The role of quantitative bias analysis for nonrandomized comparisons in health technology assessment: recommendations from an expert workshop.

The use of treatment effects derived from nonrandomized studies (NRS) in health technology assessment (HTA) is growing. NRS carry an inherently greater risk of bias than randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although bias can be mitigated to some extent through appropriate approaches to study design and analysis, concerns around data availability and quality and the absence of randomization mean residual biases typically render the interpretation of NRS challenging. Quantitative bias analysis (QBA) methods are a range of methods that use additional, typically external, data to understand the potential impact that unmeasured confounding and other biases including selection bias and time biases can have on the results (i.e., treatment effects) from an NRS. QBA has the potential to support HTA bodies in using NRS to support decision-making by quantifying the magnitude, direction, and uncertainty of biases. However, there are a number of key aspects of the use of QBA in HTA which have received limited discussion. This paper presents recommendations for the use of QBA in HTA developed using a multi-stakeholder workshop of experts in HTA with a focus on QBA for unmeasured confounding.

Smart e-Skin Cancer Care in Europe During and after the Covid-19 Pandemic: a Multidisciplinary Expert Consensus.

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma is the deadliest of all the skin cancers and its incidence is increasing every year in Europe. Patients with melanoma often present late to the specialist and treatment is delayed for many reasons (delay in patient consultation, misdiagnosis by general practitioners, and/or limited access to dermatologists). Beyond this, there are significant inequalities in skin cancer between population groups within the same country and between countries across Europe. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic only aggravated these health deficiencies. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to create an expert opinion about the challenges in skin cancer management in Europe during the post COVID-19 acute pandemic and to identify and discuss the implementation of new technologies (including e-health and artificial intelligence defined as "Smart Skin Cancer Care") to overcome them. METHODS: For this purpose, an ad-hoc questionnaire with items addressing topics of skin cancer care was developed, answered independently and discussed by a multidisciplinary European panel of experts comprising dermatologists, dermato-oncologists, patient advocacy representatives, digital health technology experts, and health technology assessment experts. RESULTS: After all panel of experts discussions, a multidisciplinary expert opinion was created. CONCLUSIONS: As a conclusion, the access to dermatologists is difficult and will be aggravated in the near future. This fact, together with important differences in Skin Cancer Care in Europe, suggest the need of a new approach to skin health, prevention and disease management paradigm (focused on integration of new technologies) to minimize the impact of skin cancer and to ensure optimal quality and equity.

An accelerated access pathway for innovative high-risk medical devices under the new European Union Medical Devices and health technology assessment regulations? Analysis and recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: The new European Union (EU) Regulations for medical devices (MDs) and health technology assessment (HTA) are welcome developments that should increase the quality of clinical evidence for MDs and reduce fragmentation in the EU market access process. To fully exploit anticipated benefits, their respective assessment processes should be closely coordinated, particularly for promising, highly innovative MDs. Accelerated approval is worth exploring for certain categories of high-risk MDs to keep the EU regulatory process competitive compared to accelerated MD approval programs elsewhere (e.g. US). AREAS COVERED: Problems observed in worldwide accelerated drug and MD regulatory approval programs are reviewed, including greater uncertainty in premarket clinical evidence generation and lack of oversight for post approval evidence requirements. Implications for MD approval, HTA and coverage are explored. EXPERT OPINION: Through analysis of two decades of drug and MD accelerated approval programs worldwide, recommendations for an Accelerated Access Pathway for select innovative, high-risk MDs are proposed to fit the EU context, leverage the two new regulations, increase opportunities for Expert Panels to provide timely advice regarding manufacturers' evidence generation plans along the MD lifecycle (pre, postmarket), and safely speed patient access while promoting increased collaboration among Member States on coverage decisions.

WtsWrng Interim Comparative Effectiveness Evaluation and Description of the Challenges to Develop, Assess, and Introduce This Novel Digital Application in a Traditional Health System.

