An Inclusive Civil Society Dialogue for Successful Implementation of the EU HTA Regulation: Call to Action to Ensure Appropriate Involvement of Stakeholders and Collaborators.

OBJECTIVES: Stakeholder involvement has long been considered a success factor for a joint European health technology assessment (HTA) process, and its relevance is now anchored in the EU HTA Regulation's (EU HTAR) legislative wording. Therefore, we aimed to explore the roles, challenges, and most important activities to increase the level of involvement per stakeholder group. METHODS: At the 2022 Fall Convention of the European Access Academy (EAA), working groups addressed the involvement of patients, clinicians, regulators, health technology developers (HTD), and national HTA bodies and payers within the EU HTA process. Each working group revisited the pre-convention survey results, determined key role characteristics for each stakeholder, and agreed on the most important activities to fulfill the role profile. Finally, the activities suggested per group were prioritized by plenary group. RESULTS: The prioritized actions for patients included training and capacity building, the establishment of a patient involvement committee, and the establishment of a patient unit at the EC secretariat. For clinicians, it included alignment on evidence assessment from a clinical vs. HTA point of view, capacity building, and standardization of processes. The most important actions for regulators are to develop joint regulatory-HTA guidance documents, align processes and interfaces under the regulation, and share discussions on post-licensing evidence generation. HTDs prioritized scientific advice capacity and the review of the scoping process, and further development of the scope of the assessment report fact checks. The top three actions for national HTA bodies and payers included clarification on the early HTD dialogue process, political support and commitment, and clarification on financial support. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the activities identified as the most important for stakeholders/collaborators in the EU HTA process (e.g., in the implementation of the EU HTA Stakeholder Network and of the guidance documents developed by the EUnetHTA 21 consortium) will be key to starting an "inclusive civil society dialogue", as suggested by the European Commission's Pharmaceutical Strategy.

Budget impact analysis for avatrombopag in the treatment of chronic primary immune thrombocytopenia in adult patients refractory to other treatments.

Introduction: Primary immune thrombocytopenia is a rare autoimmune disease characterised by a decreased platelet count resulting in an increased risk of bleeding events and even life-threatening haemorrhages. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) are the standard of care second-line therapy for adult patients with chronic immune thrombocytopenia. The first TPO-RAs approved and reimbursed in Italy, eltrombopag and romiplostim, while effective, pose some issues in terms of safety (e.g., hepatotoxicity) or general management (e.g., dietary restrictions). Avatrombopag, an effective and well-tolerated TPO-RA, was recently granted reimbursement. Methods: A 3-year (2023-2025) budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted to estimate its impact on the Italian National Health Service (NHS). Two scenarios were compared, of which one represents the current situation, without avatrombopag, and the other provides for an increasing market share of avatrombopag (up to 26.6%). Results: BIA shows that the increase in the use of avatrombopag correlates with savings for NHS: in the first year, saving would be €1,300,564, increasing to €2,774,210 in the third year, for a total of €6,083,231 over the 3-year period. The sensitivity analysis confirmed these savings in the scenario with avatrombopag. Conclusions: Based on this BIA, the introduction and reimbursement of avatrombopag is an efficient and advantageous choice for the Italian NHS.

The role of stakeholder involvement in the evolving EU HTA process: Insights generated through the European Access Academy's multi-stakeholder pre-convention questionnaire.

Involvement of all relevant stakeholders will be of utmost importance for the success of the developing EU HTA harmonization process. A multi-step procedure was applied to develop a survey across stakeholders/collaborators within the EU HTA framework to assess their current level of involvement, determine their suggested future role, identify challenges to contribution, and highlight efficient ways to fulfilling their role. The 'key' stakeholder groups identified and covered by this research included: patients', clinicians', regulatory, and Health Technology Developer representatives. The survey was circulated to a wide expert audience including all relevant stakeholder groups in order to determine self-perception by the 'key' stakeholders regarding involvement in the HTA process (self-rating), and in a second, slightly modified version of the questionnaire, to determine the perception of 'key' stakeholder involvement by HTA bodies, payers, and policymakers (external rating). Predefined analyses were conducted on the submitted responses. Fifty-four responses were received (patients 9; clinicians: 8; regulators: 4; HTDs 14; HTA bodies: 7; Payers: 5; policymakers 3; others 4). The mean self-perceived involvement score was consistently lower for each of the 'key' stakeholder groups than the respective external ratings. Based on the qualitative insights generated in the survey, a RACI Chart (Responsible/Accountable/Consulted/Informed) was developed for each of the stakeholder groups to determine their roles and involvement in the current EU HTA process. Our findings suggest extensive effort and a distinct research agenda are required to ensure adequate involvement of the key stakeholder groups in the evolving EU HTA process.

