiatric disorders and critical discussion from the perspective of child and adolescent psychiatry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Application and critical review of documents and written statements by various institutions and stakeholders related to assessment procedures and respective decisions by the G­BA for these medications. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Clearly differing requirements for study designs and outcome parameters characterize the conditions for market authorization and for the assessment of benefits. Further adjustments to the regulations in implementing the AMNOG appear to be essential, integrating agencies involved so far, complimented by expertise from regulatory agencies and medical scientific societies.

[Actual medical care situation and therapeutic needs in multiple sclerosis: Impact of the Pharmaceutical Market Restructuring Act (AMNOG)]. / Versorgungsrealität und therapeutischer Bedarf bei Multipler Sklerose : Auswirkungen des AMNOG.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) is associated with constantly rising costs for the healthcare system and pharmaceuticals constitute 60 % of the direct medical costs. The Pharmaceutical Market Restructuring Act (Arzneimittelmarkt-Neuordnungsgesetz, AMNOG) came into force on 1 January 2011 with the aim of limiting the costs of pharmaceuticals by obligating newly approved products to be subjected to an early evaluation of the additional benefits by the Federal Joint Committee (FJC, Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, G­BA). The majority of products evaluated up to October 2015 in neurology (5 out of 8) were approved for treatment of MS. OBJECTIVE: Has the AMNOG been able to fulfill the original aims? MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of available information on MS therapies evaluated by the FJC between December 2010 and October 2015. RESULTS: For various reasons an additional benefit could be shown in only 2 out of 5 assessment procedures for MS drugs. It is obvious that some methodological shortcomings of the process have to be improved. Additionally requirements for pivotal clinical trials have to be harmonized with AMNOG requirements taking the best available evidence and real-life data into consideration (e.g. non-interventional studies) and a closer collaboration between the FJC, healthcare providers and the neurological societies is necessary. CONCLUSION: The AMNOG procedure currently only partially fulfills the original aims, which could be the reason why guidelines play a more important role for therapy decision-making than FJC decisions. As the early evaluation procedure is an adaptive process methodological shortcomings might be overcome in the future; however, this requires a much closer collaboration between the FJC and neurological societies.

An Assessment Model for Evaluating Outcomes in Federally Qualified Health Centers' Dental Departments: Results of a 5 Year Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report was to establish baseline data on 10 oral health performance indicators over 5 fiscal years (2007 to 2008 through 2011 to 2012) for an Iowa health center. The baseline data provides an assessment model and reports outcomes based on the use of the model. Performance indicators show evidence of provider performance, accountability to stakeholders and provide the benchmarks required for dental management to develop future goals to improve oral health outcomes for at-risk populations. METHODS: Using descriptive statistic, this report extrapolated data from the Iowa Health Center's computer management systems software, HealthPro, and Centricity electronic medical records, and analyzed using IBM® SPSS® 19. This report describes the change in utilization for number and type of visits for uninsured and Medicaid patients over 5 fiscal years (a fiscal year is measured from November 1 through October 31). RESULTS: The number of patients receiving at least 1 dental visit in a measurement year showed n=81,673 procedures with 21% (17,167) being unduplicated patients. Preventive averaged 46%, restorative 18%, urgent care 22% and other procedures 14%. CONCLUSION: Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) with a dental component serve populations with the greatest health disparities. This population includes ethnic and racial minorities, uninsured, underinsured, rural residents, Medicaid and Medicare. Establishing baseline data for FQHCs provides a foundational tool that will allow dental management to analyze successes as well as deficiencies in the goal to provide increased utilization to oral health care for at-risk populations.

[Benefit assessment of medical services in German health service - legal framework, historical and international perspective]. / Nutzenbewertung medizinischer Leistungen im deutschen Gesundheitswesen - rechtlicher Rahmen, historische und internationale Perspektive.

The term benefit describes the (positive) causal, patient-relevant consequences of medical interventions, whether diagnostic or therapeutic. Benefit assessments form the basis of rational decision-making within a health care system. They are based on clinical trials that are able to provide valid answers to the question regarding the relevant benefit or harm that can be caused by an intervention. In Germany, evidence-based benefit assessments are fixed by law, i.e., the Social Code Book V. The application and the practical impact of these assessments could be improved.

[Benefit assessment of drugs]. / Nutzenbewertung von Arzneimitteln.

In Germany, new drugs are subject to a benefit assessment at the time of their market access. This "early benefit assessment" is the method primarily used for the benefit assessment of pharmaceuticals in Germany. While for the authorization of a drug a positive risk-benefit ratio is sufficient, early benefit assessment examines whether the new drug has an added benefit compared with other therapies, and thus differs significantly from authorization. For the evaluation, the manufacturer is required to submit a dossier, which must contain all the relevant studies. Early benefit assessment is very transparent in international comparisons, because all the relevant data and the evaluation report will be published. The assessment is carried out with regard to the evidence-based standard of care (the "appropriate comparator"). If the new drug is found to have an additional benefit, the extent of this added benefit is assessed. In addition, groups of patients should be identified with the particular extent of the added benefit. Therefore, subgroup analyses have to be carried out frequently. Often, for new drugs, only registration studies are available. General requirements for such studies (e.g., placebo comparison, endpoints) and decisions regarding the approval process (e.g., dosage regimens) can affect the level of confidence of these studies in the benefit assessment. Joint scientific advice by regulatory authorities and HTA (health technology assessment) agencies are provided to solve this problem. However, this is not possible without additional expense for the pharmaceutical companies.

[Benefit assessment of medical devices]. / Nutzenbewertung von Medizinprodukten.

Medical devices play an important role in both the diagnostic and therapeutic care of patients. The hope is that particularly innovative medical devices can contribute to the improvement of patient care. However, there is no mandatory need to conduct clinical studies with medical devices that allow an assessment of their benefit within the framework of EU market access or on the way to reimbursement by the statutory health insurance (SHI) in Germany. Numerous examples show that the existing legal framework for market access and for reimbursement in the SHI system is insufficient for providing patients with only those examination and treatment methods, i. e., medical devices, that comply with the benefit requirement and the imperative for quality stipulated in the Social Code Book V. However, it is possible to conduct meaningful clinical trials, i. e., randomized controlled trials, with medical devices as well. Hence, regular, indication-related benefit assessment of medical devices with a higher risk class as a prerequisite for reimbursement for a specific medical device is not only necessary, but also feasible. The 2014 report of the Advisory Council on the Assessment of Developments in the Healthcare System contains a promising recommendation for implementing this. A regulatory framework as described in the report would allow patients the fastest possible access to safe and effective medical device innovations, while increasing planning reliability for the development and marketing of new products, which has often been criticized as insufficient by manufacturers.