Science and technology have evolved quickly during the two decades of the 21st century, but healthcare systems are grounded in last century's structure and processes. Changes in the way health care is provided are demanded; digital transformation is a key driver making healthcare systems more accessible, agile, efficient, and citizen-centered. Nevertheless, the way healthcare systems function challenges the development (Innovation + Development and regulatory requirements), assessment (methodological guidance weaknesses), and adoption of digital applications (DAs). WtsWrng (WW), an innovative DA which uses images to interact with citizens for symptom triage and monitoring, is used as an example to show the challenges faced in its development and clinical validation and how these are being overcome. To prove WW's value from inception, novel approaches for evidence generation that allows for an agile and patient-centered development have been applied. Early scientific advice from NICE (UK) was sought for study design, an iterative development and interim analysis was performed, and different statistical parameters (Kappa, B statistic) were explored to face development and assessment challenges. WW triage accuracy at cutoff time ranged from 0.62 to 0.94 for the most frequent symptoms attending the Emergency Department (ED), with the observed concordance for the 12 most frequent diagnostics at hospital discharge fluctuating between 0.4 to 0.97; 8 of the diagnostics had a concordance greater than 0.8. This experience should provoke reflective thinking for DA developers, digital health scientists, regulators, health technology assessors, and payers.

Integrating Empirical Analysis and Normative Inquiry in Health Technology Assessment: The Values in Doing Assessments of Health Technologies Approach.

Health technology assessment (HTA) aims, through empirical analysis, to shed light on the value of health technologies (O'Rourke et al. [2020, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 36, 187-90]). HTA is, then, where facts and values meet. But how, where, and when do facts and values meet in HTA? Currently, HTA is usually portrayed as a sequential process, starting with empirical analysis (assessment), followed by a deliberation on the implications of the findings for a judgment of a health technology's value (appraisal). In this paper, we will argue that in HTA, empirical analysis and normative inquiry are much more closely entwined. In fact, as we hope to show, normative commitments act as an indispensable guide for the collection and interpretation of empirical evidence. Drawing on policy sciences, we will suggest a concrete methodology that can help HTA practitioners to integrate empirical analysis and normative inquiry in a transparent way. The proposed methodology can be conceived as a concrete means for conducting a scoping exercise in HTA. Moreover, it offers a distinct way of giving stakeholders a structural and constructive role in HTA. This paper outlines the approach developed by the values in doing assessments of health technologies project, a project funded by the Erasmus+ program (contract number 2018-1-NL01-KA203-038960), which is the European Union's program to support education, training, youth, and sport in Europe. The project has resulted in an E-learning course, an accompanying handbook, and a consensus statement, all freely available from the project's website www.validatehta.eu.

Learning and practicing more value-reflective, problem-setting health technology assessment: experiences and lessons from the VALIDATE project.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a formative evaluation of applying the VALIDATE approach in practice by (i) assessing how students appreciated the e-learning course, (ii) exploring how, for what purposes and with what outcomes the acquired VALIDATE competences subsequently were used in internships in different institutional contexts, and how this was shaped by these contexts, and (iii) what this shows on real-world use of VALIDATE. METHODS: Comparative discussion of experiences of applying the VALIDATE approach via a semistructured survey and oral feedback from e-course students; final reports on internships in health technology assessment (HTA) practice, followed by semistructured interviews with interns and supervisors to complement and interpret results. RESULTS: All students considered the VALIDATE approach an enlightening and important addition to current HTA knowledge, especially regarding understanding the relation between empirical analysis and normative inquiry, identifying policy relevant questions and using the method of reconstructing interpretive frames for scoping. The latter appeared intellectually challenging and requiring some prior HTA knowledge. The use the VALIDATE approach in practice shows that interns productively redefined the HTA problem, based on appreciation of different stakeholders' definition of the issue; they experienced constraints from retrieving all relevant perspectives from existing literature as well as from institutional rules and routines. CONCLUSIONS: Some challenges in applying the VALIDATE approach deserve attention for its future use: currently used research approaches often assume a problem as "given"; and the data needed on different perspectives is often not reported in scientific literature. Finally, data gathering on and evaluation of value dimensions was experienced as challenging.

Prioritization of COVID-19 vaccination. The added value of the "VALIDATE" approach.