Atherogenic Dyslipidemias: Unmet Needs and the Therapeutic Potential of Emerging and Novel Approaches and Drugs.

Innovative lipid-modifying agents are valuable resources to improve the control of atherogenic dyslipidemias and reduce the lipid-related residual cardiovascular risk of patients with intolerance or who are not fully responsive to a consolidated standard of care (statins plus ezetimibe). Moreover, some of the upcoming compounds potently affect lipid targets that are thus far considered "unmodifiable". The present paper is a viewpoint aimed at presenting the incremental metabolic and cardiovascular benefits of the emerging lipid-modulating agents and real-life barriers, hindering their prescription by physicians and their assumption by patients, which need to be worked out for a more diffuse and appropriate drug utilization.

The impact of conventional cost-effectiveness analysis on pricing dynamics in the market of new medicines: a proposed countervailing approach.

BACKGROUND: Countries using cost effectiveness ratio as a decision tool for price and reimbursement decisions still witness accelerating price increases. The objective of this paper is to propose a change in the application of the incremental cost effectiveness ratio as a criterion for price policy. RESEARCH DESIGN: We develop a model that sets a price for marginal effectiveness equal to the marginal willingness to pay, but it reimburses average effectiveness according to the size of increased QALY gain. RESULTS: This new formula also allows to split the economic value of drug between patients and the industry and creates a reward to invest into QALY gains. We show some empirical data of the new prices derived from the application of the new formula, as well as the implications in terms of the consumer and manufacturer´s surplus based on two potential scenarios of the incentives generated by this new formulation. DISCUSSION: We propose that small increases in life expectancy be priced differently from substantial as a way of containing the price dynamics. CONCLUSIONS: A change in the application of the ICER threshold will help to reduce the price pressure on public budgets.

An integrated valuation model for payer and investor.

Background: In order to optimize positioning and associated drug price for both payer and investor, it is for a company essential to forecast the potential market access attractiveness for the new drug for different indications at the early onset of the clinical development program. This analysis must include the constraints from the perspective of the payer, but also the biotech companies, who require a minimum drug price to satisfy their investors. This paper aims to provide an Integrated Valuation Model for payer and investor, bridging concepts from health economics and economic valuation reflecting the perspectives of the payer and the investor for a drug in early clinical development phase. The concept is illustrated for a new hypothetical drug (Product X) in advanced breast cancer in 1-line, 2-line, and 3-line position. Methods: The Integrated Valuation Model includes the outcomes of the budget impact model, pricing matrix model, and cost-effectiveness model reflecting the payer's perspective. These models are interacted and linked with a discounted cash flow model in order to reflect also the economic value from the investor's perspective. Results: The maximum price in 1-line position is €269.7 for the payer and the minimum price is €14.7 for the investor, which are unit prices per administration corresponding with treatment regimens for the comparative treatments. In 2-line position, the maximum price is €274.1 for the payer and the minimum price for the investor increases to €184.5 for the investor because of the smaller market size in 2-line position, which leads to a smaller pricing corridor to satisfy both payer and investor. Consequently, Product X has market access attractiveness for both payer and investor in 1-line and 2-line position. However, the minimum price €942.7 in 3-line position for the investor is higher than the maximum price €283.3 for the payer, which means there is no market potential. Conclusion: The practical strategic application of the Integrated Valuation Model is optimization of positioning and price of Product X. Hence, it can be a transparent tool in early-stage development of a compound based on upfront assessment of market access attractiveness for the payer and the investor.

Impact of one-year treatment with biotechnological drugs on work ability in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Italy: a prospective real-life study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the impact of biologic therapy on work productivity outcomes in an Italian real-life cohort of biologic-naïve patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: This observational prospective multicentre study enrolled RA patients in working age with an active disease who started their first biologic agent. Every patient completed the RA-specific Work Productivity Survey (WPS-RA) at each clinical evaluation (baseline, 6 and 12 months). The primary outcome of the study was the productivity gain at 12 months from the beginning of the biologic treatment, compared to baseline, assessed in terms of absenteeism and presenteeism reduction, both for employed and unemployed subjects. Linear regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of patient- and disease-related variables on productivity gain. RESULTS: Overall, 100 patients were enrolled and 85 completed the study. All indexes of disease activity and functional ability were significantly improved from baseline already at 6 months. At 12 months, the 55 employed subjects showed a significant reduction in the mean number of days of work missed (absenteeism) and of reduced productivity (presenteeism). A significant reduction in the mean number of days of household work missed was observed for all patients. At multivariate analysis, functional disability had a significant negative impact on all parameters of household work productivity, while the achievement of a low disease activity or remission was inversely correlated with presenteeism. CONCLUSIONS: One year of treatment with a biological drug significantly impacts on the disease activity and work ability of RA patients and allows economic gains due to productivity improvement.

Pricing of orphan drugs in oncology and rare diseases.

Objective: The objective of this paper is to determine an upper price limit for an orphan drug by taken a broader perspective and, including also other monetary and non-monetary values for the society. Methods: This model is based on the expected free cash flows and the required minimum rate of return for the investor. In addition we calculated an innovation premium resulting from cost savings due to the substitution effect and the monetary gain in QALYs of a new medicine. We selected Spinraza®, a first in class drug with only best supportive care as comparator, and Perjeta®, a first in class drug with already an actual treatment as comparator. Results: The results show that Spinraza® leads to an innovation premium of € 78,966 and Perjeta® shows an innovation premium of € 4,388, because there were no cost savings. The analyses show the outcomes are sensitive to discount rate for QALYs. Conclusion: The break-even price from only an investor perspective may not reflect the value of drug from a broader perspective. This study shows drug prices based on an innovation premium may be more representative of the actual value of innovation for the society.

An updated cost-effectiveness analysis of pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of pazopanib versus sunitinib as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) from an Italian National Health Service perspective, considering the evolving Italian landscape in terms of new reimbursement agreements trend. METHODS: This analysis is an update of the previously published cost-effectiveness analysis to incorporate recent 2019 costs and additional changes regarding drug discounting. A partitioned-survival analysis model with three different health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and dead) was utilized. Outcomes included progression-free life years, post-progression life years, overall life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs calculated for both treatments. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of incremental costs per QALY gained and the net monetary benefit (NMB) of pazopanib versus sunitinib. In the base case analysis, a time horizon of 5 years was used and future costs and QALYs were discounted at a 3% annual discount rate. An impact of methodological and parameter uncertainly on base case results was evaluated using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In the base case, pazopanib had higher QALYs (+0.060) at lower costs (-€5,857) versus sunitinib, hence it dominated sunitinib. At willingness-to-pay thresholds of €30,000 and €50,000 per QALY, the NMB with pazopanib were €7,647 and €8,841 per patient, respectively, versus sunitinib. The probability that pazopanib is cost-effective versus sunitinib was estimated to be 97.5% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000, 95.4% at a threshold of €30,000, and 90.2% at a threshold of €50,000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness results were robust to changes in key parameter values and assumptions as demonstrated by deterministic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib is likely to represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with sunitinib as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic RCC in Italy.

A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis in Italy.