Prioritization of COVID-19 vaccines is one of the most relevant topics in the current pandemic emergency. Prioritization decisions are political decisions that are value-laden, and as such of ethical nature. Despite the clear political and ethical nature of this topic, prioritization decisions are often interpreted and presented as scientific decisions. The aim of this article is twofold. First, we aim to show critical points that characterize certain pandemic vaccination plans from the ethical viewpoint using four dimensions (problem definitions, incorporation of different perspectives, context, and specification). The four dimensions were drawn from findings of the European project "VALIDATE" (VALues In Doing Assessments of healthcare TEchnologies", https://validatehta.eu). Second, we aim to reframe the issue about prioritization itself in the light of the four dimensions mentioned. Our conclusion is that policy-problem definitions, incorporation of different perspectives, contextual considerations and specification of moral principles seem to be common critical points of some vaccination plan documents. The European project "VALIDATE" seems to be able to provide a useful and profitable approach to address many of these critical points.

[Mecanismos de identificación y priorización de las tecnologías sanitarias a ser evaluadas por las Agencias de ETESA para decisiones de cobertura en Latino America].

OBJETIVO: Ningún sistema de salud cuenta con los recursos necesarios para evaluar todas las tecnologías. Contar con un proceso claro para priorizar qué tecnologías serán evaluadas por las agencias de evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETESA) constituye un principio de buena práctica reconocido a nivel internacional. El objetivo del Foro de Políticas en Latino América (LatamPF) 2020 de Health Technology Assessment International fue explorar cómo puede mejorarse la forma en que las agencias de ETESA de Latino América identifican y priorizan las tecnologías a ser evaluadas. MÉTODOS: Este manuscrito está basado en un documento base, una encuesta, y en el trabajo deliberativo realizado por los miembros (cuarenta y seis participantes, once países) que participaron del LatamPF, a través de la metodología design-thinking. RESULTADOS: Los participantes coincidieron en que la falta de mecanismos claros de priorización trae como consecuencia una falta de legitimidad de las decisiones y procesos de ETESA, que son percibidos como poco transparentes y demasiado expuestos a presiones políticas o de grupos de interés. También se identificaron barreras y acciones para mejorar los mecanismos de priorización de ETESA en América Latina. Los criterios identificados como más importantes para ser tenidos en cuenta por las agencias de ETESA de la región al momento de priorizar una tecnología para ser evaluada fueron la carga de enfermedad, el potencial beneficio clínico, la alineación con prioridades de salud nacionales, el potencial impacto en la equidad, ausencia de otras alternativas para los pacientes, y el potencial impacto económico. CONCLUSIONES: Los participantes del Foro coincidieron en que el establecimiento de procesos transparentes de priorización es un elemento clave para todos los sistemas de salud. Las mejoras en este proceso fortalecerán la ETESA en Latino América y darán mayor legitimidad a sus decisiones.

Identification and selection of health technologies for assessment by agencies in support of reimbursement decisions in Latin America.

OBJECTIVE: There is no health system that has the resources to evaluate all technologies. The presence of a clear process to prioritize health technologies for assessment by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies is a good practice principle recognized at the international level. The objective of Health Technology Assessment International's 2020 Latin American Policy Forum (LatamPF) was to explore how to improve the way HTA agencies in Latin America identify and prioritize technologies for assessment. METHODS: This paper is based on a background document, a survey, and the deliberations of the members of the LatamPF (forty-six participants from eleven countries) using a design thinking methodology. RESULTS: Participants agreed that a lack of clear prioritization mechanisms results in HTA processes and decisions that are perceived to be of low transparency and overly exposed to political or interest group pressures. The LatamPF identified barriers and recommended actions to improve HTA prioritization mechanisms in Latin America. The criteria identified as the most important to be taken into consideration by HTA agencies in the region when prioritizing a technology for assessment were: the burden of illness, the potential clinical benefit, the alignment with national health priorities, the potential impact on equity, a lack of treatment alternatives for patients, and the potential economic impact. CONCLUSIONS: Forum participants agreed that the establishment of transparent prioritization processes is a key element for all health systems. Improvements in these processes will strengthen HTA and provide greater legitimacy to decision making.

Health Technology Assessment of a new water quality monitoring technology: Impact of automation, digitalization and remoteness in dialysis units.