Aims: The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis, as well as a budget impact analysis, on the use of apremilast for the treatment of adult patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), within the Italian National Health Service (NHS).Methods: A Markov state transition cohort model, which was adapted to the Italian context, was used to compare the costs of the currently available treatments and of the patients' quality of life with two alternative treatment sequences, with or without apremilast as pre-biologic therapy. Moreover, a budget impact model was developed based on the population of patients treated for PsA in Italy, who can be eligible for treatment with apremilast. The eligible population was represented by adult patients with PsA who had an inadequate response to or were intolerant to previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), for the approved indication, and for the treatment studied in the economic analytic model.Results: This cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that the strategy of using apremilast before biologic therapy is cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €32,263.00 per QALY gained which is slightly over the normal threshold found in other Italian economic studies, which usually considers a 40-year-period. Conversely, the budget impact analysis was conducted over 3 years, and it led to an estimated annual saving of €1.6 million, €4.6 million and €5.5 million in the first, second and third year of apremilast commercialization, respectively, for a total saving of €11.75 million in 3 years.Limitations: Limitations of this analysis include the absence of head-to-head trials comparing therapies included in the economic model, the lack of comparative long-term data on treatment efficacy, and the assumption of complete independence between the considered response rates to therapy.Conclusion: The use of apremilast as a first option before the use of biologic agents may represent a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with PsA who fail to respond to, or are intolerant to, previous DMARD therapy. In addition, based on a budget impact perspective, the use of apremilast may lead to cost savings to the Italian healthcare system.

Adjuvanted influenza vaccine for the Italian elderly in the 2018/19 season: an updated health technology assessment.

BACKGROUND: The elderly, defined here as subjects aged ≥ 65 years, are among at-risk subjects for whom annual influenza vaccination is recommended. For the 2018/19 season, three vaccine types are available for the elderly in Italy: trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV), adjuvanted TIV (aTIV) and quadrivalent inactivated vaccines (QIV). No health technology assessment (HTA) of seasonal influenza vaccination in the elderly has previously been conducted in Italy. METHODS: An HTA was conducted in 2017 to analyze the burden of influenza illness, the characteristics, efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of available vaccines and the related organizational and ethical implications. This was then contextualized to the 2018/19 influenza season. Comprehensive literature reviews/analyses were performed and a static mathematical model developed in order to address the above issues. RESULTS: In Italy, influenza is usually less common in the elderly than in other age-classes, but the burden of disease is the highest; >10% of infected elderly subjects develop complications, and about 90% of all influenza-related deaths occur in this age-class. All available vaccines are effective, safe and acceptable from an ethical standpoint. However, aTIV has proved more immunogenic and effective in the elderly. Furthermore, from the third payer's perspective, aTIV is highly cost-effective and cost-saving in comparison with TIV and QIV, respectively. Nevertheless, vaccination coverage needs to be improved. CONCLUSIONS: According to this HTA, aTIV appeared the vaccine of choice in the elderly. HTA should be reapplied whenever new relevant data become available.

DEFINING INNOVATION WITH RESPECT TO NEW MEDICINES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW FROM A PAYER PERSPECTIVE.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate how innovation is defined with respect to new medicines. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and EconLit databases were searched for articles published between January 1, 2010 and May 25, 2016 that described a relevant definition of innovation. Identified definitions were analyzed by mapping the concepts described onto a set of ten dimensions of innovation. RESULTS: In total, thirty-six articles were included, and described a total of twenty-five different definitions of innovation. The most commonly occurring dimension was therapeutic benefit, with novelty and the availability of existing treatments the second and third most common dimensions. Overall, there was little agreement in the published literature on what characteristics of new medicines constitute rewardable innovation. CONCLUSIONS: Alignment across countries and among regulators, health technology assessment bodies and payers would help manufacturers define research policies that can drive innovation, but may be challenging, as judgements about what aspects of innovation should be rewarded vary among stakeholders, and depend on political and societal factors.

Approaches to manage 'affordability' of high budget impact medicines in key EU countries.

Background: The launch of hepatitis C (HCV) drugs such as sofosbuvir or ledipasvir has fostered the question of affordability of novel high budget impact therapies even in countries with high domestic product. European countries have developed a variety of mechanisms to improve affordability of such therapies, including 'affordability thresholds', price volume agreements or caps on individual product sales, and special budgets for innovative drugs. While some of these mechanisms may help limit budget impact, there are still significant progresses to be made in the definition and implementation of approaches to ensure affordability, especially in health systems where the growth potential in drug spending and/or in the patient contribution to health insurance are limited. Objectives: In this article, we will review how seven countries in western Europe are approaching the question of affordability of novel therapies and are developing approaches to continue to reward new sciences while limiting budget impact. We will also discuss the question of affordability of cost-effective but hugely expensive therapies and the implications for payers and for the pharmaceutical industry. Results: There is clearly not one solution that is used consistently across countries but rather a number of 'tools' that are combined differently in each country. This illustrates the difficulty of managing affordability within different legal frameworks and within different health care system architectures.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of different seasonal influenza vaccines in the elderly Italian population.

ABSRACT In the perspective of reaching at least 75% influenza vaccination coverage in the elderly and substantial budget constraints, Italian decision makers are facing important challenges in determining an optimal immunization strategy for this growing and particularly vulnerable population. Four different influenza vaccines are currently available for Italian older adults aged 65 years or above, namely trivalent inactivated vaccines (TIVs), MF59-adjuvanted TIV (MF59-TIV), intradermal TIV (ID-TIV) and quadrivalent inactivated vaccines (QIVs). The present study is the first to compare the cost-effectiveness profiles of virtually all possible public health strategies, including the aforementioned four vaccine formulations as well non-vaccination. For this purpose, a decision tree model was built ex novo; the analysis was conducted from the third-payer perspective in the timeframe of one year. All available vaccines were cost-effective compared with non-vaccination. However, MF59-TIV had the most favorable economic profile in the Italian elderly population. Indeed, compared with non-vaccination, it was deemed highly cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €10,750 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The ICER was much lower (€4,527/QALY) when MF59-TIV was directly compared with TIV. ID-TIV and QIV were dominated by MF59-TIV as the former comparators were associated with greater total costs and lower health benefits. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of the base case results. From the economic perspective, MF59-TIV should be considered as a preferential choice for Italian older adults aged 65 years or above.

Cost-effectiveness of Pazopanib Versus Sunitinib as First-line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma from an Italian National Health Service Perspective.

PURPOSE: A prior randomized controlled trial (COMPARZ [Comparing the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Pazopanib versus Sunitinib]) found non-inferior progression-free survival for pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The present study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma from an Italian National Health Service perspective. METHODS: A partitioned-survival analysis model with 3 health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and dead) was employed. The model time horizon was 5 years. For each treatment strategy, the model generated expected progression-free life years, post-progression life years, overall life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. Results were reported as incremental costs per QALY gained and the net monetary benefit of pazopanib versus sunitinib. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact on results of methodological and parameter uncertainty. FINDINGS: In the base case, pazopanib was associated with higher QALYs and lower costs and dominated sunitinib. Using willingness-to-pay thresholds of €30,000 and €50,000 per QALY, the net monetary benefits with pazopanib were €6508 and €7702 per patient, respectively, versus sunitinib. The probability that pazopanib is cost-effective versus sunitinib was estimated to be 85% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000, 86% at a threshold of €30,000, and 81% at a threshold of €50,000 per QALY. Results were robust to changes in key parameter values and assumptions. IMPLICATIONS: These results suggest that pazopanib is likely to represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Italy.