BACKGROUND: Water quality monitoring at the dialysis units (DU) is essential to ensure an appropriate dialysis fluid quality and guarantee an optimal and safe dialysis treatment to patients. This paper aims to evaluate the effectiveness, economic and organizational impact of automation, digitalization and remote water quality monitoring, through a New Water Technology (NWT) at a hospital DU to produce dialysis water, compared to a Conventional Water Technology (CWT). METHODS: A before-and-after study was carried out at the Hospital Clínic Barcelona. Data on CWT was collected during 1-year (control) and 7-month for the NWT (case). Data on water quality, resource use and unit cost were retrospective and prospectively collected. A comparative effectiveness analysis on the compliance rate of quality water parameters with the international guidelines between the NWT and the CWT was conducted. This was followed by a cost-minimization analysis and an organizational impact from the hospital perspective. An extensive deterministic sensitivity analysis was also performed. RESULTS: The NWT compared to the CWT showed no differences on effectiveness measured as the compliance rate on international requirements on water quality (100% vs. 100%), but the NWT yielded savings of 3,599 EUR/year compared to the CWT. The NWT offered more data accuracy (daily measures: 6 vs. 1 and missing data: 0 vs. 20 days/year), optimization of the DU employees' workload (attendance to DU: 4 vs. 19 days/month) and workflow, through the remote and continuous monitoring, reliability of data and process regarding audits for quality control. CONCLUSIONS: While the compliance of international recommendations on continuous monitoring was performed with the CWT, the NWT was efficient compared to the CWT, mainly due to the travel time needed by the technical operator to attend the DU. These results were scalable to other economic contexts. Nonetheless, they should be taken with caution either when the NWT equipment/maintenance cost are largely increased, or the workforce involvement is diminished.

Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Field Intraoperative Magnetic Resonance in Glioma Surgery.

OBJECT: Low-field intraoperative magnetic resonance (LF-iMR) has demonstrated a slight increase in the extent of resection of intra-axial tumors while preserving patient`s neurological outcomes. However, whether this improvement is cost-effective or not is still matter of controversy. In this clinical investigation we sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the implementation of a LF-iMR in glioma surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing LF-iMR guided glioma surgery with gross total resection (GTR) intention were prospectively collected and compared to an historical cohort operated without this technology. Socio-demographic and clinical variables (pre and postoperative KPS; histopathological classification; Extent of resection; postoperative complications; need of re-intervention within the first year and 1-year postoperative survival) were collected and analyzed. Effectiveness variables were assessed in both groups: Postoperative Karnofsky performance status scale (pKPS); overall survival (OS); Progression-free survival (PFS); and a variable accounting for the number of patients with a greater than subtotal resection and same or higher postoperative KPS (R-KPS). All preoperative, procedural and postoperative costs linked to the treatment were considered for the cost-effectiveness analysis (diagnostic procedures, prosthesis, operating time, hospitalization, consumables, LF-iMR device, etc). Deterministic and probabilistic simulations were conducted to evaluate the consistency of our analysis. RESULTS: 50 patients were operated with LF-iMR assistance, while 146 belonged to the control group. GTR rate, pKPS, R-KPS, PFS, and 1-year OS were respectively 13,8% (not significative), 7 points (p < 0.05), 17% (p < 0.05), 38 days (p < 0.05), and 3.7% (not significative) higher in the intervention group. Cost-effectiveness analysis showed a mean incremental cost per patient of 789 € in the intervention group. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 111 € per additional point of pKPS, 21 € per additional day free of progression, and 46 € per additional percentage point of R-KPS. CONCLUSION: Glioma patients operated under LF-iMR guidance experience a better functional outcome, higher resection rates, less complications, better PFS rates but similar life expectancy compared to conventional techniques. In terms of efficiency, LF-iMR is very close to be a dominant technology in terms of R-KPS, PFS and pKPS.

On the integration of early health technology assessment in the innovation process: reflections from five stakeholders.

Early health technology assessment (HTA), which includes all methods used to inform industry and other stakeholders about the potential value of new medical products in development, including methods to quantify and manage uncertainty, has seen many applications in recent years. However, it is still unclear how such early value assessments can be integrated into the technology innovation process. This commentary contributes to the discussion on the purposes early HTA can serve. Similarities and differences in the perspectives of five stakeholders (i.e., the hospital, the patient, the assessor, the medical device industry, and the policy maker) on the purpose, value, and potential challenges of early HTA are described. All five stakeholders agreed that integrating early HTA in the innovation process has the possibility to shape and refine an innovation, and inform research and development decisions. The early assessment, using a variety of methodologies, can provide insights that are relevant for all stakeholders but several challenges, for example, feasibility and responsibility, need to be addressed before early HTA can become standard practice. For early evaluations to be successful, all relevant stakeholders including patients need to be involved. Also, nimble, flexible assessment methods are needed that fit the dynamics of medical technology. Best practices should be shared to optimize both the innovation process and the methods to perform an early value assessment.

Lifecycle evidence requirements for high-risk implantable medical devices: a European perspective.

INTRODUCTION: The new European Union (EU) Regulations on medical devices and on in vitro diagnostics provide manufacturers and Notified Bodies with new tools to improve pre-market and post-market clinical evidence generation especially for high-risk products but fail to indicate what type of clinical evidence is appropriate at each stage of the whole lifecycle of medical devices. In this paper we address: i) the appropriate level and timing of clinical evidence throughout the lifecycle of high-risk implantable medical devices; and ii) how the clinical evidence generation ecosystem could be adapted to optimize patient access. AREAS COVERED: The European regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) contexts are reviewed, in relation to the lifecycle of high-risk medical devices and clinical evidence generation recommended by international network or endorsed by regulatory and HTA agencies in different jurisdictions. EXPERT OPINION: Four stages are relevant for clinical evidence generation: i) pre-clinical, pre-market; ii) clinical, pre-market; iii) diffusion, post-market; and iv) obsolescence & replacement, post-market. Each stage has its own evaluation needs and specific studies are recommended to generate the appropriate evidence. Effective lifecycle planning requires anticipation of what evidence will be needed at each stage.

[Vínculo Entre La Evaluación De Tecnologías Sanitarias y La Toma De Decisión Para La Asignación De Recursos Sanitarios en Latino-América].

OBJETIVOS: Un vínculo claro entre la evaluación y la toma de decisión constituye un principio de buena práctica en evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETESA) reconocido a nivel internacional. El objetivo del Foro de Políticas en Latino-América (LatamPF) 2019 de Health Technology Assessment International fue explorar los diferentes modelos que vinculan la ETESA y la toma de decisión y discutir su potencial aplicabilidad en Latino-América. MÉTODOS: Este manuscrito está basado en un documento base y en el trabajo deliberativo realizado por los miembros (54 participantes, 12 países) que asistieron al LatamPF, a través de la metodología design thinking. RESULTADOS: Los participantes coincidieron en que la relación inapropiada entre la ETESA y la toma de decisión atenta hoy contra la legitimidad de las decisiones, expone al proceso de ETESA a una excesiva influencia política y judicial, y condiciona que algunos actores se sientan relegados del proceso de evaluación y toma de decisión. Se identificaron los atributos del proceso de ETESA más prioritarios y factibles de ser mejorados en la región, y con el mayor potencial para generar un cambio positivo en los sistemas de salud. La mayor parte de estos están vinculados con la apropiada institucionalización de la ETESA, ampliar la participación de los diferentes actores y mejorar la transparencia de los procesos de ETESA. CONCLUSIONES: El LatamPF ha identificado barreras y recomendado acciones para reforzar el vínculo entre ETESA y la decisión. A su vez, existe en estos momentos una ventana de oportunidad en la región, ya que el tema es visualizado como una prioridad por gran parte de los actores de la sociedad. Por ello, los diferentes actores de los sistemas sanitarios deberían ahora tomar esta oportunidad para avanzar en el fortalecimiento del vínculo entre ETESA y toma de decisión.

The link between health technology assessment and decision making for the allocation of health resources in Latin America.