Cost of breast cancer based on real-world data: a cancer registry study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: In European countries, it is difficult for local health organizations to determine the resources allocated to different hospitals for breast cancer. The aim of the current study was to examine the costs of breast cancer during the different phases of the diagnostictherapeutic sequence based on real world data. METHODS: To identify breast cancer cases diagnosed between 2007 and 2011, we used the cancer registry of the Agency for Health Protection of the Province of Milan (3.2 million inhabitants). A generalized linear model controlling for patient age, cancer stage and Charlson co-morbidity index was used to calculate the adjusted mean costs for each hospital and for each study phase. Regression analyses were based on dependent variables of individual costs (diagnosis, treatment, follow-up and total cost were logtransformed. The following independent variables were included as covariates: age at diagnosis, hospital volume, stage, job category, educational level, marital status, comorbidities, deprivation index. Total and mean costs were computed for several variables and for each phase. On average for each subject, the costs were collected over 2.5 years. RESULTS: A total of 12,580 breast cancer cases were studied. The mean cost of diagnosis was €414, the mean cost of treatment was €8,780, the mean overall cost of follow-up was approximately €2,351, and the mean total direct medical cost was €10,970. The age of the patients, stage of tumor and employment level of the patient were significantly correlated with the variability of the costs. The highest variability in costs was observed for the follow-up costs, in which 38% of hospitals fell outside the 95% confidence interval. In the overspending-hospitals, patients received an intensive follow-up regimen with scintigraphy and thoracic CAT (computerized axial tomography). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, which represents the first population-level study of its kind in Italy, we estimated all direct medical costs for the 6-month period before the diagnosis of breast cancer and the first two years after diagnosis. Patients were identified from the local cancer registry. The analysis offers insight into the utilization of resources incurred by one major area of interest of cancer care in Italy.

Ethical Hurdles in the Prioritization of Oncology Care.

With finite resources, healthcare payers must make difficult choices regarding spending and the ethical distribution of funds. Here, we describe some of the ethical issues surrounding inequity in healthcare in nine major European countries, using cancer care as an example. To identify relevant studies, we conducted a systematic literature search. The results of the literature review suggest that although prevention, access to early diagnosis, and radiotherapy are key factors associated with good outcomes in oncology, public and political attention often focusses on the availability of pharmacological treatments. In some countries this focus may divert funding towards cancer drugs, for example through specific cancer drugs funds, leading to reduced expenditure on other areas of cancer care, including prevention, and potentially on other diseases. In addition, as highly effective, expensive agents are developed, the use of value-based approaches may lead to unacceptable impacts on health budgets, leading to a potential need to re-evaluate current cost-effectiveness thresholds. We anticipate that the question of how to fund new therapies equitably will become even more challenging in the future, with the advent of expensive, innovative, breakthrough treatments in other therapeutic areas.

Feasibility and attractiveness of indication value-based pricing in key EU countries.

Indication value-based pricing (IBP) has been proposed in the United States as a tool to capture the differential value of drugs across indications or patient groups and is in the early phases of implementation. In Europe, no major country has experimented with IBP or is seriously discussing its use. We assessed how the reimbursement and pricing environment allows for IBP in seven European countries, evaluating both incentives and hurdles. In price setting countries such as France and Germany, the Health Technology Assessment and pricing process already accounts for differences of value across indications. In countries where differential value drives coverage decisions such as the United Kingdom and Sweden, IBP is likely to be used, at least partially, but not in the short-term. Italy is already achieving some form of differential value through managed entry agreements, whereas in Spain the electronic prescription system provides the infrastructure necessary for IBP but other hurdles exist.

Extracorporeal Photopheresis for Second-Line Treatment of Chronic Graft-versus-Host Diseases: Results from a Health Technology Assessment in Italy.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a comparative, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact analysis of Therakos online extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) compared with the main alternatives used for the treatment of steroid-refractory/resistant chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) in Italy. METHODS: The current therapeutic pathway was identified by searching medical databases and from the results of a survey of practice in Italian clinical reference centers. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of second-line alternatives. Budget impact and cost-effectiveness analyses were performed from the Italian National Health Service perspective over a 7-year time horizon through the adaption of a Markov model. The following health states were considered: complete and partial response, stable disease, and progression. A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes. RESULTS: The most common alternatives used in Italy for the management of steroid-refractory/resistant cGvHD were ECP, mycophenolate, pentostatin, and imatinib. The literature review highlighted that complete and partial responses are higher with ECP than with the alternatives while serious adverse events are less common. The economic analysis showed that Therakos online ECP represents the dominating alternative, in that it delivers greater benefit at a lower cost. In fact, according to the alternatives considered, cost saving ranged from €3237.09 to €19,903.51 per patient with 0.04 to 0.21 quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Therakos online ECP should be considered an effective, safe, and cost-effective alternative in steroid-refractory/resistant cGvHD. There is inequality in access, and a dedicated reimbursement tariff, however, should be introduced to overcome these barriers.