OBJECTIVE: One of the good practice principles for health technology assessment (HTA) is having a clear link between the assessment and decision making. The objective of the 2019 Latin American Policy Forum (LatamPF) of Health Technology Assessment International was to explore different models of connection between HTA and decision making and to discuss the potential applicability of such models in Latin America. METHODS: This paper is based on a background document and the deliberations of the members of the LatamPF (fifty-four participants from twelve countries) where a design-thinking methodology was used. RESULTS: The participants agreed that insufficient links between HTA and decision making undermine the legitimacy of decisions, expose the HTA process to excessive political and judicial influence, and promote the exclusion of some stakeholders from participating in the assessment process and decision making. High priority aspects of the HTA process that could feasibly be improved and which hold the greatest potential to generate positive changes in the health systems in the region were identified. The majority of these aspects were associated with the appropriate institutionalization of HTA, a greater degree of participation by different stakeholders, and improved transparency in the HTA process. CONCLUSIONS: The LatamPF identified barriers and recommended actions to strengthen the link between HTA and decision making. Participants emphasized that there is now a window of opportunity in the region as many societal actors see this as a priority. For this reason, health system stakeholders must take this opportunity to increase efforts toward strengthening the link between HTA and decision making.

Burning Issues in Health Technology Assessment and Policy Making: What's Keeping Senior Health Technology Assessment Users and Producers up at Night?

A key working session, held as part of the Health Technology Assessment international (HTAi) Global Policy Forum meeting asks members to share "What's Keeping Me Up At Night." Members-senior thought leaders from health technology assessment (HTA) agencies, payer organizations, industry, and the HTAi Board-share without fear or favor the thorny issues related to HTA that are challenging them now or likely to do so in the near future. This article contains a reflection on the discussions at this session over the last 2 years and focuses on the recurrent and repeated themes: internal and external stakeholder involvement in HTA processes; globalization of HTA and the future of HTA (namely innovative technologies, tide of data and the "war for talent"). While the aim of these informal sessions is not to produce solutions, it reinforces the importance of developing a truly multi-stakeholder HTA community with working relationships built on mutual trust and long-standing engagement.

Optimisation of cardiac resynchronisation therapy device selection guided by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: Cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent study showed that the presence and characteristics of myocardial scar could independently predict appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies and the risk of sudden cardiac death in patients receiving a de novo cardiac resynchronisation device. DESIGN: The aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging-based algorithms versus clinical practice in the decision-making process for the implantation of a cardiac resynchronisation device pacemaker versus cardiac resynchronisation device implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device in heart failure patients with indication for cardiac resynchronisation therapy. METHODS: An incidental Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime progression of a heart failure patient cohort. Key health variables included in the model were New York Heart Association functional class, hospitalisations, sudden cardiac death and total mortality. The analysis was done from the healthcare system perspective. Costs (€2017), survival and quality-adjusted life years were assessed. RESULTS: At 5-year follow-up, algorithm I reduced mortality by 39% in patients with a cardiac resynchronisation device pacemaker who were underprotected due to misclassification by clinical protocol. This approach had the highest quality-adjusted life years (algorithm I 3.257 quality-adjusted life years; algorithm II 3.196 quality-adjusted life years; clinical protocol 3.167 quality-adjusted life years) and the lowest lifetime costs per patient (€20,960, €22,319 and €28,447, respectively). Algorithm I would improve results for three subgroups: non-ischaemic, New York Heart Association class III-IV and ≥65 years old. Furthermore, implementing this approach could generate an estimated €702 million in health system savings annually in European Society of Cardiology countries. CONCLUSION: The application of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging-based algorithms could improve survival and quality-adjusted life years at a lower cost than current clinical practice (dominant strategy) used for assigning cardiac resynchronisation device pacemakers and cardiac resynchronisation device implantable cardioverter-defibrillators to heart failure patients.

Economic Analysis of the Use of Anti-DFS70 Antibody Test in Patients with Undifferentiated Systemic Autoimmune Disease Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and undifferentiated features of systemic autoimmune disease, the coexistence of monospecific anti-dense fine speckled 70 (anti-DFS70) antibodies is associated with a lower risk of progression to overt disease. Therefore, they might help in correctly classifying ANA- positive patients and avoiding unnecessary followup diagnostic procedures. The aim of this study was to analyze the economic effect of the introduction of the anti-DFS70 antibody test in a hospital setting. METHODS: A case-control study was performed to detect monospecific anti-DFS70 antibodies in ANA-positive subjects with undifferentiated features (cases, n = 124) and with a defined systemic autoimmune disease (controls, n = 290). Based on current clinical practice, a decision tree was developed to represent the disease course of patients with undifferentiated features in the subsequent 3 years. A budget impact analysis (BIA) was performed to estimate the effect of implementing the screening for anti-DFS70 antibodies in the case group on the total costs. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to calculate the effect of the uncertainty of the input variables on the results. RESULTS: Among the 124 patients in the case group, 5 (4.0%) tested positive for anti-DFS70 antibodies versus 4/290 (1.4%) in the control group (p = not significant). The mean cost per patient under the current clinical practice decreased from €3274 to €3192 in our scenario. The BIA reports cost savings of €10,128. CONCLUSION: The introduction of anti-DFS70 antibody test would avoid unnecessary followup diagnostic procedures and minimize the use of health resources generated by suspicion of a potential systemic autoimmune disease.

How to Deal with the Inevitable: Generating Real-World Data and Using Real-World Evidence for HTA Purposes - From Theory to Action.

OBJECTIVES: Real-world evidence (RWE), derived from real-world data (RWD), is already used, to some extent, for health technology assessment (HTA) purposes. With the increased availability of RWD, there is potential for more widespread use but also challenges ensuring reliable RWE for HTA. Opportunities to overcome key challenges, identified at a scoping meeting, were discussed during the 2019 HTA international (HTAi) Global Policy Forum (GPF). METHODS: Reflection of discussions using Design Thinking (an interactive process aimed to solve complex problems) between seventy-three representatives from not-for-profit, for-profit organizations, and HTAi leadership. The discussions were informed by a background paper, and presentations from three invited keynote speakers and eleven GPF members. RESULTS: Several options were listed for addressing the identified key challenges: quality and acceptability, governance and accountability, transferability, and informing decision making. The GPF emphasized that the HTA community should first understand what questions could be answered with RWE. Additionally, more clarity on methods, standards, streamlining RWD collection, data sharing across jurisdictions, replication of RWD, and expert analysis were mentioned as important priorities. CONCLUSIONS: The HTA community is currently standing at a cross-road as it is not yet fully equipped to address these key challenges. It is, therefore, time for action. The community should start aligning on what is the best source of evidence according to purpose and how the data should be collected to create reliable evidence. It should also initiate the development of actions and guidance to properly develop and manage RWD/RWE to inform decision making across the technology lifecycle.

Definiendo el valor de las tecnologías sanitarias en Latino-América: desarrollo de marcos de valor para informar la priorización de recursos sanitarios.

ResumenObjetivosEl reciente desarrollo de marcos de valor responde a una demanda por hacer más explícito e inclusivo el proceso de toma de decisiones sobre asignación de recursos sanitarios. El objetivo del Foro de Políticas en Latino América 2018 de Health Technology Assessment International fue explorar las experiencias internacionales y discutir la potencial aplicación de marcos de valor en la región.MétodosEste manuscrito está basado en un documento base y en las presentaciones y discusiones mantenidas por los miembros del Foro (43 participantes, 12 países) durante el Foro del 2018.ResultadosLos participantes coincidieron en que un proceso de evaluación y toma de decisión basado en marcos de valor más inclusivos y abarcativos podría mejorar la efectividad, eficiencia, sustentabilidad y equidad; promover la transparencia y una evaluación más completa de las tecnologías, mejorar la rendición de cuentas de las decisiones y la participación de actores. Se identificaron como criterios esenciales para ser incluidos en marcos de valor en la región a la carga de enfermedad y severidad de la condición, la efectividad y seguridad de la tecnología, la calidad de la evidencia, la costo-efectividad e impacto presupuestario. Los potenciales desafíos para su implementación identificados incluyeron la escasez de recursos humanos y las demoras en el proceso de evaluación que se podrían producir.ConclusionesLos participantes remarcaron que los próximos pasos deberían ser identificar procesos y metodologías apropiadas, adaptadas al contexto de cada país, para facilitar la aplicación de marcos de valor y mejorar el vínculo entre la evaluación y la toma de decisiones.